Breaking the silence on male rape

On 12 March, a 20-year-old boy from Narayanganj was raped by his neighbour. But, a case filed against him under the Sodomy law. 

In the case statement, the plaintiff (victim's mother) stated that her son was standing on the road in front of their house when their neighbour, Sayeed (40), called him to go over to his house, saying he had something urgent to discuss with him. Sayeed allegedly raped him and later threatened to kill him if he disclosed the matter.

The case was recorded under Section 377 of the Penal Code, 1860, meaning the incident is being classified as sodomy rather than rape.

This archaic section, a legacy of our colonial masters, criminalises 'voluntary carnal intercourse against the order of nature'. Though clearly this Section does not cover 'involuntary' or 'non-consensual' acts, which fall under sexual abuse/rape, time and again this draconian Section has been evoked and applied, especially in cases of rape against men and boys. 

One of the first few cases recorded and tried under this Section was Nur Mohammad alias Bog Master vs the State [41 DLR 1989], where we see a similar pattern. A brief summary of this case is that on 5 May 1982, Md Yunus Ali (victim who was a minor) went to the house of the accused to fetch homoeopathic medicine for his mother. 

At that time, the accused petitioner took him to a room, shut the door and windows, and had forceful intercourse with him [in the original judgement, the wordings are: "had carnal intercourse with him against the order of nature". Md Yunus cried out, and upon his return home he informed his mother and brother about the incident, saying "he [the accused] did dirty things to me". 

Later on, a First Information Report (FIR) was lodged, and subsequently, after an investigation the police filed the charge sheet under Section 377 of the Penal Code. The trial court opined "one of the ingredients of the offence under this Section is penetration [degree and extent of penetration not necessary to be proved], and as the penetration has been proved, he has committed the act of sodomy." 

However, later on, the accused was acquitted by the High Court. The striking part of this case is that from the facts and circumstantial evidence, it is clear that it was a rape case against Md Yunus Ali, which has not been mentioned even once by any of the courts/judges, rather the words 'carnal intercourse against the order of nature' were used. 

Another case that was tried under Section 377 (along with Section 511 of the Penal Code, which deals with 'attempting' to commit a crime) was Ali Md vs State [22 DLR 153], where the accused was charged with 'attempted sodomy', and the Court reasoned "actual penetration is not necessary to constitute an offence under the said Section."

The statutes of Bangladesh that address the notion of rape are found in the Penal Code-1860, the Evidence Act 1872, the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and the Women & Children Repression Prevention Act-2000. Although the Women & Children Repression Prevention Act 2000 protects male minors against sexual abuse (who are under the age of 18), no other law provides any space for men or male child rape victims. 

In 2021 a Writ Petition was filed with the High Court seeking amendment in the law to include sexual violence against men as a criminal offence. The petition asked for amending Section 375 of Bangladesh Penal Code by including the word "person" instead of "woman." Consequently, in 2022, the High Court issued a rule to amend section 375 of the Penal Code to include "rape of males" and "rape of others" as a crime and punishable offence. Unfortunately, the directives of the High Court have not been implemented yet.

Recently, the 2025 amendment proposals include changes to the definition of rape. By changing the definition, rape is being made punishable not only by men, but by any person. In addition, the definition of rape has been expanded to include 'Bolatkar'. Not only penetration, if any other object is used, or rape is done in any way, the amendment hopes to bring them under punishment.

I wonder, men who are on a mission of moral crusade aiming at restricting women and their movement, riding on a tumultuous state of victim blaming, launching smear campaigns, and spewing hate comments online—how come they are not talking and raising any concerns about the abuse and rights violations of their fellow comrades? Does imagining men and boys as victims of rape and abuse make them feel less 'macho'? 

Though machismo is synonymous with sexism and misogyny, where women have always been the 'subordinate, submissive other', it is not only women who endure such destructive masculine notion, it is also men and boys who bear the brunt of it. 

The 'man up' attitude compels men to suppress their emotions and adhere to rigid masculine norms where the notion of men being the victim in any context is attached to shame and guilt. As a result, many such sexual abuse against men and abuse go unreported and unnoticed. 

According to a report of The Business Standard, in the year 2024 alone, 36 cases of rape against boys were reported; unfortunately, in Bangladesh there is no law to address it except for the 2025 proposed amendments. 

This also begs the question: why a sexist and misogynist guy like Andrew Tate has millions of followers (mainly young men and boys)? The answer is he taps into something with which many young men and boys can relate, for example: fighting, womanising, and reproducing. 

Tate has created this 'male' image where macho men lead the pack and get away with practically anything, and in that image, there is no space for men and boys who are (emotionally) vulnerable, who typically do not tap into the machoness, who can be potential prey instead of predators.  

We need to take boys and men offline to give them a reality check, to make them understand, a serious crime like rape has nothing to do with your sex, it has a lot to do with power, and there will be times when someone more powerful than you can assert it on you even though you belong to the same clan. Admitting it and acknowledging it does not make you less of a man; rather, it gives your power back to you, which your perpetrator stripped off of you. 

On the one hand, we have a set of laws against rape of women and girls, but the procedural delays, lack of victim protection, social shaming, victim blaming, fear of further stigmatisation, etc. have made the application of such laws ineffective. On the other side, yet, no proper legal remedy exists for male victims of rape, and on top of that, the rigid macho culture makes it further difficult for men to come forward and talk about it. Where does it leave us? In a perpetual legal and social limbo. 

It is about time we initiate conversations beyond birds and bees when we talk about sexuality education, create safe circles, normalise mental health (beyond sex and gender), get in touch with grassroots, understand the power dynamics, analyse law and legalities from an intersectional lens, and advocate for some sustainable changes. 

Sketch: TBS

S Arzooman Chowdhury is an Alumnus of the University of Cambridge. She is a Human Rights and Research Specialist.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.