Then There was a meeting,
I sat there Scheming.
Then They started the discussion,
It added to my frustration.
They realised!! 'This issue is primary',
I decided my priority ' Nirvana, Double Apple and Sikandari'.
Finally some respite, they said ' Lets move on to the next issue',
I was elated, my ears heard 'Lets Wrap up this issue'.
Then They said 'We speculate, This issue is complicated'.
I died off. Pluchakkkkkkkkkk..
Shit what a shitty poem. U get the drift right??
BTW: Nirvana, Double Apple and Sikandari -> Flavors of hookah.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Debating the minimums..
Recently the Indian Law Commission headed by A R Lakshmanan decided that the minimum age for marriage for the men (too) will be reduce to 18 years. Also along with that it was decided that minimum age for consensual sex will be set at 16 years.
So here we are, this now raises a million and a half questions.
1. Why simply change it from 21 years?
2. Consensual sex… what the hell does that mean?
3. Ain’t 18 years a little too young for the present age father or mother?
4. Should we have had separate laws considering that child marriage makes sense to only fewer section (differentiated regarding culture, rural, urban or geographical) of people today?
5. What do you think is the ‘appropriate’ age for marriage and sex?
Though presumably my answers or rather views, it will be harmful only to you if you consider it harmful :P
So, Why Simply change it from 21 years?
Since India is a republic that is enrolled in every other, some times non consequential, human rights organization. Which also includes UN ones. They have to abide by something called rights to equality, in this case ‘sex’. So men and woman should not have different laws, cool by me, But is it pragmatic in a predominantly patriarchal society to have same rules for both the sex. But then I ponder over the law and find that’s its just a law to set the minimums, not the compulsories. So that’s that if you have been through your 18 years, u are ready to get married.
Then, Consensual sex… what the hell does that mean?
Thinking like a virgin 23 year old guy, consensual sex is rather a redundant phrase. So what does consensual sex mean? whose permission do we (ahem) need to take before having sex? The law commission says that other than having the permission of those involved, they have to be above the age of 16 years. And hence, even though you have been married before the age of 16 years (socially might have been accepted, but still illegal) you are barred from having sex (again leagally). But there is a catch, the minimum age according to Child marriage act is 15 years and according to A R Lakshmanan law commission any matrimonial where the involved is below the age of 16 will be considered void. Hello?? Can somebody have CVS incorporated in the bars ( and no I am not talking about spirits) .
Now, Ain’t 18 years a little too young for the present age father or mother?
Ok so in this exponentially growing economy of india, can a family where the ‘girl’ and ‘boy’ in their teens survive? Even Rakhi sawant can answer that. NO. but then why set a minimum when it absolutely doesn’t make sense.
Then I see the big pictures, what about say a traditional marwadi family selling saaris in avenue road in Bangalore. I can (though not completely convinced) somehow make sense of the number 18. Then I catch the drift or rather the problem of the law commission which makes them set the minimum to 18.
I feel the govt. has more work on their sleeves than just simply setting minimums or maximums. They got to take the awareness programmers to a completely new high and make the people in the slums realize that just getting your daughter or son married isn’t helping your situation and make the poor from the rich cities to see the big picture.
This brings us to, Should we have had separate laws considering that child marriage makes sense to only fewer section (differentiated regarding culture, rural, urban or geographical) of people today?
We all are aware about how it’s of cultural significance or rather cultural pigeon holes to get the girl child married once they reach their teens. But today, it makes sense only to a selected community of parents. So assuming that a bangalorean or for that matter any cosmopolitan city’s laws should be different compared to say jeypore in Orissa or Bikaner in Rajasthan. Simply, because the amount of modern city demons one has to face is much more. So we need more ‘astra’ to fight them and hence higher minimum age??
But having different laws for different region is ridiculous especially the human rights related ones. But the government will have to rely on the presumably higher street smartness (big city common sense) of a city lad or lady.
And finally, What do you think is the ‘appropriate’ age for marriage and sex?
