It was not an affectionate embrace, but it was a passionate clinch. Richard Gere looked like a panther grabbing a baby deer and devouring it. A peck or two or a liplock would not have attracted any comment.

Gere held her with his arms and legs in a breath-taking grip, bent her down, pressed his torso and hips against her soft body. It looked as if he was overcome with passion and could not control himself. He was evidently unaware of the large audience that had come to participate in an AIDS awareness programme. He was totally oblivious to the world and got into a tight, blissful embrace.

Gere is regarded as a serious man, always caring for his fellowmen around the world. If he was not that kind of a man, he would not have been involved in an AIDS mission.

It is all crap to suggest however that the happening in Delhi is an everyday occurrence in foreign countries like the U.S. or Europe. They do kiss in public and on stage, but what happened at the AIDS meet in Delhi was not just a kiss — such things don't happen in the U.S. or Europe. That clinch would have attracted a fatwa if it happened in any West Asian country.

Please note that I am only describing the happening. There is no comment — either in favour or against. Street protests, taking up the issue to court and moral policing are unnecessary and unfair.

And Gere perhaps would have been more careful if he was aware of the kind of moral policing that exists in our country. The moral police are not just in the police force, but they are there all over the place, angrily condemning all ‘immoral activities' and swearing by our ancient and glorious heritage.

Women members in various organizations who have nothing much to do in life, are mounting attacks on Gere. They have not only condemned the ‘obscene' scene at the AIDS meet but also declared such amorous happenings will not help the AIDS awareness programme. I do not know exactly what they mean by this.

And this is what they do not like also. They say that Shilpa Shetty should have, instead of giggling fought against his ‘sexual attack', screamed and strongly put up resistance. Instead of doing this ‘she seems to have enjoyed it all'. They want her to say nasty things about Gere – that he looks like a sex maniac, that she was taken unawares, that her giggling should not be regarded as a sign of ecstasy she was experiencing, but was a result of pain and embarrassment. They are prepared to let go the victim scot free if she were to agree with them and make out she was an unwilling partner in the ‘obscene' act.

It is better perhaps that the moral police beat it. Our country has a better record than Pakistan in this regard. Recently a minister who hugged a paratrooper in France is in trouble. It was a hug for charity. The minister was participating in an air-drop exercise and when they came down to earth, she got a hug. A fatwa has been issued against her. She says her life is in danger.

There was a time when a scantily-clad girl could not be shown on the screen. When for the first time the bare leg of an actress was shown four decades ago there were objections, but people flocked to the theatre and the film was a big box office hit.

Slowly, bit by bit, nudity was revealed in our films — and accepted. Kissing of course was not allowed. It is still not done. As the faces of the girl and the boy kept coming together, two doves were shown pecking. Rain was taken advantage of — to reveal wet curves — the breasts and the bottom.

If filmwallahs had their way, would have shown kissing, the heroine in the nude and even sex scenes. They do perhaps shoot these scenes, but the censors do the moral policing and effect cuts. Kissing is still taboo, maybe it will be allowed in another decade.

And perceptions about morality keeps changing. In the Victorian period in England, there were stiff regulations about woman's dress. Sex was taboo. Let alone farting, a woman had to be careful even about sneezing or burping. Great writers like D.H. Lawrence, Oscar Wilde and many others were harassed because they brought sex into their books.

Some of these morals arrived in India. It would be more appropriate to say they were imposed on the native subjects. Indians began to accept the stiff moral codes of the British. Today when they talk of ‘our heritage', they refer to the moral which existed during the colonial rule. For instance, our women in ancient times were free. A woman could choose any man she wanted was her husband. Every warrior was a Casanova and he was admired for his amorous activities. Take Arjuna for instance. Whenever he conquered a kingdom, he had an affair with pretty women of the kingdom.

And in the elite circles, the women exposed themselves stark naked and bathed in moonlight. Compare their dress to the clothes women wear today. Go to some ancient cave and you can see how Draupadi used to dress. If she walked down Dadabhai Nowroji Road today, people would be scandalized. The big breasts were squeezed into a tiny bit of a bra which at the back had only thin strings. Almost the entire back was bare. The neck region and the arms and the armpits too were not covered.

And down there, the thunder thighs were enclosed with skimpy silk material. The bottom with the deliberately distinct cleavage was revealingly exposed.

Persons who know nothing about our great civilization and the healthy values our ancestors cherished, shout themselves hoarse from housetops and decide what is moral and what is not.

By the way, nobody talks about how men dress. Our male film actors go to gymnasium, put on muscles and show all of them. There is no protest from women. The reason is not difficult to see: they dare not point the accusing finger at the man. The decision about what is moral and what not is always taken only by man. Women do not have much say in the matter.

Women should have a greater say when it comes to decision-making with regard to perceptions about morality. It must be noted however that only the enlightened, well-read and experienced women can participate in this work. Most women are not fit enough to do the work because from childhood they are brainwashed and they get trapped in the set of rules made by the male. It is difficult for most of them to wriggle out of captive minds and find a place in the sun.

Having said all this, I would like to state we cannot enact intimate bedroom scenes at Chowpatty or on a stage – on a stage where an AIDS awareness programme is being discussed.

But those who cross the rekha should not be locked up. There should be no laws passed by the establishment. There should not be anything like a moral offence. An offence that can lead to arrest, trial and jail. The police and the court should not figure in any moral situation. They should have no role to play in this regard.

For instance, it is wrong that the police pick up couples from Bandra Bandstand, put them in a van, take them to the police station and frame charges against them. Boys and girls are traumatized by such police action. They are looked upon as common criminals.

If some couple takes a brave stand and let the matter come up in court — it never does because the young are afraid — it can be torn to bits. A good lawyer can bore a huge hole in the case and get the kids out free. Searching, embarrassing, confusing questions by the lawyer can blow up the prosecution case.

This is cache, read story here