TO DO OR NOT TO DO, THAT IS THE LAW

--
The Telegraph - May 15

By changing the age of consent from 16 to 18, a proposed law has exposed its hypocrisies and raised questions about child marriage and teenage sexuality

Child marriage in rural areas

You are not old enough for this, and then, in the same breath, don’t behave like a child — everyone has heard this at some point of time in their adolescent years. Who decides the right time when a child evolves into an adult? Recently, the Union cabinet had given its assent to a bill that raised the age of legal sex in India from 16 to 18. It gave the go-ahead to the protection of children from sexual offences bill, 2011, which deems that sex under the age of 18 would be considered rape, even if it was between two consenting individuals. It is interesting to note that the legal age of marriage is 18 years. Does that mean that our legal system, ensconced in morality, now wants to propagate that consensual sex before marriage is not only immoral but also illegal in India?

One wonders how the law would analyse the implications of such moral policing on the widely prevalent practice of child marriage, which is still rampant in India. When juvenile couples have sex with the consent of not only each other but also of the parents and in-laws, who should be convicted for rape? Surely not the 30 per cent of adolescent males, roughly around 72 lakh young boys, who are married to pre-adolescent and teenage girls according to a recent Unicef study? The main reason for concern is the fact that in many villages, marriages are not registered until the bride has attained 18 years of age even though the marriage has taken place much earlier. Thus the girls are kept out of health monitoring programmes, and now, with sex likely to become a crime until the girl and her young husband both turn 18 — especially the bride — would imply that they would be kept out of health and birth-control programmes too. This means further difficulties with teenage pregnancies. They would also be kept away from hospitals during pregnancy and childbirth, making them far more vulnerable than they already are.

The age of puberty has come down all over the world and it is a medically accepted fact. Studies have found that boys tend to achieve puberty at 13 years and girls at 10 years. Youngsters start to feel the effects of sex hormones well before they get to the age of 16, let alone 18. Is it expected that none of these youngsters would want to experiment till they are 18 when they are living, as we do, in a sexually aware environment? With the internet, sexual content on television and in movies, sexually explicit advertisements, youngsters are surely not expected to remain immune to their surroundings?

It is interesting to see that the law indirectly supports sexual activity only after marriage. So it can be inferred that if youngsters wanted to experiment with sexuality, they would have to get married. Thus it can lead to a spurt in marriages at a young age, but does being 18 also mean being mature enough to make serious decisions for life? If there is a sudden spurt in marriages, wouldn’t there be a sudden rise in divorces as well?

In a society where matrimony is ‘holy’ and sex a taboo, the new law teaches young people to lie a little more.