Tweet
An interesting question I came across when pondering the age of consent laws of India.
Over here, the age of consent is 16.
However, this applies only to women. That is, unless it comes under child abuse, it is perfectly legal for a fourteen or fifteen year old to have sex with an older woman of any age whatsoever.
So it works out like this:
a) Boy between the ages of fourteen to eighteen (the ages when you can have sex but are not a child any longer) - can have sex with any older woman. Basically, this is the time when almost everything is fair game.
b) Boy after eighteen - can have sex with any girl older than 16.
c) Girl before 16 - cannot have sex legally (unless probably the male is equally young).
d) Girl above 16 - free for all.
Is this a sensible policy? Should the age of consent for males be lowered to something like fourteen or fifteen in other countries, considering the much lower psychological impact a non-abusive relationship at that age has on us? If it's abusive, that can be dealt with under child abuse laws, but if it isn't, then should the state interfere? Under Indian law, the state doesn't care as long as it isn't abusive.
Over here, the age of consent is 16.
However, this applies only to women. That is, unless it comes under child abuse, it is perfectly legal for a fourteen or fifteen year old to have sex with an older woman of any age whatsoever.
So it works out like this:
a) Boy between the ages of fourteen to eighteen (the ages when you can have sex but are not a child any longer) - can have sex with any older woman. Basically, this is the time when almost everything is fair game.
b) Boy after eighteen - can have sex with any girl older than 16.
c) Girl before 16 - cannot have sex legally (unless probably the male is equally young).
d) Girl above 16 - free for all.
Is this a sensible policy? Should the age of consent for males be lowered to something like fourteen or fifteen in other countries, considering the much lower psychological impact a non-abusive relationship at that age has on us? If it's abusive, that can be dealt with under child abuse laws, but if it isn't, then should the state interfere? Under Indian law, the state doesn't care as long as it isn't abusive.
Comment