Category: Adultery

Introduction

History has witnessed the women have always been treated as the second class citizen. In the middle ages the Doctrine of Coverture was developed in England as part of the common law system. According to the doctrine all the legal rights of women after marriage were absorbed by her husband. Somewhat similar view has been adopted by historians in India. Before marriage a woman is considered to be protected by her father and after marriage by her husband. She has no existence of her own, neither physical nor legal.

What is adultery?

The word adultery has originated from a French word “avoutre”, which further has its root in the latin word “adulterium” which means “to corrupt”.

Over time it has been defined in different ways: According to the New International Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary, the concept of women corrupting her marital relationship by engaging in a relationship outside the marriage was termed as adultery.

The word adultery as per the Black Law’s Dictionary is defined as the voluntary sexual intercourse of a married person with a person other than the offender’s husband or wife. In English itself, the word ‘adultery’ has been defined as the: “Violation of the marital band; sexual relations of a married person with one who is not his or her lawful spouse whether unmarried or married to another.”

Historical background of adultery in India

In India roots of adultery goes back to the time when more emphasis was placed on the physical chastity of women and their unquestioned obedience to husbands. Since ancient times it has been believed that male descendants would carry on the names of their families and in order to maintain the purity of the male bloodline, chastity of women has been considered as her prime virtue, while at the same time men were allowed to have more than one wife. The other objective was to ensure that only the husband can retain control over the sexuality of his wife. Therefore, making men as the whole and sole owner of the soul of women.

How adultery is defined in India?

With the advent of colonialism in India, Victorian morals creeped into the Indian legal system. Women were expected to be loyal to their husband whereas men were allowed to have multiple partners. Men could divorce their adulterous wives whereas women could not divorce their adulterous husbands. Women having relations with other men besides their husbands were seen as “ruined” or “fallen”. Thus, further strengthening the patriarchal structure of India. The reflection of the victorian era laws can be seen in Section 497 IPC which defines adultery as:

Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such a case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor.

Therefore, adultery is committed when a man has sexual intercourse with a married woman without the consent of her husband.

In what ways section 497 was anti-woman?

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution because this provision discriminated against women on the basis of sex only and it unjustifiably denied to women the right which was given to men. According to this section men were considered as the sole author of the women. Even the reason behind not penalizing women as an adulterer was that she was regarded only as chattel and being the property of men she can only be the victim. This is also for the chauvinistic reason that the third-party male had seduced her. This makes article 497 manifestly arbitrary.

Section 497 provided that the husband had the right to prosecute the adulterer but, there was no right conferred upon the wife to prosecute the woman with whom her husband had committed adultery; and also, the wife had no right to prosecute the husband who had committed adultery with another woman. This only showed that it was a crime committed by a man against a man.

Section 497 talked only about the sexual relations with the married woman and it failed to take into account those cases where the husband had sexual relations with an unmarried woman, with the result that husbands have, as it were, a free license under the law to have extra-marital relationship with unmarried women. The underlying basis of not penalising a sexual act by a married man with a single woman was that she (unlike a married woman) was not the property of a man (as the law would treat her to be if she is married). What about the wife of that man ? This provision did not talk about her. She was not regarded by the law as a person whose agency and dignity was affected.

Section 497 spoke of women as the property of man

It stated that a man can have sexual intercourse with the wife of another man, with the Consent of that man.The legislature attributes no agency to the woman. Whether or not a man with whom she had engaged in sexual intercourse was guilty of an offence depends exclusively on whether or not her husband was a consenting individual. No offence existed if her husband were to consent. Even if her husband were to connive at the act, no offence would be made out.The wife of the man who had engaged in the act has no voice or agency under the statute. The consent of the women committing adultery was material only for showing that the offence was not another offence, namely, rape. It showed that women had no individual autonomy, desire and identity. And that there was a husband’s control over his wife or that she was subordinate to him.

In K.S. Puttaswamy and another v. Union of India and others, it was laid down that: “Human dignity is an integral part of the Constitution. Reflections of dignity are found in the guarantee against arbitrariness (Article 14), the lamps of freedom (Article 19) and in the right to life and personal liberty (Article 21)”. To live is to live with dignity.

In Joseph Shrine vs UOI, it was held that: Section 497 IPC, has curtailed the equality of women and has curbed the essential dignity which a woman is entitled to have. It does this by creating invidious distinctions based on gender stereotypes which creates a dent in the individual dignity of women. Besides, the emphasis on the element of connivance or consent of the husband tantamounts to subordination of women. It also laid down that it is in violation of article 21.

In the landmark judgement in Joseph Shrine v Union of India, the supreme court struck down the 158 years old law declaring it unconstitutional and discriminatory against women. CJI Dipak Misra in its judgement said :

‘‘The civility of a civilization earns warmth and respect when it respects more the individuality of a woman. The said concept gets a further accent when a woman is treated with the real spirit of equality with a man. Any system treating a woman with indignity, inequity and inequality or discrimination invites the wrath of the Constitution…. And, it is time to say that a husband is not the master’’.

He also quoted john stuart mill: “The legal subordination of one sex to another – is wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement; and that it ought to be replaced by a system of perfect equality, admitting no power and privilege on the one side, nor disability on the other”.

Conclusion

Gender discrimination, male chauvinism are things of past. Laws like adultery which are retrogressive in nature and which encourages patriarchy has no place in a civilized society. Section 497 was arbitrary and illogical in a way that while protecting a woman as an abettor it did not even take into account the interest of the wife of an adulterer. Thus, on one hand it protected women and on the other it gave the authority of the body of women to men. Even the reason behind not treating the woman as an abettor is male chauvinism. But with the passage of time, the courts have recognized the conceptual equality of women and essential dignity which a woman is entitled to have. There can be no curtailment of the same. The constitution which is the supreme law of the land, confers equal rights on both men and women, through Article 14 and Article 15. Equality has to be regarded as the summum bonum of the constitutional principle in this context.

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, adultery is described as “voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than that person’s current spouse or partner”. The act of adultery has existed from the beginning of human civilization in different forms and in different societies and religions. There might be a slight modification and understanding regarding the definition of adultery in each religion, but every culture treats adultery as a sin. Similarly, Judaism and Hinduism treat adultery as a hateful act and considers it a sin. Judaism which is the religion of Jewish people have a bigger population of followers in United States and Israel. Whereas Hinduism, one of the oldest religions in the world, is practiced especially in South Asian countries like India, Nepal, and Bangladesh.

In traditional Judaism, marriage is seen as a sacred act where the bond between a man and woman is created by God, also called “bashert”. It is believed that after marriage a single soul merges with another single soul, and therefore there is a formation of a complete soul. It is believed that the complete soul should be together for life until one of the souls is taken away by any natural cause, for instance, death. And during the marriage life, it is expected that both the husband and wife should be faithful to each other and respect the spiritual relationship created in heaven. (Duet.24:1) Similar beliefs can also be witnessed in Hinduism. The relationship between a man and a woman is predestined by God in heaven. During the marriage ceremony, the couple takes a circular walk around the fire (Agni) for the seventh time, with the belief that the relationship is supposed to last for seven lifetimes. During the marriage life, the spouse performs their duties being faithful to each other and fulfilling each other’s wishes and desires and creation and continuation of life.

Since marriage is considered as a sacred act, so any direct or indirect activities that hurt the core moral value of the marriage are considered offensive and in a greater extent a sin. Both Hinduism and Judaism criticize such activities that offend the belief and value of the marriage. And adultery is one of the main offensive activities committed against religion. The foundation of marriage is based on the notion of being faithful to each other, supporting each other, devoting one’s life to household duties, and fulfilling religious obligations.

To some extent, women are treated as a possession of men in both Hinduism and Judaism. Consequently, it is the sole responsibility of the man to fulfill the sexual, economic, and emotional needs of the wife. If the husband, in any circumstances, is found of being unable to fulfill the wishes of the wife, then he is punished by the law or in some cases, the decision of the divorce is bestowed on him. Since woman is thought of as a possession, she shall always be under the guidance and watch of the husband.