If u ask me this question I would say after 26 and 18 (subject to availability, sadly ) respectively. Simply because I feel this age of infinite growth possibilities will ask for much higher requirements to satisfy the next generation (our children) and hence having the ‘astra’ is very important. Minimum one degree of credibility and a bank balance good enough to support a family of 4 (mom, dad, wife and you) to ask the least.
And regarding sex…. [smilies]
So here we are, this now raises a million and a half questions.
1. Why simply change it from 21 years?
2. Consensual sex… what the hell does that mean?
3. Ain’t 18 years a little too young for the present age father or mother?
4. Should we have had separate laws considering that child marriage makes sense to only fewer section (differentiated regarding culture, rural, urban or geographical) of people today?
5. What do you think is the ‘appropriate’ age for marriage and sex?
Though presumably my answers or rather views, it will be harmful only to you if you consider it harmful :P
So, Why Simply change it from 21 years?
Since India is a republic that is enrolled in every other, some times non consequential, human rights organization. Which also includes UN ones. They have to abide by something called rights to equality, in this case ‘sex’. So men and woman should not have different laws, cool by me, But is it pragmatic in a predominantly patriarchal society to have same rules for both the sex. But then I ponder over the law and find that’s its just a law to set the minimums, not the compulsories. So that’s that if you have been through your 18 years, u are ready to get married.
Then, Consensual sex… what the hell does that mean?
Thinking like a virgin 23 year old guy, consensual sex is rather a redundant phrase. So what does consensual sex mean? whose permission do we (ahem) need to take before having sex? The law commission says that other than having the permission of those involved, they have to be above the age of 16 years. And hence, even though you have been married before the age of 16 years (socially might have been accepted, but still illegal) you are barred from having sex (again leagally). But there is a catch, the minimum age according to Child marriage act is 15 years and according to A R Lakshmanan law commission any matrimonial where the involved is below the age of 16 will be considered void. Hello?? Can somebody have CVS incorporated in the bars ( and no I am not talking about spirits) .
Now, Ain’t 18 years a little too young for the present age father or mother?
Ok so in this exponentially growing economy of india, can a family where the ‘girl’ and ‘boy’ in their teens survive? Even Rakhi sawant can answer that. NO. but then why set a minimum when it absolutely doesn’t make sense.
Then I see the big pictures, what about say a traditional marwadi family selling saaris in avenue road in Bangalore. I can (though not completely convinced) somehow make sense of the number 18. Then I catch the drift or rather the problem of the law commission which makes them set the minimum to 18.
I feel the govt. has more work on their sleeves than just simply setting minimums or maximums. They got to take the awareness programmers to a completely new high and make the people in the slums realize that just getting your daughter or son married isn’t helping your situation and make the poor from the rich cities to see the big picture.
This brings us to, Should we have had separate laws considering that child marriage makes sense to only fewer section (differentiated regarding culture, rural, urban or geographical) of people today?
We all are aware about how it’s of cultural significance or rather cultural pigeon holes to get the girl child married once they reach their teens. But today, it makes sense only to a selected community of parents. So assuming that a bangalorean or for that matter any cosmopolitan city’s laws should be different compared to say jeypore in Orissa or Bikaner in Rajasthan. Simply, because the amount of modern city demons one has to face is much more. So we need more ‘astra’ to fight them and hence higher minimum age??
But having different laws for different region is ridiculous especially the human rights related ones. But the government will have to rely on the presumably higher street smartness (big city common sense) of a city lad or lady.
And finally, What do you think is the ‘appropriate’ age for marriage and sex?
If u ask me this question I would say after 26 and 18 (subject to availability, sadly ) respectively. Simply because I feel this age of infinite growth possibilities will ask for much higher requirements to satisfy the next generation (our children) and hence having the ‘astra’ is very important. Minimum one degree of credibility and a bank balance good enough to support a family of 4 (mom, dad, wife and you) to ask the least.
And regarding sex…. [smilies]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)