In the end, perhaps surprisingly, there was not much divergence of views on the core issues at stake amongst those who believe in a constitutional democracy. Yes, the process had the highs and lows of a Shakespearian play, but in the end, using the rule of law and principles of participation, civil society and lawmakers found lots of common ground.
A particular low in public hearings was when human rights defenders were called ‘agents of Satan’ and ‘forces of darkness’, following their rights-based approach to law-making. However, we consoled ourselves with the fact that the accusers were also willing to attack the freedoms in our Constitution that the people of this country fought for and that we were trying so hard to defend, such as the right to privacy and the right to dignity. Clearly they had a different agenda for society that South Africans would never agree to. Could we go backwards now and give up our Constitutional principles of equality and the related freedoms of expression that are the bedrocks of our society? I believe most people in South Africa would find that hard to do.
There were plenty of highs – robust debate between law makers and citizens, an insistence that this was a societal matter and all must be given an opportunity to air their views, and most encouragingly, one presentation after another; committee deliberations reiterating that we did not want to make criminals of our children.
The proposed amendments to the Sexual Offences Act does not lower the age of consent from 16, it only seeks to decriminalise adolescents of similar ages (between 12 and 16) who express their sexuality with their peers. Criminalisation, stigmatisation and shaming adolescents have had very dire consequences – we have recently learnt of Christina, the girl in the Jules High School case, who committed suicide. This is the sobering reality of how making adolescents into criminals for this kind of behaviour can affect their lives.
After the portfolio committee process, finally we seemed to be reaching consensus about the core issues and the course of action to be taken to remedy the broken law. On 27 May 2015, the amendment bill was voted on and passed by the portfolio committee, and the National Assembly debate was conducted on 17 June 2015. The amendment bill passed with no objections from any political party.
So for all South Africans who were not as privileged as we were to attend the public hearings, let’s see how far off we were from your personal views on the subject of adolescent sexuality.
As with any self-help test, here are the issues below, with the option to select yes, no or maybe:
No matter how many “yes”, “no’s” or “maybe’s” you expressed, this is a litmus test of sorts in relation to how comfortable you are with the issues of sex and sexuality. If the test made you uncomfortable to even think about, let alone broach the subject with your own teens, you are in the majority. Very few people are comfortable with issues of sexuality in South Africa – especially adolescent sexuality. We prefer to deny it exists or perhaps find solace in the belief that sexuality is taboo. So we are more comfortable issuing well-meaning but unhelpful advice such as ‘wait until you are married’. When we do this, we are absolving ourselves of our responsibility to support and guide our children in the most effective way.
We are afraid that sharing information will lead to promiscuity. This is akin to believing that a kiss causes pregnancy. In fact, the evidence suggests that the more information that we provide to our adolescents, the higher the chances they will not engage in risky behaviour. So we must find ways and courage to be pioneers, even if we have no models of how to do this because our parents were unable to talk to us too.
The best place to start would be to build a relationship of trust and open communication with our children and provide a home environment that is conducive to their wellbeing. This is half the battle won. Then, in relation to sexuality education, my rule of thumb is if they are old enough to ask the question, they are old enough to know the answer. However, remember to provide age- and stage-appropriate answers. Answer with a simple response; if they want more information, you have established the relationship and they are assured that they will receive the answers.
Then all you have to do is keep this going through their adolescent years, assuring them they can speak to you about anything without expecting judgement but fulfilling their expectation for honest information. Through the same robust engagement and principles of participation that Parliament modelled, you will have the opportunity to be truly influential in your adolescent’s life and will be a major reason why they delay sexual debut and refrain from risky sexual behaviour. Go on, you can do it. DM
* Christina Nomdo is Executive Director of Resources Aimed at the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (RAPCAN)
Are You A South AfriCAN or a South AfriCAN'T?
Maverick Insider is more than a reader revenue scheme. While not quite a "state of mind", it is a mindset: it's about believing that independent journalism makes a genuine difference to our country and it's about having the will to support that endeavour.
From the #GuptaLeaks into State Capture to the Scorpio exposés into SARS, Daily Maverick investigations have made an enormous impact on South Africa and it's political landscape. As we enter an election year, our mission to Defend Truth has never been more important. A free press is one of the essential lines of defence against election fraud; without it, national polls can turn very nasty, very quickly as we have seen recently in the Congo.
If you would like a practical, tangible way to make a difference in South Africa consider signing up to become a Maverick Insider. You choose how much to contribute and how often (monthly or annually) and in exchange, you will receive a host of awesome benefits. The greatest benefit of all (besides inner peace)? Making a real difference to a country that needs your support.
Kids in the United Kingdom spend less time outside than prison inmates.