Manusmriti (The Laws of Manu) is a sacred, ancient book in Hinduism that consists of a set of moral duties and religious guidance that must be performed by the Hindus daily. The book says that “Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one’s control. Her father protects her in childhood, her husband protects her in youth, and her sons protect her in old age.” As we can see that woman is not considered as a single body or an individual rather someone who is considered incomplete without a company. Throughout her life she is never free; rather, she is always under the watch of a male. Likewise, in Judaism even straying from the husband’s site is considered a moral breach. Extramarital intercourse breaks the very fundamental belief of marriage and religion. It shatters the vows taken during the marriage ceremony in front of family members and God. It is a direct sin. In simple conditions, no spouse can leave his/her partner. As the bond between the two-person is eternal and holy, no person can break it easily. There are certain exceptions, though. For instance, the death of the partner. (Michael, 2001)

The practice of adultery has always prevailed throughout the history of mankind. There are many explicit and implicit reasons floating around for the cause. One of the concrete causes is dissatisfaction with the partner. And the sub-categories of dissatisfaction are sexual dissatisfaction, financial conflict, failure to understand and respect each other’s emotions, pressure to be confined within the social institution and many more other internal and external problems. And throughout the history, religion and the society in which the religion is strictly followed have always tried to reduce such activities—one way is punishment.

Various forms of punishment have been practiced in order to reduce the number of adulteries or any other form of offenses to the religion. The number of cases might have decreased in a short time period and increased in other; however, the total number of such related cases has never stopped. The general trend is fluctuating. And as the individuals, in the modern world, divert themselves to the materialistic world, new cases are evolving every time. There is the presence of a different degree of punishment for the sin of adultery. In Judaism, the adulterer used to be given the death penalty. Though there is no stoning in Hinduism. And even in the modern world, this punishment is still practiced in some middle eastern countries. As the adultery is considered as a sin against the partner and God, the punishment is inevitable. The adulterer is neglected by the society he is living in. He is isolated and treated like an animal. He is slashed with different curse words and most cases beaten by the neighbors. (Adamczyk, 2012)

In most of the cases, the punishment is more severe towards woman than men. Most of the societies where one of the religions is practiced is patriarchal in nature. So, most of the decisions regarding any crime is favored more towards men than women. And some cases, even the crime is waived or given a very light punishment compared to the sin and compared to the punishment given to a woman. A woman who has committed a crime like adultery is very less likely to be spared from the punishment unless she is very powerful or has some influences. In some cases, if the woman is the adulterer then sometimes the woman is forgiven if the husband decides to. Though there are high chances of divorce after the incident. (David, 2019)

Adultery, in both the religion, is looked upon as a great sin against the religion and belief. The society doesn’t give any space and recognition to the adulterer. According to Vishnu Purana 3.11, “He who commits adultery is punished here and hereafter; for his days in this world are cut short, and when dead he falls into hell.”

In conclusion, both the religion treats the act of adultery as a sin against the core belief of the religion and religion. There is a certain degree of punishment for the adulterer. Though the punishment most of the time is biased because of the gender: the punishment is lenient towards men and severe towards the women. Since both the religious institution respects the holy processes of marriage and considers it as a sacred act so any irrelevant activities against the holy processes of marriage are considered a hateful deed. Therefore, the attitude towards adultery is seen as a sinful act.

Reference

1. Deuteronomy Chapter 24, 1
2. Broyde, M. J. (2001). Marriage, Divorce, and the Abandoned Wife in Jewish Law, (2001), 45
3. Amy, A. (2012). American Sociologist Review, 77, 5.
4. Amram, D. W. (2019). Encyclopedia

The story of The Thousand and One Nights, translated by Dawood, is a tale about a clever woman who saves herself, and other women in the kingdom, from being killed by a vengeful king. She tells him a story that never ends for a thousand and one nights, and purposely makes sure that she does not finish each of the stories, leaving the king interested in the ending of each of her stories. In the story, the theme of adultery or infidelity is quite prevalent. Although many stories are about happy marriages, involving two people falling in love, the author uses describes how society looks down upon women. In essence, this frame story for the entire work is the unifying thread between each of the stories, recounted by Schherazade, an intelligent wife to the king. Although the story of The Thousand and One Nights is considered a unique tale that teaches morals using the different stories within the main story, the depiction of adultery seems to be associated with death.

In the story, two kings, Shahryar and Shahzaman, are used to bring out the themes of riches and greed, while also helping develop the theme of adultery in many ways. First, when Shahzaman, the young king, catches his wife having sex with a kitchen boy, he considers this an act of adultery and kills both of them. Later when Shahryar visits his brother’s kingdom, he finds out that his brother’s wife is also adulterous. When his brother, Shahrayar, realizes this, he also kills the wife and all slaves involved in adultery. From then, Shahryar decides to land his anger on all women, marrying and executing several virgin women each night.

One day, the two brothers, after vowing to search for faithful women, fall prey of a strange woman “who had been kept by her demon husband inside a chest” (193), so that she will not cheat on the husband. She tricks the duo to have sex with her “when the demon is asleep with his head on her lap” (193), a trick she has used to trick many other men. However, when the brothers find out that the strange woman’s wiles are unending, they return home. At this time, the feel as if all women are adulterous and not faithful to their husbands.

Other than the illicit sex between man and women, the author also portrays a unique kind of infidelity between a beast and a woman. For instance, there is the portrayal of bestiality in the “Tale of Wardan the Butcher, the Woman, and the Bears” (190), which illustrates a different form of sexuality. Accordingly, the author thinks that “The effect of this ambiguous attraction is even more striking when the sexual encounter is illicit, in other words when sex is considered a crime” (190). While this illustration is more of a negative supposition of what women can do, the narrator appears to use it to draw back to the barbaric acts that men do to their women in the patriarchal society.

Throughout the story, there are a lot of depictions of infidelity or adultery, along with the expression of women as sex objects. For instance, “The Story of the Third Dervish recounts the experiences of the protagonist in a supernatural realm where he “enjoys the favors of forty beautiful maidens but is magically transported back to the ordinary world when he transgresses the taboo not to open a particular door” (195). It is particularly interesting to note the dynamics of several tales resulting from illicit sexual activities or extramarital encounters, whether real or imagined.

Overall, The Thousand and One Night story appears to be a reflection of a particular culture, exposing the deeds of both men and women in society at the time the story is told. On the one hand, men are depicted in the story as oppressive and full of themselves. On the other hand, some women are portrayed as smart and intelligent, while others are adulterous. Almost in all of the stories, culture seems to assign women a lowly status in society. They are presented as inferior to the men, and their identities tend to be imposed upon the men and the rigid patriarchal society.

The purpose of this research article is to review the penal provision of adultery as stated under section 497 of the Penal Code 1860 (hereinafter referred as the IPC) and to analyze the consequences of reintroduction of adultery. The punishment of adultery was codified more than 150 years ago considering the vulnerable position of women under the social structure of the erstwhile Indian sub-continent. Though the society has undergone much historical, political, economic and value-based development within this long period of time, surprisingly the penal provision of adultery remained stagnant in the same place for a long time until the historic judgment of Supreme Court in Joseph Shine vs. Union of India. The act of adultery in itself cannot make or break the institution of marriage unless there existed deep rooted cracks already.

The objective of the article is to achieve the following goals:

• Firstly, to represent the existing provision of adultery under the IPC.
• Secondly, to find out the reason of immunity of woman from the charge of adultery.
• Thirdly, to address such debated issue of exemption from the legal point of view and under the present social context.
• Fourthly, to discuss about the reintroduction of adultery in the present context.

ADULTERY: INTRODUCTION AND ANALYSIS

Generally, adultery refers to the illegitimate relationship with the opposite sex; sexual intercourse between individuals who are not married to each other. The term ‘adultery’ has its origin in the Latin term ‘adulterium’. The term comes from the words ‘ad’ (towards) and ‘alter’ (other). At the time of its origin, it referred exclusively to sex between a married woman and a man other than her spouse. Under the Common Law, the crime of fornication consisted of unlawful sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man, regardless of his marital status is adultery. Almost every religion condemns it and treats it as an unpardonable sin. However, this is not reflected in the penal laws of countries.

Adultery is an offence which is committed by a third person against a husband in respect of his wife and of which a man can alone be held liable for the offence. Adultery is considered to be an invasion to the right of the husband over his married wife. The law of adultery is not applied on a woman and has been expressly provided that the woman cannot be held for abetment of the offence. The object of the law is to inflict punishment on those who interfere with the sacred relation of marriage, as it is considered to be an offence against the sacred matrimonial tie. It is commonly accepted that it is the man who is the seducer and not the woman, and it is considered as an anti-social and illegal act by any peace lover and citizen of good morals.

