"If you leave who will prove that my cry existed?/ Tell me what was I like before I existed.

yes i am selfish and spoilt.. i am, really... because while the world is talking about crimes against women and people are working their asses off all over the city, i'm wrapped up in a little bubble of mourning and memories...

in the past one month, i've lost three people who spent nearly my entire childhood pampering me, who were there in the background and foreground, often scolding my parents for scolding me, or hiding me when i wanted to escape the world... my grandmom, almost-surrogate- grandmom, and my Taiji- surrogate mom.
between the three of them, they can string together every step of my life from when i started talking to now when i stepped away and only returned to them when i needed a break from life.. even at age 24, i would cuddle up to taiji and ask amma to tell me the same stories that she's been entertaining me with since childhood.. i would visit damma and have her smile at me like i've made her day...
they were the people who all the news about life HAD to go to... they were the people who would scold me for working too much and eating too little and not having enough time to just be their little girl again...
They are the ones who remember little milestones and bumps from my childhood. stories like what i did with some long forgotten toy and the tantrum i threw about a shoe or the way i had to cajoled into eating something..
They knew my childhood, they knew the brat before i became I with an identity and a belief system.. they were the ones whose stories and admonitions and love and PRESENCE helped shape  me into who i am now.. my parents both worked, and they were there all day with me..

and now the witnesses to my childhood are gone...
Amma passed away on December 3, Damma on 15th, and Taiji on january 4...
i like to think that all three of them are now sitting in a sunny balcony up in heaven, drinking cupfuls of tea and  chatting about things just like they used to when i was a child running around with ati and akku....

You aren't a 'woman' here.. you're the "Vakil Madamji"

Child marriage is an accepted, if outwardly hidden norm for a large section of Indian Population even today. despite the various warnings and "social awareness"  about the detrimental effects of child marriages on the children, the family and society. Having an express Law banning child marriages doesn't seem to have worked very well because people are still stuck in the "lets get them out of our hair and to their 'own' family as soon as possible" mindset. 

infact, i recall having a major argument with someone recently about child marriages and the impact they have on the girl. shockingly, this guy was a "social worker" employed at one of Delhi government's 'Gender Resource Centres', which are run by NGOs in the city and provide employment, education, self help aid, legal and medical aid to poor women.This man has been working there for over a year, raising awareness about education and social issues such as gender based violence, population, sanitation etc. he's a graduate from IGNOU and belongs to what passes as a 'well off family' in the area, roughly as lower service class family. 

and despite the fact that this man is employed by an NGO that seeks to empower women., his outlook is set firmly in the tiny little box that his 'community' allows. 

The first argument he gave in favour of child marriages was a very cliche'd "why bother educating girls when all they have to do is take care of the house?" this while more than half his co-workers are women. 

the second was "these people are poor, they cannot afford to feed and take care of girls". This when his co-workers are active contributors to the family coffers and he himself is working with women's financial self help groups.

third- "madamji people say bad things about women who roam around outside the house and tallk to strange men" THIS when i was sitting in the office of the NGO with him alone and having this discussion.. so did that  mean that according to this man I and all teh wormen working in his pffice were not worthy of his 'respect' because we were out of our houses?? 

he apologised for the last remark though when he realised that i had taken serious offence to al his arguments. He stubbornly refused to take back his arguments though, and as a last word, his closing argument was "madamji you belong to a different society. Here people respect you because you are from a different social strata and are educated. No one sees you as a 'single young girl' here. You are the "Vakil Madamji".

so when the society refuses to give these girls and boys any identity beyond their membership of the family, when their aspirations, their very existence as a rational being is denied, is it really a surprise that the government needs to take seemingly weird, drastic measures to ensure that laws are complied with?

This is the news item that prompted this post:

Bharatpur admin makes DoB of bride, groom must on wedding card

PTI | 06:03 PM,Mar 31,2012

Jaipur, Mar 31 (PTI) To check child marriages, Bharatpur district administration in Rajasthan has taken an unique initiative of making it mandatory to print date of birth of the bride and groom on wedding invitation cards. A circular was issued on Thursday, directing all press owners in the district to print the cards only after taking age proof of bride and groom. "Legal action will be taken against such press and registration would be cancelled if they fail to do it...To check that they are following the guidelines, we will conduct surprise check," Bharatpur District Collector Gaurav Goyal said today. "The step is aimed at ensuring that no child marriage takes place on the upcoming occasion of Aakha Teej," he said, adding that the order is for two months now and may extend further. Child marriages are rampant on the occasion of Akshya Tritiya particularly in rural areas in the state.

consent, sexual abuse and "love"... how does one judge?

so a senior of mine sent me a mail about a discussion regarding this Article in the Times of India..
I invite all to comment.

the text of the article is this:

‘Love not crime’, teen’s lover freed

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 

New Delhi: “The act of falling in love cannot be punished in the way other criminals are punished”. With this observation, a trial court acquitted a 22-year-old on charges of raping his 15-year-old girlfriend, although it held him guilty of kidnapping as he had not taken the consent of her parents. The girl went missing on April 1, 2010, on which her father lodged a complaint that she had been kidnapped. She, however, returned home after a week. The teenager told the court that she had gone on an “outing” to Haridwar with her lover of her own will. The court also noted that the relationship between the two was later approved by both families. Convicting Sanjay, a resident of Jahangirpuri, on charges of kidnapping, additional sessions judge Anju Bajaj Chandna sentenced him to three months in jail, but the term was set aside against the imprisonment he had already undergone during trial. “It is clear that emotion of love and affection compelled the convict to take this step wherein he failed to acknowledge the presence and sanctity of consent of the parents of the girl,” the court said.

