India’s age of consent is 18 years old. However, until recently, it was legal for sexual relations to occur between an adult man and his child bride if she was over the age of 15.
On October 11, 2017, which happened to be the “International Day of the Girl Child” as declared by the U.N. in 2012, India’s Supreme Court ruled that sexual intercourse between an adult male and a child bride between the ages of 15-17 is considered rape. Child brides under the age of 18 can now charge their husbands with rape within one year of the forced sexual encounter.
This ruling, considered a victory by women’s rights activists, has many wondering how it will be enforced. Child marriage abounds in India and this law does not prohibit the concept of child brides; according to the BBC, most of these marriages are arranged and approved of by the parents of the child bride. 47% of Indian girls are married by the age of 18 and due to poverty, low education, and patriarchal family units, child marriage persists in conservative rural Indian areas.
“A minor girl who is already married, almost always with the consent of her parents, will not usually have the courage to go to the police or court and file a case against her husband,” said Geeta Pandey of the BBC. According to an article written by TIME Magazine, in “2015, there were more than 34,000 rape cases reported in the country, according to India’s National Crime Records Bureau. Domestic abuse is even more widespread, affecting 40% of married women between the ages of 15 and 49, and 70% of child brides, according to government statistics cited by Reuters.”
In Westernized countries, it is repeatedly encouraged for women to step forward if they were sexually harassed or abused; yet the men accused are often considered innocent until proven guilty, or unable to be prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. It is unfortunate that not many real-life 9to5-style stories exist or that there were countless men who were privy to Harvey Weinstein’s behavior and chose to remain silent. Still, the age of consent is not known or adhered to by many, as evidenced by a Jeopardy! contestant responding to the clue “In common law, the age of this… is presumed to be 14 in boys & 12 in girls” with “What is the age of consent?;” and as evidenced by what happened between Mary Kay Letourneau and Vili Fualaau–an incomprehensible story that I will not even attempt to expand upon in this news brief.
While it is undeniable that, legally, America and other Westernized counties are more progressive when it comes to laws regarding marriage between minors and adults, our culture continues to simultaneously fetishize the Kubrick-Lolita prowess in women; it is considered to be both an intoxicating aphrodisiac and an immoral pursuit.
The Indian Supreme Court ruling, while distinctively Indian, forces us American readers to consider overarching concepts relating to marriage and female autonomy. It is revealing to analyze such rhetoric when reading headlines addressing this news story. “Victory”; “Success”; “Win.” Nowhere is the word “Finally,” nowhere is the word “Decency,” for Indian marriage laws have ways to go.
–Salvatore Casto
A World of Mystery
Earth. Earth is a place of love, merriment, misery, memories, mystery and so many more m words for a variety of creatures, from ants, and dolphins – to humans, the one species hoping to one day reminisce on a past they’re still in the process of dreaming up. It is a place some call home, some call hell, and others call flat. It is the myriad of impossibilities that encapsulates the wonder that is life. Yet, it is only one of “eight” planets in our solar system. By definition, a solar system is a “system” of planets (and other heavenly objects) that orbits a host star (although there can also be numerous stars and in rare cases no star at all).
As of right now, our solar system is comprised of “eight” planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune (insert Pluto no longer being a planet cliché). Our cosmic backyard has always been of awe to the common person, and of discoveries waiting to be made to the scientist.
The science community has been going bonkers recently over a statement released by NASA who confirmed the possibility of a ninth planet believed to be roughly 10 times the mass of earth.
Planet nine, planet x, whatever you want to name it – is more likely than not out there… and it’s big. There are several things that practically confirm its existence, from a wobble in orbits of heavenly objects, to an orbit slightly out of place (I promise, this will be my last attempt at putting you to sleep). An entire planet engulfed by an atmosphere of mystery orbits the same sun that wakes you up in the morning. It could be a gas planet, just as Jupiter and Saturn are, orrrr, it could be a rocky planet, as are mars and earth.
Now, with regards to why this should spark your interest… well, why shouldn’t it? Picture this, you live in an apartment, you have roughly eight neighbors (give or take), and you’ve met them all – except for one. But, every day, as the sun is rising, you hear the anonymous closing of their door, or you follow the labyrinthine scent of an entrancing perfume or cologne… but sadly, that’s as far as it goes… a form of secondhand experience to a firsthand interest or fascination. Wouldn’t this bother you and at the same time entice you, even if only subtly? Regardless of what this person looks like or what this person’s agenda is… there is a whole human being who lives a couple of feet from you who you’ve never seen. A person you’ve never met, that falls under both “next door neighbor” and “the unknown.” And yet, they exist. A whole world you know nothing about… all next door. Well, that’s planet nine – the next door neighbor that you want to fall in love with but probably won’t… or will you?
Now, if that didn’t catch your attention… your next door neighbor probably won’t either.
And yes, this will be my last piece on the subject of space… maybe… well… probably not…
~Richard Gonzalez
Media Images of Law Enforcement
As a formerly frequent watcher of Criminal Minds, and still a fan, I’ve seen many media representations of the FBI. And the FBI has a close relationship with Hollywood; it actively works to “control and burnish its image through consulting work on films” and television shows. Slides obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show the FBI’s thought process: they’re seeking to “build the FBI ‘brand’… through storytelling.” The same slides quote Nielsen data indicating that “FBI-themed dramas or documentaries reach 100,000,000+ people in the United States” per week.
The Bureau is open to questions from filmmakers about its representation, most often regarding fact-checking or permission to use its logo, but also offers more serious consultations about the role of the FBI. (It recommended a filmmaker try a governmental health or medical agency rather than the FBI for dealing with zombies.) The FBI further “conducts semi-regular ‘FBI 101’ workshops at the Writers Guild,” and call it filmmakers’ “opportunity to engage with the FBI directly.” The Bureau tends to offer the most assistance to higher-profile projects, and refuse use of its logo for projects where its role is “too small.”
Filmmakers are often looking for “their work to be more realistic,” while internal records of the Bureau show that it has a clear “mission interest in developing the public image of the FBI and ensuring an accurate portrayal of FBI personnel, past and present, in order to encourage public cooperation with the FBI in performing its mission”; its goal is “not only to support authentic depictions but favorable ones,” and to “humanize” its agents. The Bureau is also careful to steer away from depictions of surveillance, force, scare tactics, and “being rude to local law enforcement.”
The FBI maintains that its main goal is to “build the trust of the American people so that they can help” solve crimes by being willing to talk to an agent. The 2014 film Selma, “critical [of] the bureau’s intense surveillance of civil rights hero Martin Luther King Jr.,” relied on books, documentaries, and internal FBI documents, and “notably” did not consult with the Bureau.
What is the balance between a need for effective law enforcement, with civilians willing to work with agencies for a common good, versus actively promoting a brand to “make people ‘more comfortable with the idea of this extremely powerful agency’” while also downplaying controversial practices? With constant concerns about net neutrality and FBI directors & investigations and media censorship and surveillance, it’s perhaps time to be reminded of the NYPD officer undercover at the Brooklyn College Islamic Society from 2011 to about 2014. How does the media we’re consuming affect our views of law enforcement?
— Lora
The Junction Journal 