Lord Macaulay, who was instrumental in the early drafting process, gave due consideration to the possibility of criminalising adultery in India. He concluded it would serve little purpose. For him, the possible benefits from an adultery offence would be better achieved through pecuniary compensation in most cases. He accepted that for the other cases the law could never provide a satisfactory solution in dealing with marital infidelity given the sacramental nature of marriage. Those involved with finalising the IPC disagreed and gave us Section 497. Consequently, one must turn to the experience of various committees and the courts in their dealing with Section 497 for assistance in determining the intent behind criminalisation. In one of its more ambitious projects, the Law Commission of India undertook a comprehensive revision of the IPC, culminating in the 42nd Report by that Commission.

The Report provided information about the legislative history of Section 497, and offered a comparison with the position in France, England, and the United States of America. The Commission posed itself questions not dissimilar to the ones we are focusing upon here: doubting both the criminalisation of adultery per se and its particular manifestation in Section 497. After casting grave doubts over the purported benefit of criminal actions for adulterous conduct, the Commission noted that “though some of us were personally inclined to recommend repeal of the section, we think on the whole that the time has not yet come for making such a radical change in the existing position”.

The Commission did, however, recommend an amendment: removal of the exemption from liability for women, and reduction of sentence from five to two years. The Report does not indicate what led the Commission to think abolishing adultery as radical, nor does it furnish any justifications. The Amendment never occurred, but the thought was followed up in the next attempt at revising the IPC which culminated in the 156th Report of the Commission. Here, the observations made in the 42nd Report were reiterated along with quoted excerpts from the decision of the Supreme Court in Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India, where the Court observed any changes to Section 497 must originate from the Legislature and not the Court. In a proposal which it believed reflected the “‘transformation’ which the society has undergone”, the Commission suggested removing the exemption from liability for women while retaining the five year imprisonment. [4: AIR1985SC1618]

BACKGROUND ANALYSIS: MYTHS AND RELIGION

The concerned social notions are often justified in the name of Indian culture and Indian tradition. Therefore, as Romila Thapar has pointed out in a recent work, the social mindset produced by these notions often search for the solution in limiting the freedom of the victim — like incarcerating women at home after dark, not allowing girls to use cell phones to stop them from contacting boys, suggesting the repetition of the ‘Saraswati Mantra’ for a woman about to be raped or the observance of a ‘Lakshman Rekha’, etc. — rather than searching for the root of the problem. It is often the same social mentality that calls for the death penalty of the rapists on the ground that a raped woman is nothing but a living corpse. Similar cultural mores lead to the insensitive statements of the Chief Minister and Home Minister of Uttar Pradesh about rape, including the presentation of rape as an error committed by the boys, alleging the free mingling of boys and girls as the cause of rape, and describing rape as ‘sometimes right and sometimes wrong.’

The institution of marriage is shown as an institution of giving away the daughter to a man. Women and property are often referred to jointly, and the necessity to protect both is pointed out. It is declared that the vice of anarchy is that property cannot be retained and the wife is not under control. In fact, kingship emerged to ensure the security of property and women, while the first.

king accepted this duty in return for a share of the property and women of his subjects. Women are not only conceived as a desirable possession bestowed by the wish-fulfilling tree, they are often bracketed with animal wealth, probably being considered as movable property. Like any property, they could be sold, mortgaged or given away.

According to the Garuḍa Purāṇa, a man should defend himself at the cost of his wealth and wife. Having a similar idea, king HariŚcandra gives away his wife to appease ViŚvāmitra, in the Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa. The Agni Purāṇa also gives an interest rate of 1/70th of the original value for the pledged women and animal. Vijay Nath has observed that lawgivers like Āpastamba, Manu and Yājñavalkya are of the opinion that family members cannot be gifted, sold or pledged. Manu clearly differentiates the wife, obtained from God, from cattle or gold, obtainable in the market. [8: Garuḍa Purāṇa, 109.1 (M.N. Dutt trans. & ed., Delhi, 2009).]

However, these only demarcate women’s status as a different kind of property, but do not negate the idea of women being labelled as property. Manu declares: “In her childhood (a girl) shall be under the will of her father; in (her) youth, of (her) husband; her husband being dead, of her sons; a woman should never enjoy her free will.”

Seen in this light, a woman’s body being marked out as husband’s property is part of ancient Indian legal tradition. The present Indian state still bears the Hindu Laws and Muslim Laws, partly as legacies of that colonial mistake. The Manusmṛti, being one of the earliest Sanskrit texts translated into English, had an immense impact on the colonial understanding of early India. As a result, early India was seen only as the land of religious speculation, the laws of Manu, the chastity-obsession of Sita and Anasuya, and the country of the Sati system; whereas the erotic literature of Amaru and Bhartṛhari, Kaalidasa and Jayadeva, the decorations on the temples of Khajuraho or Konarak, the pragmatic diplomacy of Kauṭilya and the shrewd pleasure-seeking of Vatsyayana, the polyandry of Draupadi and the charm of Ambapali were receded to the background. A female’s modesty and integrity was to be preserved by keeping her body protected from the access of other males. These notions were in a manner shared by Manu, Al-Hanifa and Macaulay.

ADULTERY: INFRINGEMENT OF RIGHT TO PROPERTY- FROM MANU TO JUSTICE CHANDRACHUD.

One of the biggest markers of the woman’s status as husband’s property is the gendered concept of adultery. All the law-givers who conceived the female body as an exclusive property of the husband saw adultery as a serious offence.

Manu defined adultery as: “He who addressed the wife of another at a watering-place, in a forest or wood, or at the union of rivers, would incur (the sin of) adultery.

Attendance upon her, sporting with her, touching her ornaments or clothes, sitting upon a bed with her, all this is called adultery.

If any man touches a woman upon an improper part (of her body), or being thus touched by her submits to it with patience, this is all called adultery, (if done) by mutual consent.”

Manu takes it as one of the most serious offences and suggests capital punishment for any non-brāhmaṇa committing adultery. He also suggests different amounts of fine for the adulterous men, depending on their varṇa and the varṇa of their female partner The clear suggestion is that adultery is a serious violation of another man’s property (wife’s body). The violation can be of several levels, and the punishment has to be proportionate. The violator has to be the man only, for only one worthy of possessing or enjoying a property can violate another’s property rights. The woman, being herself the property, has no say in the matter. Therefore, a relationship which she consents to is also a criminal offence.

However, this consent would be a violation of her husband’s ownership over her body. That is a dangerous possibility: a man’s right to property being disregarded because of the agency of the property itself. Manu, therefore, prescribes the highest punishment for such an instance, not just death but something worse than that: “…the king should have her devoured by dogs in some much-frequented place.”

Manu’s spirit is faithfully retained by the subsequent lawgivers. Narada, for instance, clarifies the three different grades of adultery as meeting with another man’s wife in an unseasonable hour or place, sitting and conversing with her, and being sexually involved. Narada’s punishments are a bit milder a middling fine for adultery with a woman of lower caste, the highest fine for adultery with a woman of own caste, but capital punishment for adultery with a woman of superior caste. The woman participating in the act has been prescribed certain penances, including having her hair shaved, lying on a low couch, receiving bad food and bad clothing, and being assigned the job of a sweeper.

Bŗhaspati also tries to make the punishments lighter by distinguishing between the different grades of adultery: “Winking (at a woman), smiling (at her), sending her messengers, and touching her ornaments or clothes is termed an adulterous act of the first (or lowest) degree.

Sending perfumes, garlands, fruit, spirituous liquor, food, or clothes, and conversing with her in secret, is considered an adulterous act of the second degree. Sitting on the same bed, dallying, and kissing or embracing each other, is defined as an adulterous act of the highest degree by persons acquainted with law.”

For these three grades of adultery, the first, middling and highest fines shall be inflicted respectively. Bṛhaspati’s mercy to the woman seems to be on the ground that the woman is nothing but the object at stake, without agency.

The epics contain the story of the hero Parasurāma which tells how he beheaded his own mother Reṇukā who was aroused by seeing king Citrasena in water-sport and thus committed an offence of adultery against her husband Jamadagni who ordered her to be beheaded. This story, a legend of the Bhṛgu clan to which Manu also belonged, matches the spirit of Manu. On the other hand, the Rāmāyaṇa contains the story of Ahalyā, the wife of the sage Gautama, who consented to an adulterous advance by Indra. There, Indra is punished by the sage’s curse, while Ahalyā is cursed to a long and severe penance, as Nārada would want it to be. The same epic also shows Śūrpanakhā, the sister of Rāvaṇa, trying to seduce Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa, an act punished by mutilating her nose and ears, as Bṛhaspati would suggest.

