This article is an opinion piece on the recent Cabinet proposal to increase the legal age for marriage from 18 to 21 years for women under the garb of "women empowerment". It discusses the drawbacks of this proposal in the context of recent as well as past statistical data and information. The article also highlights the gross misappropriation of funds under the "Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao Scheme" revealed by the recent Lok Sabha report. The views expressed are completely personal and not meant to harm any sentiments, they have based on research and experiential reality of a young female student and an informed citizen of the nation.
"I’m “wife”—I’ve finished that—
That other state—
I’m Czar—I’m “Woman” now—
It’s safer so—"
(From I’m “wife”—I’ve finished that by Emily Dickinson)
The Cabinet's recent proposal to increase the legal age for marriage from 18 to 21 years for women, in order to "equalize" the disparity between marriageable ages between men and women has received an onslaught of direct criticism from organizations across the nation. Before exploring the reasons for an outright public rejection of the move, one must note that in spite of the blatant opposition to the move, the Center remains mute. This, we must infer, is an amusing reversal wherein only the 'subaltern can speak' and the people at the power centres are to remain silent.
Women's rights activists and legal service agencies for women like Majlis have spoken at length about the problematic aspects of the Cabinet's proposal. These organizations have seen right through the flawed proposed law and have voiced the inherent hypocrisy in the Center's apparent move towards "women empowerment". Flavia Agnes in her TOI article titled 'Increasing marriage age for girls may only strengthen patriarchy' eloquently asserts that when this proposal becomes a law, it will inevitably operate within a deeply patriarchal society which will ensure that this law becomes another mode of controlling the autonomy of young girls by parents, in addition to chastising them for their sexual choices, with the active collusion of state functionaries like the police and welfare officers. The 'illegalization' of marriages in the cases where both partners are less than 21 years of age will deprive the girl of her matrimonial rights and state support. Such circumstances will invite increasing "honour crimes" and reinforce marriage as the so-called destiny of the girl child.
Moreover, if increasing marriageable age for women was actually the solution to the prevention of child marriages and a plausible move towards women empowerment then the massive failure of the 1978 law (increasing marriageable age from 15 to 18 for girls and 18 to 21 for boys) statistically exposes the complexity of gendered oppression in India. The recent National Family Health Survey 2019-21 reveals the alarming rate of child marriages to be 23% of all marriages. A massive failure, considering the four-decade time gap between the survey and the 1978 law, confirms that delaying marriage is not the solution to eliminate the subjugation of women. It is removing illiteracy, educating women with employable skills and ensuring proper nutrition and menstrual hygiene apart from sex education, reproductive health and state-initiated career support policies. When is the Cabinet going to propose any of these?
Brinda Karat aptly points out that during the lockdown in lieu of the COVID-19 pandemic, a child helpline supported by the Ministry of Women and Child Development prevented 5,200 child marriages. This staggering number, in today's India, sufficiently confirms all the doubts raised about the legitimacy of Cabinet proposals for empowering women which in many instances like these, remain confined on paper, and never translate into the reality of gender dynamics. This is a truly unfortunate trend that is reinforced by the Cabinet's proposal as it demonstrates the tragic lack of interest in making amends or realizing legal loopholes in order to learn from past experiences in the context of working towards a future of gender equality in our nation.
Various civil society members have spoken up on the glaring shortcomings of the government in its failure to establish (or even propose) an individual law recognizing marital rape is a punishable offence, formulate a law against "honour crimes", dismal cutting down of funds on health and education, privatizing the health sector, flaring inflation, in addition to curbing the rights of adult women in the name of reproductive health. In the face of such severe economic and social instability, the most adversely affected are the marginalized groups in which Indian women are doubly marginalized. Firstly, on account of their gender, and secondly, on account of their economic, religious or caste-based circumstances. Just as the complex identity of the female subjectivity doesn't fit in the term- "woman", the laws need to reflect sensitivity towards diverse modes of entrenched gender violence and vulnerability of the female subjectivity in a nation that is overtly patriarchal in its legal and political ideologies.
Lastly, Flavia Agnes rightly indicates the actual cause of distress behind child marriages- the high rate of school dropouts, especially in marginalized and poverty-stricken communities. She powerfully asserts- "Only when a girl is in school, will under-age marriages reduce". The 10 December 2021, Lok Sabha report on “Empowerment of women through education with special reference to Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao Scheme’’ reveals that a shocking 78.91% of the total funds, has been splendidly spent on advertisements. Leaving out a relatively paltry
Rs 156.46 crore of the Rs 848-crore budget (claimed to have been) spent on the implementation of the scheme over five years. This comes as a matter of little surprise as it goes well with the "show" and "lip service" to relevant social issues which the government has professed on multiple occasions, time and again, blatantly misappropriating lump sum funds. But finally, the subaltern is speaking, and louder each passing day.
Sources:
Times Of India dated 19 December, 2021.
About the Author:
Pronita is currently studying English Literature at the University of Delhi. She is an art enthusiast with a love for writing, reading and cinema. She hopes to debunk the multiple stereotypes associated with Humanities Studies and become a worthy English Professor to her future students. She can’t wait to meet them! On most days Pronita chooses sleep over everything else, and on some everything else oversleep.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻kudos