Nayan Shah's book, “Stranger Intimacy,” examines the social history and backgrounds of South Asian migrant men in Canada and northwest America in the early 20th century. . Fuzzy and fluid ideas about the age of consent, crime and human relationships introduce the concept of "legal boundaries" and how this has played a key role in the way legal bodies and officials have attempted to define behavior and “normal” and “appropriate” links. among the people. Shah further analyzes how the meaning of race and sexuality was formed, controlled, and contested in these “border zones” of encounter and intimacy. Shah's study offers us an in-depth look at how the bodies of South Asian migrants (largely Sikh with some Punjabi Muslims) have been racialized in terms of sexuality, heteronormativity, and foreignness. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayShah critically analyzes court cases, archival documents, property relationships, employment contracts, contracts marriage and civil and criminal procedures to describe how migrants were both secure and living outside the confines of the nation-state. This draws a parallel with Wendy Brown's article in which she mentions the legal-liberal legislative power of the state as the unlimited power of the state to protect white, middle-class women who were willing to give up their powers to seek state protection. Shah further questions "three conceptual stabilizations" that permeate much historical scholarship, namely "permanence rather than ephemerality", "the nuclear family home", and "polarized sexuality". Shah examines legal cases through a close reading of court cases involving South Asian migrants. and their difficulties with the justice system in America's northwest, where they were allegedly charged with sodomy, indecency, or a related crime of "criminal vagrancy." The case of Samuel Robbins, a fifty-six-year-old white accountant accused of sexually harassing or assaulting sixteen-year-old Sidney, shows how the credibility of the "accomplice" depended on the circumstances and the social status of the accused. the adult defendant of the alleged crime. The most interesting fact about this case is the fact that both men had white privilege, but despite this, Robbins' defense was successful due to his white racial identity and respectable middle-class status. Even Ms. Nute's testimony in this case was quashed by the court, due to the fact that she was accused of "indiscretion" and did not witness the crime itself. Would it have been different if it had been a white man's testimony instead of Ms. Nute's? In this context, age and class emerged as critical factors, as a respectable white middle-class senior status served as a symbol of "normal" masculinity and mentorship, thus countering sexual predation. The very idea of ​​the “big brother act” mentioned by the judges during the trial shows how homosocial activities between white men and boys were perceived as natural, moral and “pedagogically” appropriate. Certainly, one could draw parallels between the mention of the “big brother act” and the legislative power of the legal-liberal state which includes the division of power into spheres and places the vulnerable part of society in a feminized position . In this case, the intervention.