It must be mentioned in passing that the conditions seem to have been a shade better in Islamic prescriptive texts. In Islam, marriage is not a sacrament, but a contract. The Prophet Mohammed strongly denounced the customary practice of contemporary Arabia where a woman was considered to be property and was sold to the highest bidder. The Quran (IV.19) declares the marriage to be a contract where both the parties should consent in full knowledge. Thus, adultery is seen in Islam as a violation of a contract, rather than an infringement of the husband’s proprietary right. It is, according to The Quran, an evil opening the road to other evils. Thus, the woman’s agency is accepted in the matter, and the punishment is to be equal for both the parties.

The punishment for adultery in Islam is milder than what the three Brahmanical lawgivers prescribed and it recognizes the agency of both the parties. It also does not consider the loss of ‘chastity’ as the end of a woman’s life, but prescribes that an adulterous woman should be married to only an adulterous man, and vice-versa. However, adultery still remains only the violation of the body of a woman married to someone else, and not the violation of the body of a man married to someone else. The marital contract recognizes the husband’s sole authority over the wife’s body, allowing the husband to legally marry up to four women. So, even in the much reformed language of Islam, the status of the female body is only a shade better than it is in the eyes of Manu, Nārada and Bṛhaspati.

Given the logic, an act like adultery, not sanctioned by Dharma (social ethics), but beneficial to Kāma (pleasure), becomes justified if it brings some material profit (Artha) as well. Vātsyāyana refers to earlier authorities who enlisted such cases where sexual pleasure with another man’s wife is permissible on such a ground.

The Viṣṇu Purāṇa states that the women sported with Kṛṣṇa at night, despite being forbidden by their husbands. Irrespective of the marital status of the women, Kṛṣṇa’s love play is an amorous festive dance in the earlier sources. The Bhāgavata Purāṇa, however, stretches the matter much beyond a simple festive dance in a society with lesser taboos, and makes Kṛṣṇa steal the clothes of the bathing cowherd women and satisfy all kinds of demands of these women who are portrayed as selfless devotees.

Even the law giver Nārada spared some exceptional cases of adultery where the man has intercourse with the wife of one who has left his wife without her fault, or of one impotent or consumptive, if the woman herself consented to it.

However, a look at the Section 497 of the IPC would show that we have not moved much from the time of Manu and Bṛhaspati yet. The Section says: “Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case, the wife shall not be punished as an abettor.”

The idea is again, clear. Adultery is an offence committed by a man against a man. The wife, or better to say the wife’s body, is nothing but the property in contestation. Therefore, a sexual union between two consenting adults becomes a crime, but only when the woman is married and not the vice-versa. If the woman is unmarried, there is no law governing such intercourse. Further, the wife has no power whatsoever to sue her husband for adultery with an unmarried or married woman. This, in itself reflects, how a woman is merely treated like a property, subject to transfer and exercise of rights of ownership, possession and enjoyment.

LAW AND THE JUDGMENTS OF THE SUPREME COURT

Since independence, three decisions of the Supreme Court have considered challenges to the constitutional vires of the adultery provisions. Mr. Yusuf Abdul Aziz challenged the exemption from liability made for women under Section 497 IPC, arguing the same was contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution. Having lost at the Bombay High Court, he moved the Supreme Court, and five judges gave the decision in Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay. The Court unanimously held that the exemption for women was protective discrimination safeguarded under Article 15(3) of the Constitution. Importantly, Mr. Aziz did not impugn the validity of the offence itself.

The next landmark decision was Sowmithri Vishnu, delivered by a bench of three judges in 1985. Here, the Petitioner expanded the scope of arguments to impugn the validity of Section 497 as being contrary to Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, furthering notions of women as mere chattel. The Court remained unconvinced, and saw these arguments as falling in the realm of policy rather than law. But this did not stop the bench from engaging with the arguments, providing us with a unique insight into how three judges of the Supreme Court viewed matters of marriage and sexuality. Repelling the contention that exempting women from liability violated the equality guarantee, the Court observed that “it is commonly accepted that it is the man who is the seducer and not the woman”.

For the judges, exempting women conveyed the message that “the wife, who is involved in an illicit relationship with another man, is a victim and not the author of the crime”. The peculiar structure behind the offence was understandable, because it was an “offence against the sanctity of the matrimonial home, an act which is committed by a man, as it generally is. Therefore, those men who defile that sanctity are brought within the net of the law”. In consonance with this idea, the Court quashed the adultery complaint since the complainant husband had obtained a divorce from his allegedly adulterous wife.

In V. Revathi v. Union of India, the Petitioner expanded the scope of her arguments to assail the validity of restrictions placed under Section 198(2) Cr.P.C., which allow only the husband to initiate a prosecution for adultery committed by his wife and her paramour. In dismissing the Petition, the Court considered Section 497 IPC together with Section 198(2) Cr.P.C. as a “legislative packet” designed to “deal with the offence committed by an outsider to the matrimonial unit who invades the peace and privacy of the matrimonial unit and poisons the relationship between the two partners constituting the matrimonial unit… It does not arm the two spouses to hit each other with the weapon of criminal law.” Ultimately, the Court concluded that “even handed justice” was meted out to both parties.

Making consent of the husband material for prosecution lends greatly to an argument that the offence is merely an enforcement of his rights over the wife, contrary to the views of the Supreme Court. The Bombay High Court has on different occasions expressly approved the view that Section 497 only furthers the husband’s private rights.

In Re Shankar Tulshiram Navle, the Court held that “adultery is an infringement of the rights of the husband towards his wife, and when the offender has once been convicted or acquitted of the offence of adultery, which consisted of one sexual intercourse, he cannot with impunity commit another offence of adultery under Section 497.”

More significantly, in Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay, Chief Justice Chagla observed: Mr. Peerbhoy is right when he says that the underlying idea of Section 497 is that wives are properties of their husbands. The very fact that this offence is only cognizable with the consent of the husband emphasises that point of view.

It may be argued that Section 497 should not find a place in any modern Code of law. Days are past, we hope, when women were looked upon as property by their husbands. While such direct remarks are not ubiquitous, they significantly damage the assumptions which the Supreme Court proceeded to lay bare in Sowmithri Vishnu. Those assumptions of Section 497 furthering community interests of protecting are further dented if we look at how the courts placed great importance upon form over substance when faced with adultery cases. The same was upheld in Vijay Lakshmi vs. Punjab University and Ors.

REINTRODUCTION OF ADULTERY: JOSEPH SHINE VS. UNION OF INDIA

This law regarding adultery came under questioning why only men, not women, should be punishable for the offence. Questioning the validity of Section 497 of the India Penal Code (IPC), which criminalises adultery only by men, a Bench headed by CJI Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud issued notice to the Centre on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).

The PIL moved by Kerala native Joseph Shine claimed that the law is discriminatory, biased towards women, and should therefore be reviewed. Supreme Court said that though the ‘act is hypothetically capable of being committed by both the man and woman’, only the man is ‘liable for criminal offence’. Though criminal law proceeds on gender neutrality, ‘this provision is an aberration to the same’. Further, if the husband of the woman gives his consent for sexual intercourse with another man, no offence lies, that is another aspect of arbitrariness. In this case, the law operates to perpetuate an unequal world for women.

The court further noted, ‘It is perceivable from the language of the provision the fulcrum of offence is destroyed once the consent of husband is obtained. Viewed from that scenario, the provision creates a dent on the independent identity of women.’ It was held that any system treating a woman with indignity, inequity and inequality or discrimination invites the wrath of the Constitution and is ultra vires. Even though a provision might have been approved of decade’s back, that does not stop the judiciary to decide against it. A woman cannot be asked to think as a man or as how the society desires. Such a thought is unacceptable, for it slaughters her core identity. Most importantly, women are no longer chattels in the hands of men. Men are no longer the masters.

Thus, adultery has been decriminalized and is no longer an offence. The ability to make choices within marriage and on every aspect concerning it is a facet of human liberty and dignity which the Constitution protects. In depriving the woman of that ability and recognising it in the man alone, Section 497 failed to meet the essence of substantive equality in its application to marriage.

CONCLUSION

In the eyes of law, there is no possibility that a woman can commit adultery, or file a case against her husband or another woman if she finds out that her husband is having sexual intercourse with another woman. The implications of this law is that that if a married woman has sexual intercourse with multiple men, all those men are liable to criminal charges being filed by the husband, except the woman herself. On the other hand, if the husband sleeps with several married or unmarried women, there exists to liability for the same and is thus arbitrary treatment. Further, the decriminalization runs the risk of fostering extra-marital affairs, the emergence of divorce as the way out will catalyze the break-up of marriages, leaving little children in the lurch.

