In pursuit of wiser laws

The concept of a legally-permitted age of sexual consent arrived in India in 1860, when sex with (or more accurately, rape of) a girl under 10 years was outlawed. Since then, the age of consent has been raised a number of times, most recently in 2013, from 16 to 18. This year, senior advocate Indira Jaising argued that it be lowered to 16 again, so as to not proscribe consensual relationships among teenagers of a reasonable age. The Supreme Court has rejected this. However, the close-in-age exception to protect the relationships of older teenagers that was proposed has much merit, which activists and lawyers may continue to support. It is necessary to protect minors from sexual exploitation. But in a country where the autonomy of grown adults themselves isnt honoured, and minors rights are even less valued, there are unique challenges in designing laws which work well on the ground but dont infringe on autonomy. For example: there must be cognizance of the fact that within a culture that does not respect peoples personal liberties at any age, the freedom to learn from ones own mistakes will have heavier long-term repercussions than otherwise. Progressive activism works towards liberalising the culture itself, preventing it from calcifying or regressing into further oppression. But youth need not become sacrificial lambs towards this goal through a lowered age of consent. This is where a deeply nuanced conversation about informed consent, emotional maturity, and supportive ecosystems has to occur, conjointly with legal protection from predators. Lowering the age of consent presents an illusion of empowerment within a system devoid of freedom, and enables greater exploitation than already exists. A close-in-age exception, however, offers something much more sensible and workable. Safeguards from predators are constructive only when there is a clear understanding, both in practice and in the letter of the law, that teenage sexuality and sexual expression are normal and healthy. Laws must provide a safe scaffolding for these without curbing them. Last month, actor Gautami Kapoor shocked many Indian netizens by sharing in an interview that she had wanted to buy her daughter, now aged 19, a vibrator for the latters 16th birthday. They had a conversation about it, and while she declined the gift at the time, Kapoor says her daughter later came to appreciate the thought. The thought itself may be novel to many, but it is not wrong of Kapoor to have wanted her daughter to become aware of and self-reliant about her own pleasure. It is a right that has been denied to many and to women in particular. The fact is that sexual desire begins at puberty, and taboos around self-pleasure are harmful, even if taboos around early sexual activity may have some rational basis in the extent to which a very young person can make a truly informed choice. Both occur in spite of taboos, and normalising what is already normal can help prevent harm to oneself or others. Teenage sex is normal, and introducing a close-in-age exception without lowering the age of consent and alongside better school-level sex education programmes will protect young adults while also safeguarding their fundamental right to joy.