“Sanjay is a young man and is in the process of making his career and future. In my opinion, no purpose would be served by sending him behind bars where he would be living in the company of hardened criminals.”

The judge added that the three months which Sanjay spent in jail was sufficient to teach him a 

“Sanjay is a young man and is in the process of making his career and future. In my opinion, no purpose would be served by sending him behind bars where he would be living in the company of hardened criminals.”

The judge added that the three months which Sanjay spent in jail was sufficient to teach him a “Sanjay is a young man and is in the process of making his career and future. In my opinion, no purpose would be served by sending him behind bars where he would be living in the company of hardened criminals.” The judge added that the three months which Sanjay spent in jail was sufficient to teach him a lesson.

The prosecution alleged that said that the girl returned home on April 8, 2010, when a case was registered against Sanjay that he had kidnapped her and raped her.

The girl, however, told the court that she had gone to Haridwar with Sanjay for an outing on her own free will. The court refused to accept Sanjay's submission that he had not forced the girl to accompany him, saying the minor's consent was not valid. “I am of the opinion that even if no force has been used, the offence of kidnapping would be made out,” the judge said.

The prosecution alleged that said that the girl returned home on April 8, 2010, when a case was registered against Sanjay that he had kidnapped her and raped her.

The girl, however, told the court that she had gone to Haridwar with Sanjay for an outing on her own free will. The court refused to accept Sanjay's submission that he had not forced the girl to accompany him, saying the minor's consent was not valid. “I am of the opinion that even if no force has been used, the offence of kidnapping would be made out,” the judge said. The prosecution alleged that said that the girl returned home on April 8, 2010, when a case was registered against Sanjay that he had kidnapped her and raped her. The girl, however, told the court that she had gone to Haridwar with Sanjay for an outing on her own free will. The court refused to accept Sanjay's submission that he had not forced the girl to accompany him, saying the minor's consent was not valid. “I am of the opinion that even if no force has been used, the offence of kidnapping would be made out,” the judge said.

and the text of the mail was this:



This article appeared in Times of India, Pune edition on 26th Sep, 2011? Under IPC section 375, this should be a case of child sexual abuse because the girl is 15 years old and the abuser is 22 years old. Do you think this is a justified exception since age of consent is an artificial delineation and ignores the reality that younger adolescents may also be indulging in sexual activities? Do you think the judge is being humane in not criminalizing a consensual romantic relationship since the girl has declared her consent to the sexual relationship?
Is this a dangerous precedent? Does it leave too much to the discretion of the judge? Will it lead to failure of the law to protect young children from sexual abuse? We think the article raises a lot of tricky questions related to child protection and law. 

My reply to this email was the following



If i may put forward my views..
yes, decriminalising consensual sex is the need of the hour. adolescents today are much more aware of their minds and bodies and are exposed to a lot of inputs from all over the word. However, we will be missing a very essential point if we only take into account the fact that the girl says that she gave consent out of 'love'. further, what this question here is doing is assuming that "love" essentially involves sexual relations.

while i agree with sir (a previous email from another lawyer that said that consent is important because children are often punished under such laws) that "love is a delicate and soft emotion", it is, at the end an Emotion which is very transient and can easily be confused with infatuation or plain pressure. 

I personally know of situations where school and college students feel the need to consummate their "love" because of peer pressure... "you will say yes if you love me" is a much used line and not just in movies.. friends, movies etc a encourage exploration of sexuality. I can't take a national perspective but in elite schools of Delhi, losing one's virginity before leaving school is rapidly becoming a way of adding to one's "coolness". it gets even worse in colleges where being "single' is an invitation for taunts.

moreover, for someone as young as 15, there is ample scope for confusion between "love" and hormones... at that age, 'love' usually is a overdose of hormones.

the problem is of how one defines consent... and how one judges whether the person concerned is capable of giving consent..
as for the case that was mentioned in the email, i find it impossible to believe that the 22 year old in question did not know the age of the girl he was supposedly in "love" with. Nor do i believe that this 22 year old could not have waited for the girl to be a little more mature if he really "loved" her.
the sole reason why society governs sexual relationships is because society as a whole has to bear the burden if this "love" results in the production of a child/transmission of STDs/ mental or physical abuse of the girl or boy. we are running nationwide campaigns asking parents to not get their daughters married before age 18. one major point in the campaign is that she is NOT physically ready for sexual relations or childbearing. why then are we assuming that a teenager will be aware of safe sex practices or will in a situation where they think they're "in love" even stop to think of the consequences of their actions???

a 15 year old is a class 10 student. when the education system has been made easier and external examinations done away with on the premise that these children are "unable to handle the pressure", HOW does one imagine they can handle the pressure of a relationship??

Sure, two 15 year old having consensual sex should not be punished because neither of them really know better.. but a 22 year old, asking a 15 year old for sex in a "romantic relationship"???? i fail to agree that "consent" was there in such a relationship. If one of the partners was old enough to know better, they deserve to be punished for breaking the law..
I agree that consensual sex should not be punished... But i fail to read "consent" in a relationship that is as unequal as the one described in this case.