However the question as to whether the society will accept this is skeptical. Sitting in our closed houses and porche cars, discussing about live-in relationships and marital rape, decriminalizing adultery might be a fancy step for the elite class of metropolitan cities. However, the majority of India still resides in rural areas, areas where child marriages are continued, female feticide prevalent, women veiled, girl child condemned, rapes every fortnight, murders, homicide, poor sanitation and atrocities. Sadly, majority women in India are not even aware that they have the right of prevention from sexual harassment or that to sanitation. In such a scenario, will it be reasonable to bring the women under the ambit of law? Specially, where women are raped multiple times by the Naxalities or their fellow family members or traded for a night to secure some money or employment.

The question before us is the impact on women from this class. The question is about the time we choose to invest. The question is about the historical background and jurisprudence behind the law. The question is about the recipient of law and the subjects of it.

The question is how far is the ideology of women being treated as property correct? For how long, will the historical school of jurisprudence eclipse the law makers and prevent lawyer’s extraversion. The question is how a woman can be identified as an individual and not as a mere property subjected to transfer and rights of ownership, possession and enjoyment. The question is about not empowering or uplifting women by putting men on a backseat. If an offence is committed liability is to be borne by the two individuals. The law can of course be subjected to age bars and limits to keep in check the tradition of child marriages. Only time will tell, if the reintroduction breaks homes or instills freedom in the institution of marriage. However, in the view of the author, a third person can never break a matrimonial bond in the absence of existent indifferences, dissatisfaction or visible differences. A marriage can only be interfered with or broken if it has existent cracks.

INTRODUCTION

Over the past thirty years, two sexual revolutions have taken place, a dramatic increase in awareness of sexual problems and the simultaneous expansion of the range of therapies for sexual ailments; and a radical change in sexual behavior and behavior.

The discussion focused on the ethical implications of these changes. The standards of sexual morality in this society are derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition.

In this passage, sexuality is first linked to the establishment of a permanent relationship between man and woman and secondly as a means of giving birth to new life.

ABSTRACT

The paper examines the compatibility of the zina punishment (adultery or fornication) with modern ideas of personal freedom and, in particular, sexual freedom. From the many verses of the Quran we can conclude that the punishment for adultery is the first type of tazir, that is, discouragement and becomes hadd, that is, a punishment that is then established in the form of a fixed punishment which varies depending on the marital status of the perpetrator. .

This was accepted by all Muslim lawyers except the Kharajit al-Azariqa group, and some trial lawyers denied that stoning was the death penalty for married offenders who said the revelation changed the stoning from Cor’a.

Examining the arguments of advocates of tougher sentences and conflicting opinions, the paper notes that in a legal system where all actions and relationships are measured by a level of moral judgment, it is normal to have a strong concern for execution.

The paper concludes with the idea that the mandatory penalty for adultery applies to those who commit crimes, regardless of the law or the sentiments of the community.

Since the current Muslim communities do not accept the Islamic way of life, it is wrong to punish by Zina and not talk about death in a community where everyone invites and encourages illegal sex.

FORNICATION

The main cause of sexual intercourse is that it is good for pregnancy and the pregnancy is limited to marriage. Any premarital sex is punishable by death; Seduction and adultery are all deceptions. This practice has restricted sexual intercourse in marriage to procreation and continues to this day, where it is often questioned and violated. Loan contraception has significant side effects

Sex is stressful. Praise praises love, but it all depends on what you mean by love. There are at least three ways to understand the relationship of love, sex and loneliness, temporary sex between couples and sex in marriage.

Masturbation has a place in the lives of young people and can be different for men and women, but the pleasure of participating is greater than masturbation. In most cases, it can easily lead to human and homosexual activities in small minority groups.

Short-term contact is more effective than contraception. The goal is orgasm. When this is done, there is no need. But this is not right and you should focus on sex in marriage.

At the heart of the race is the continued fidelity of being with the one who did this. In most cases, dating comes from a new way of life to a way of sustaining, healing and improving married life.

ZINA

Zina is an Islamic legal term that refers to illegal sex. According to traditional jurisprudence, zina can include adultery (married parties), fornication (unmarried parties), prostitution, rape, sodomy, homosexuality, incest and bestiality.

Although the classification of homosexual intercourse as zina differs depending on the law school, most apply the zina rules to homosexuality, primarily to male homosexuality.

The Qur’an disapproved of the promiscuity that prevailed in Arabia at the time, and several verses refer to illegal sex, including one that prescribes the punishment of one hundred genes for prostitutes. Four witnesses are needed to prove the crime. Therefore, Zina belongs to the hadd class, crimes that specified the Quranic punishments.

ISLAM’S PROHIBITION ON FORNICATION AND ADULTERY

Chastity is defined as controlling oneself against forbidden desires due to the love of Allah Almighty in response to His command and seeking its reward in return.

Islam has always been keen to establish chastity in the Muslim community and therefore has enacted many laws which reduce and control the strong impact of these desires; it also encouraged to stay on track and warned against exceeding the defined definition.

Islam has preserved the honor of the people and protected the sexes from the mixture. Islam even outlawed anything that could lead to these sins, such as immoral gender stares, depraved words, flirtatious moves, a man and a woman being in an isolated room, and anything that would lead to this terrible sin.

The fornicator would be lashed with a hundred stripes. Do not let pity restrain you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. .

Fornication is a carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to human dignity and human sexuality, which naturally benefits husbands and wives and the generation and education of children.

ISLAMIC MOTIFS PREVENTED BY FORNICARE

Immortality is evil and temptation is an invitation to do evil, but wisdom keeps the wise from evil. If you believe in the slippery and deceptive promises of immorality, if you choose to sin by marriage, then you are wrong.

Immortality tries to enslave you. Surrender becomes easier. Resistance becomes more difficult. You cannot play with immorality and hope to escape. You can cover it for a while, but you will find out later. Allah sees everything and it is a fire.

You can rob your current or future spouse of the best love and attention. You can steal someone’s innocence. Or you can continue to support the terrible pornography industry, which is destroying and shutting down young women. Images are never harmful; we cannot lie.

We do this because it feels good. But like an alcoholic destroying his liver or a smoker ignoring his lungs, we commit suicide with good sense or jump off the highway.

You will be hurt for it later. You expose yourself to constant guilt and bad reputation. You will always be the one who ran away with the girl and cheated on something good. Sexual immorality rightly angers him.

CONCLUSION

He whore each of the one hundred and hit the coast. I feel sorry for one of you, if ye believe in God; do not believe God made the two to prevent the flashes as at the last day. I Of faith and a testimony of those. (Quran 24: 2)

For whatever is in the premarital sex is one of you, and was hindered, and the very lest they become discouraged. The Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said ‘If followers of the two unmarried men (men and women) together claimed, would become the devil, and a third do not sin; Q mingling of sexes is discouraged. To dress modestly and women in the trial, because no man.

Islam is prohibited premarital sex. It’s called Nel’zina allowed. But if the woman lives to be a fornicator Shariah and the Quran is dispensed with the law of the country for a hundred times with rods.

REFERENCE

1. Semerdjian, Elyse (2009). ‘Zina’. In John L. Esposito (Ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acre/9780195305135.001.0001. ISBN 9780195305135. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1528817X.2012.733132
2. Semerdjian, Elyse (2008). ‘Off the Straight Path’: Illicit Sex, Law, and Community in Ottoman Aleppo. Syracuse University Press. p. 53. ISBN 9780815651550. Retrieved 13 July 2019. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1528817X.2012.733132
3. Khan, Shahnaz (2011). Zina, Transnational Feminism, and the Moral Regulation of Pakistani Women. UBC Press. p. 8. ISBN 9780774841184. Retrieved 13 July 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.everydayhealth.com/longevity/can-promiscuity- threaten-longevity.aspx
4. Akande, Habeeb (2015). A Taste of Honey: Sexuality and Erotology in Islam. Rajah Publishers. p. 145. ISBN 9780957484511. Retrieved from: http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation
5. Mere, Josef W. (2006). Medieval Islamic Civilization: L-Z, index. Taylor & Francis. p. 646. ISBN 9780415966924. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1080/1528817X.2012.733132

The Scarlet Letter ​mainly covers the sin of adultery, while ​The Crucible ​covers witchcraft. Both have obvious similarities like the setting and the crime, but both have major differences. The author of ​The Scarlet Letter ​is Nathenial Hawthorne and the playwright of ​The Crucible ​is Arthur Miller. ​The Scarlet Letter​ is about Hester Prynne committing adultery with Arthur Dimmesdale and becoming pregnant with his child, while she had a husband known has

Roger Chillingsworth. Roger discovers who the father of her child is and torments Arthur for seven years, until Hester tells Arthur that Roger knows that he is the father of her child. ​The Crucible ​is about John Proctor committing adultery with Abigail Williams, who adores him and wants his wife, Elizabeth Proctor, to be hung for witchcraft, which she did not commit, so Abigail can have John to herself. John confesses that he committed adultery with Abigail to get his wife her freedom, then he is taken as a prisoner because he commits to witchcraft and that there is no God, so Abigail cannot have him to herself. Therefore, when it comes to the subject of adultery, Hester Prynne and John Proctor are more different than they are similar because Hester’s punishment after she committed adultery is not has harsh as what John Proctors punishment for when he committed adultery and witchcraft is.

Clearly, Hester commits adultery with Arthur Dimmesdale and his imprisoned because adultery is a sin and it violates their Puritan religion (Hawthorne 59). Her husband Roger is out of the country when she commits adultery with Arthur, then when she is in prison her husband comes back into the country and Hester finds out she is pregnant when imprisoned. She is released from prison since she is with child and will not kill her, but then everyone demands to know the father of the child since her husband was out of the country at the time. Her punishment instead of being killed is to have the letter ‘A’ sewn into her dress for the public to let them know she has committed adultery (Hawthrone 63).

Furthermore, John commits adultery with Abigail (Miller line 841) and is not imprisoned for this act because no one believes him even though he told his wife and said his wife will never lie. Then the council brought in Elizabeth and asked her if she knew about John and Abigail and she said no and that it was not true (Miller line 958). John then tells Elizabeth that he has confessed when she is being removed from the court, and she regrets not telling the truth since John told Danforth that Elizabeth has never lied before in her life (Miller line 891-894, 963).

Then, the girls run out of the courtroom and the men follow them to the pond and John tells everyone that is gathered around from the commotion that he has known Abigail. In other words, Hester and John have some similarities between the two of them, but they have more differences that are greater than they are alike. Hester’s punishment is not as severe as Johns punishment is to as where he has been chained and locked away from everyone until he confesses every name that was involved with witchcraft. He would be set free, but he does not go through with it since he did not commit witchcraft.

Nonetheless, Hester’s punishment is later revealed and is due to be humiliated in front of the whole town (Hawthorne 64). Hester has to ​stand only a space of three hours on the platform of the pillory, and then thereafter, for the remainder of her natural life, to wear a mark of shame upon her bosom. She stands there with her newborn child, which she has yet to name, and on her dress is the letter ‘A’ sewn in fine red cloth with an elaborate embroidery and fantastic flourishes of gold thread around the ‘A’. Hester’s punishment is not too severe, she could have been killed, but she was humiliated and has to wear the letter ‘A’ to be known as an adulterer. On the contrary, John admits that he has known Abigail to prove his wife is innocent because Elizabeth is imprisoned from her name being brought up in the court for witchcraft, which she has never done (Miller line 850-868). Abigail is ecstatic because Elizabeth is in prison and will be hanged unless proven she is innocent, and Abigail gets to have John to herself even though John does not see Abigail that way at all. He thinks what they did was a mistake and it will not happen again because he loves his wife dearly. John’s punishment did not come until later when he had confessed to witchcraft so he would be killed and so that Abigail could not have him to herself.

Additionally, part of Hester’s punishment is to wear the letter ‘A’ to show her sin that she has committed because everyone in the town and Hester, herself, need to be reminded of what she has done and what is to come of anyone does it too. The new people that pass through their town will be told to either stay away from her because she might try to commit adultery with their husband, or they will tell them the sad story of how she has to wearthe letter to represent the toll that she has taken for committing such an act. On the bright side she got a beautiful baby girl, which she named Pearl because of her complexion and beauty that she has brought into the world. Since Hester stood on the platform of the pillory she has understood the mistake and sin she had done, but she does not wish for everything to be taken back and that she did not do that in the first place.

However, John fails to show that he has known Abigail, so he says he had committed witchcraft because the only way for him to be away from Abigail is to die and she cannot get what she wants if he is in prison. John is miserable and happy because he knows he is going to die, but he would not have to deal with Abigail and her shenagaines again and his wife Elizabeth is pregnant, so she is released and cannot be killed since she is with child. John’s discipline is to die for the sin he has performed, even though he was not responsible for witchcraft, just as long as he could escape Abigail and for his wife to live and be happy with their child that she will have to raise by herself in the future.

In essence, Hester Prynne and John Proctor both committed adultery, but their punishments were not the main focus from adultery. Hester’s was but John was for witchcraft and they both had their Puritan religion at fault to be imprisoned for their actions. Adultery is a terrible sin, but Hester got a beautiful child out of it and John loved his wife even more after he had an affair with Abigail. The Puritan religion is not around that much as it used to be, but there are some religions out there that carry on this tradition, just without the being killed part, they most likely get a divorce.

Works Cited

1. Hawthorne, Nathenial. ​The Scarlet Letter. ​Logan: A Tale Blazer Book, 1979. Print.
2. Miller, Arthur. ​The Crucible. Holt McDougal Literature: American Literature. ​Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2010. 134-221. Print.

“Secure attachment was once viewed as important for infant development. More recently, it has been deemed the most important ingredient for successful relationship formation, strong self-identity & confidence to function and achieve in our lifetime.”

Introduction

A child’s experience in their early formative years largely influences their later development. The influence largely accounts for the development of their cognitive skills, emotional stability, personality, and social skills. According to Bawdy (1977), attachment is the emotional bond that individual forms towards another person. The attachment is corresponding between the infant and their parents. Attachment leads to the adoption of the values which largely determine the later development of the child as they grow up into adulthood.

Secure and Insecure Attachments

Attachments can either be secure or insecure (Bowlby, 1958). Secure attachment serves as a model for future relationships that the child ill have and how they will engage and interact in such relationships. An infant who is confident in their attachment will relay their positivity in the relation. An infant who is safe in their attachment will show some resistance when left with a stranger and will react warmly when the familiar face comes back. According to Glaser (2006), securely attached children are more compliant and show greater enthusiasm in comparison to an insecure infant.

Development Theories

Development theories are crucial to understanding human growth and provide insight into why human beings behave as they do and give great insight into the society and the individual. The development of children was often ignored with scant information available. However, from around the 20th century, a lot of research has been done to understand the different changes that take place in a child and how they affect and influence their individuality. According to Freud psychoanalytic development theory, a child’s experiences and their unconscious desires mostly changed their behavior. The development of the child mostly takes place during their formative years, and Freud believed that the early experiences of the child played a critical role in how the child eventually develops. Another development theory formulated is the psychosocial theory as advanced by Erickson (Fraley, 2000).

Bowlby Attachment Theory

According to Bowdys attachment theory, the early relationship between a minor and the caregiver influences their social relationships throughout their life (Barnes, 2018). Bowdys attachment theory opines that children are generally born with an innate want to form attachments. Therefore such attachment helps them in their survival because the child receives protection and care. Secure attachments, according to the theory, ensures both motivational and behavioral development patterns of the child become assured. Secure attachment ensures that the child usually develops (Harlow, 1958). There are four characteristics of attachment theory, which are separation distress, proximity maintenance, stable base, and haven. The four features are present in the relationship between the caregiver and the child. According to the theory of attachment, the child relies on the caregiver for comfort when he /she feels threatened. The caregiver offers a reliable foundation to ensure the child learns to sort the said issues without a lot of help. The child, therefore, aims to explore the world and at the same time, still maintain proximity to the caregiver. As a result, when the caregiver separates from the child, the child is likely to feel distressed.

In adults, attachment towards the child is evidenced by their response to the needs of the child. Therefore, such an attachment would significantly affect their subsequent attachment. According to Bowlby, the mother is attached to the mother, which affects their emotional, social, and cognitive development. A child who is detached from the mothers according to the theory will most likely experience maladjustment in later life. According to researchers, attachment takes place in stages. According to Shaffer (1964) in the study of 60 children for an 18 month period observed that the children showed anxiety towards strangers, and they were reluctant to be separated from their caregivers, and lastly they sought a social referencing where they always found their caregivers to check how they should respond when something new was introduced. The study observed that infants who of 10months and beyond were increasingly heavily dependent and formed several attachments with those that responded to their signals not necessarily their primary caregiver. According to the evolutionary, therefore, the children come to the world when they are already programmed to form an attachment with other people to ensure their survival.

Secure attachment is considered one of the most critical ingredients for the formulation of successful relationships even in adulthood because a child who grew up end up being strong, confident and formulates successful relationships in their lifetime Attachment theory is essential to understanding people and how to best help them. Attachments expressed early in life over on to the next generation, and the adult is likely to pass what they learned to the next generation. According to Dollard (1950), one’s attachment style influences how people react. People with insecure attachments are more likely to develop maladaptive behaviors because of the neglect that they encountered young children.

The mother and child bond is crucial to the development of a person. According to Ainsworth, children who are secure in strange places have parents who are responsive to their need, and such a person is likely to develop healthy relationships in their adult life. According to cross-cultural studies, infants who are secure are well adjusted in later life. People are more likely to have relationships with people who have the same views about attachment relationships as themselves in adulthood (Frazier et al., 1997). Secure attachment enables the adult to have a sense of belonging, and one feels connected to another person. A person with a secure attachment is likely to have positive self-esteem and confidence, which are essential to attaining stability in a relationship. A person who did not have a stable base can either develop the base later in life to heal ay form of insecure attachment that they may have.

Secure Attachment in Adults

In the late 1980s, the attainment theory was extended to the study of relationships among adults. In the field of psychology, the attachment theory is applied to an adult’s links, which include their emotional, friendship, and platonic relationships. The four main attachment styles were explored to check how attachment affects the outcome of relationships. The relationship between adults is different from that of children and their caregivers. According to Fraley and Shavey (2000), the central propositions when it comes to adult attachment are based on behavioural and emotional dynamics, which are based on their similar biological system. The difference in behavioural attachment among the adult is identical to their relationships. The orientation of attachment between adults is correlated with the bond that they had as children. According to Sable (2008), secure attachment is promoted by a caregiver who was emotionally available when the child was growing up and whether the said caregiver was responsive to the needs of the child.

The outcome of adult relationships varies, and some of the links experience more participation in contrast to others. According to studies, attachment styles are closely interlinked with satisfaction in a relationship. It has also suggested that people who are securely attached are more likely to stay longer n relationships compared to those who have insecure attachments (Brennan, 1995). Bowlby (1982), in his observation, found out that children are likely to seek comfort and closeness to their caregiver whenever they experience anxiety or discomfort. The attachment theory attributes people’s likelihood to enter into intimate relationships as a fundamental human nature component that is likely to continue until old age. Attachment is essential in the interactions because it influences the frequency and way in which people express their feelings. Change is expected to take effect, but it doesn’t change the fact that people need support in the day to day life. The development theory explains how secure attachment develops over time until a person reaches adulthood. A person is most likely to take the beliefs and behaviors learned at an earlier stage into their adult life. Having a caregiver who checks on a child and ensures that they take care of the needs of the child would result in a child who is securely attached in the future. Attachment theory looks at a person’s ability to maintain intimate bonds and relationships that attain the desire o for intimacy often lead to more secure attachments at the individual level.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is true that secure attachment is among the essential ingredients for attaining a relationship that is successful in adult life. Secure attachments also increase one’s confidence and their self-esteem enabling the individual to achieve more out of life. Secure attachment sets an individual on a clear path of self-actualization and in adult life; it allows the adult to seek support from the relationships formulated. Without the presence of secure attachments the children would grow up to become people who have self-worth issues and would face increased risk of suffering from anxiety and depression. Having in place secure attachment protects a person from such risks and positively impacts their development to become well-grounded adults who can handle the success and failures of relationships.

Reference

1. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1973). The development of infant-mother attachment. In B. Cardwell & H. Ricciuti (Eds.), Review of child development research (Vol. 3, pp. 1-94) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1991). Attachments and other affectional bonds across the life cycle. In C . M. Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (Eds.), Attachment across the life cycle (pp. 33-51). London: Routledge.
3. Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bell, S. M. (1970). Attachment, exploration, and separation: Illustrated by the behavior of one-year-olds in a strange situation. Child Development, 41, 49-67.
4. Barnes GL, Woolgar M, Beckwith H, Duschinsky R. John Bowlby and contemporary issues of clinical diagnosis. Attachment (Lond). 2018;12(1):35-47.
5. Bowlby, J. (1958). The nature of the child’s ties to his mother. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 39, 350-371.
6. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment. Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Loss. New York: Basic Books.
7. Bowlby, J., and Robertson, J. (1952). A two-year-old goes to the hospital — proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 46, 425–427.
8. Brennan, K.A.; Shaver, P.R. (1995). ‘Dimensions of adult attachment, affect regulation, and romantic relationship functioning.’ Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
9. Dollard, J. & Miller, N.E. (1950). Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill
10. Fraley, R.C.; Shaver, P.R. (2000). ‘Adult attachment: Theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions.’ Review of General Psychology.
11. Harlow, H. F. & Zimmermann, R. R. (1958). The development of affective responsiveness in infant monkeys. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 102,501 -509.
12. Prior, V., & Glaser, D. (2006). Understanding attachment and attachment disorders: Theory, evidence, and practice. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
13. Sable, Pat (2008). ‘What is Adult Attachment?’. Clin Soc Work J.
14. Schaffer, H. R., & Emerson, P. E. (1964). The development of social attachments in infancy. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1-77.

Infidelity

Infidelity is what we all popularly refer to as cheating or unfaithfulness in a romantic relationship. It is the betrayal of a couple’s agreement on emotional and sexual discretion. According to Wikipedia, infidelity is a violation of a couple’s assumed or stated contract regarding emotional and/or sexual exclusivity.

Other words that can be used in this context are adultery, affair, cheating, two-timing, straying, or unfaithfulness. Infidelity is like breaking the code of commitment between couples. We must understand that every relationship is bound by a set of rules and regulations. Some are made deliberately while other comes naturally with the package deal. For instance, in school, every student knows that if you fail an examination, you have to retake the class. It may not be clearly spelled it in the school’s book of codes and conduct but every single has this information registered in their subconscious. Here’s another example. Every tenant knows that they must pay their rent. The owner of the house need not remind you of the implications of not updating your rent. The minute you fail to pay, he quickly forgets that you have been a good occupant in the past and he quickly serves you an eviction notice.

The same goes for relationships. Some of the package deals of every relationship are love, faithfulness, commitment, accountability, trust, communication, understanding, care, tolerance, etc. One of the top criteria on the chart should be faithfulness. Except you two are simply friends with benefits who are allowed to have multiple partners, no man or woman wants to be told that their partner is frolicking with someone else. In fact, that is a deal breaker for most people. The moment they discover you are two-timing they will not hesitate to bid you farewell. For someone, it does have to be the whole third base brouhaha. As little as admiring, lusting, or crushing over someone else is enough to end that relationship.

The cost of infidelity

Most people enter into relations without weighing the cost. These same people are quick to cheat on their partners because they do not know the cost of infidelity either. They think it is all about that initial attraction or euphoria that intoxicates them. Relationships are more than just a parole of two naïve love birds. It takes more than chemistry to sustain a relationship. Love may be the foundation on which that house is built but love alone is never enough to keep the ship sailing. This is what most people fail to understand. Every day, you see a flock of people boarding the dating, courtship, or marriage train without a true understanding of its implications. They hurriedly jump into relationships without an in-depth knowledge and understanding of the meaning of commitment. It does not come as a surprise that they jump off the train as quickly as they jump in.

Do you still wonder why the rate of divorce and heartbreak rises every passing hour?

You must understand this. The moment you enter into a relationship you are signing a seal that says,

“I choose you over all others”

No, your partner may not be the most charming bloke you’ve met. Yes, she may not be as pretty as your ex. Trust me, as long as you live in this world, you will constantly run into more handsome, beautiful, rich, smart, sexy, curvy, charming, nice, and caring men and women. Sometimes, you might be tempted to stray. Do not be quick to think you are immune to such fleeting emotions. Don’t give yourself too much credit. Go and meet some of these men and women who ruined their relationships simply because they could not tame their passion. Ask them a couple of questions. You will find that most of them never intended to cheat. I’m sure most of them could have sworn a week earlier that they would never do such to their spouse. You don’t believe it? Honestly, not all cheating partners are philanders. Some of them are good men and women who fall into the temptation of seduction or infatuation. Oh! You’ve seen nothing set. Take a year off and travel the world. Go vacationing in the Caribbean and then you will find that the beautiful ones have been born. However, your decision to commit to a relationship is a decision to forsake all other regardless of whatever qualities they may have that is lacking in your partner. Also, be informed that there is no such thing as perfection. Those individuals have flaws they are also battling with. If you insist and decide to scale the fence, you will realize that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side.

Infidelity comes at it high cost. It does not only destroy your relationship but it could destroy the life of your spouse (who is the victim in this whole brouhaha) and the lives of other people around you. Oh! You thought you were the only own affected. Let me educate you perhaps you are unaware. Research shows that children are a product of the environment and the condition under which they were raised. A child who grew up in the ghetto is more likely to have a run with the law as an adult. A child who grew up in an abusive environment has the tendency to become an abuser. A child who grew up watching their father physically abuse them are likely going to become wife-beaters themselves. In case of the females, they usually develop a certain fear or hatred for men. Children from broken homes are more susceptible to unstable relationships. So what do you think is the fate of a child who grew up in an atmosphere of cheating and infidelity? Children are like a plain sheet of paper. What you write on them is who they become. It is not always about what you teach or instruct them to do. Remember that the act of coherent speech is one of the skills we have to learn as children. Language and Speech is not an inherent trait. It is a learned skill. If you are raised in a British home, chances are that you will have a good common of the English Language. Some cannot be said for a child who was raised by Chinese parents. On the other hand, the ability to see comes naturally from birth. We could see clearly months before we could speak coherently. Thus, children are more visual than verbal learners. Children learn better and faster by observation. If you preach love to them but your actions and behavior display hate. They will quickly pick out that hate culture before remembering that you taught them to love. Your actions towards your spouse go a long to form their perception of relationships and marriage. When you teach you are simply teaching them to do the same.

It helps if we can pause to think about the consequences of our actions. Wisdom demands that we weigh the long-term consequences of our actions against the short-term satisfaction we stand to gain. Infidelity causes a lot of emotional and psychological damage to the other party. In A. Pawlowski’s words,

“Infidelity is one of the most distressing things you can experience in a romantic relationship.”

Infidelity could lead to anger, rage, bitterness, damaged self-esteem, violence, negativity, depression, despair, unhappiness, fury, aggression, drug abuse, hate, alcoholism, enmity, and suicide. Infidelity builds up a burning furnace of fury in the heart of the scorned partner. Such fury can push them into a blind rage and make them take laws into their own hands in the quest for revenge. This kind of betrayal is what drives people to form unhealthy sexual habits. Most people who had to deal with a cheating partner ended up becoming emotional scavengers. They begin to experiment across multiple partners simply for the purpose of a rebound. Many of them lose faith in love and are unable to maintain stable healthy relationships in the future. They see every man or woman as an enemy who is set to break their heart at any point. They become suspicious of their every move and even lay snarls for them to fall. Cheating begins a lifestyle for some of them. They begin to cheat as a rebound or means of venting their frustration and vengeance. Have you also paused to think of have this affects your partner’s relationship with other people? Such experience damages other relationships in their life. It destroys their relationship with their family, friends, colleagues, and neighbors. They become very distrustful, suspicious, and secretive. Most of them begin to blame themselves for the misbehavior of their partner. They begin to second-guess themselves and question their self-image and worth. Soon they begin to withdraw into their shells, depression sets in and they commit suicide.

Are you also aware that having multiple sex partners is the highest cause of sexually transmitted diseases? You stand the risk of contracting such diseases which are often difficult to combat. It does not end there. You are also likely to infect your partner who is unaware of your sexual escapades. Imagine the kind of trauma it would cause them. You went on your adventure without giving them prior notice and now they have to suffer for your misbehavior. Let’s assume that the cheating partner is a male. Have you considered that your wife, fiancé, or girlfriend may be trying to conceive? If you contact sexually transmitted disease and infect her in the process, the disease will be subsequently passed down to your unborn child or children (if they are twin babies). Little by little more people get roped into the chain reaction.

Why should an innocent child pay for the crimes of his father?

Can you see how much harm infidelity causes the people you love?

You may think that the aforementioned reasons would make most people desist from infidelity. Ironically, it seems that the rate of infidelity increases by leaps and bounds every single day. This brings us to the ultimate question…

Why do people cheat?

There are a thousand and one reasons why people cheat on their spouses. In fact, it seems everybody who cheats invents their own for cheating. Have you ever met a cheat who did not put up a word in their own defense? They always have a reason or excuse to give. Some even go as far as harassing their spouse for unveiling their secret affair. Don’t be quick to conclude that it is the fault of their spouse. No! The reasons do not always have something to do with their spouse. Sometimes, you could be doing everything right yet your partners may fall for the temptation of cheating on you. There is actually a long list of motives and intentions that try to justify the actions of our unfaithful partners. Let’s discuss some of the top reasons on the chart.

1. Untamed Sexual Desires:

This ranks top among the many reasons people cheat on their spouse. When you fail to tame your sexual desires, you will never get enough of it. Your spouse may be giving you more than you need but it will never be enough by your own standards. Sometimes it is curiosity and the desire to explore or experiment that drives people into cheating on their spouses. Be careful in your quest to test new waters. Man is already insatiable in nature pushing your luck further might be a journey of no return. Don’t be quick to defend your actions with the slogan “You only live once”. That quote was invented to motivate people to unleash their full potential while they are still alive. It is an advocacy for people to unleash the untamed evil that lives within them. Sexual desires were created for men and not men for sexual desires. You should be the master of your emotions and hormones not the other way round. We should exercise moderation in everything we do even when it comes to such matters. Handle your sexual fantasies with discretion.

2. Wrong Perception of Commitment:

Like I said earlier most people do not know nor understand the cost of being in a relationship. They do not understand that relationships come with their own package deal. There is a certain attitude and behavior expected of you in a relationship and one of them is fidelity. Once you enter into a relationship you have entered into an emotional and sexual commitment to the person especially in the case of marriage. You have decided to choose that person over every other person and so it must remain. There is nothing like,

“My husband is not caring like him”

“Wife does not have a banging body like hers”

Sorry to burst your bubble. You kissed that banging body goodbye the moment you decided to commit to your spouse. Too bad if your spouse is not caring enough. You also kissed that goodbye. That is why it is important that you think about caring before you agree to commit to anyone. Relationships are not things that should be boarded at a wimp. Do not make your decision based on your feelings only. Sometimes what the heart wants is not always go for it so you have to think with your head. You can always guide your heart to do the right thing. If you discover a trait in your potential partner that you cannot deal with, it is best to take a walk at that very moment. Do not make excuses for those red flags you see. Leave before it is too late. However, if you decide to stay with him or her, then you must be faithful to them.

3. A Pound of Flesh:

There are some couples who do not know how to resolve or manage conflicts in their relationship. The first thing that comes to their mind when they are offended by their spouse is ‘revenge’. This is mostly found among people who have anger management issues. At the slightest provocation, they will always find something to smash or destroy. They will always go for an item that is important to their spouse. In more grievous scenarios, they could decide to cheat on their spouse as a form of payback. Relationships require a lot of patience. If you do not forgive people’s offenses easily, you may struggle with that in your relationship. Your spouse is not perfect. They are bound to offend you at one point or the other during the course of your relationship. You must learn how to manage such situations so they do not escalate. Deal with your personal flaws, weaknesses, and baggage before entering into a relationship.

4. Neglect:

I was careful not to omit this point as I am aware that some cases of infidelity are triggered by the spouse. Relationships are all about commitment. I cannot over-emphasize this. There is no room for going back and forth. You can’t be half-way in or half-way out. You are either in or you are out. It’s that simple. When you decide to commit to someone, you must give them your all. Show them how much you love them. Care for them. Always be there for them. Give them the attention they deserve. Most people are tempted to cheat on their spouse when their emotional needs are not met. It will help if you can learn your partner’s love language. Love language is the way your partner perceives love. No matter how much you claim to love them they may not believe you are expressing through the wrong channel. That is why communication is important. Your partner’s love language could be words of affirmation, quality time, gifts, acts of service, or physical touch. Find out and use it as a channel to express your love for them.

No matter the reason you have to defend infidelity, nothing really justifies it. Two wrongs can never make something right. Remember that you won’t be the only one affected by your actions. If you really your partner, you won’t do anything to hurt them. Keep to your words and do right by them.