Permendikbud 30/2021 — Sexual Harassment Prevention vs Free Sex: Problem with Consent?
I’ve been wanting to write this piece for quite some time, but I either can’t find the time or the proper channel to do it. As much as it’s the topic that I’m really concerned with, there are a lot of others in the activist communities who already explained it better. But, a lot of the debates tickled me and I think the more people voicing their arguments, the better it would be. So, I guess, I will start here. It will be long so bear with me.
Surely, by now, most people already heard some sort of version regarding it. Funny thing is, when there is a big hu-ha about the Permendikbud, the same letter from the Jakarta Government (below) didn’t get much spotlight. Hmm… politic much?
Anyway, back to the main regulation that I gonna discuss here.
I got a little excited after reading the proposed draft and when the Minister also pushed forward the agenda that universities would get fines and even go far as decreasing the accreditation level if they don’t integrate it somehow. After all, sexual harassment in the education system wasn’t something straight out of fiction in Indonesia. We got some famous cases that ended badly for the victims rather than the perpetrators.
Personally, I deal with a lot of reports surrounding similar lines in the support group. Lots also ended up in the ditch with nowhere to go because the abuser was either having a much bigger power in the relation dynamic or had a strong backup from the university itself. A big part of the victims gave up halfway under the pressure and we would stir it to be more focused on managing the trauma for the sake of the victims rather than trying to punish the culprit. I mean, being threatened by ‘not graduating’ and ‘stop tarnishing the institution name’ are kinda expected when one trying to speak. Holding back is a bleak move, but necessary practice for as long as I could remember just to keep the victims sane.
Going down to my own lane of memory, for my 12 years of education in Indonesia. I received such harassment in all three different schools and in all three different stages from primary, junior, and high school. Being patted, asked to stand and smile next to the teacher when he was teaching to accompany him, getting unsolicited messages, etc. When I tried to talk about it, usually the responses would be, ‘Well, the teacher might just adore you because you are pretty and outspoken,’ like it was my fault, to begin with, and I was the one who was expected to check my t and i.
The lack of structured rules, processes, where and how to even begin to report the harassment is also a big part of the problems. Forget about justice, it is even hard to convince someone that you are indeed getting harassed without being judged in the first place. That, you, being a victim, has no control over it and are not supposed to be blamed. Is that mean our education industry is a prime spot for sexual predators that everyone pretends not to see?
So, from my perspective, I really don’t understand why there is so much resistance towards this change. Seeing that a lot of alumni coming out admitting that finally, they have the moment to speak up and something to support also should tell something. It has been that long for the victims to be silent and it has been that long we are holding the inconvenient memories.
Which section was so controversial? Well, I put it below.
(I tried to translate part of it to English and use a daily English term rather than a proper law term, so…)
Pasal 5 (Chapter 5)
(1) Kekerasan Seksual mencakup tindakan yang dilakukan secara verbal, nonfisik, fisik, dan/atau melalui teknologi informasi dan komunikasi.
(1)Sexual harassments include all the actions which has been done through verbal, non physical, physical, and/or through the information and communication technology.(2) Kekerasan Seksual sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (1) meliputi:
(2) Sexual Harassment as it mentioned in the clause (1) include:
a. menyampaikan ujaran yang mendiskriminasi atau melecehkan tampilan fisik, kondisi tubuh, dan/atau identitas gender Korban;
a. conveying discrimination or harassment towards the physical appearance, physical condition, and/or the identity of the victim;
b. memperlihatkan alat kelaminnya dengan sengaja tanpa persetujuan Korban;
b. deliberately showing off the sexual organ without the victim’s consent;
c. menyampaikan ucapan yang memuat rayuan, lelucon, dan/atau siulan yang bernuansa seksual pada Korban;
c. conveying sentence that include tantalising, jokes, and/or catcalling with sexual context to the victim;
d. menatap Korban dengan nuansa seksual dan/atau tidak nyaman;
d. staring at the victim with a sexual context and/or uncomfortable;
e. mengirimkan pesan, lelucon, gambar, foto, audio, dan/atau video bernuansa seksual kepada Korban meskipun sudah dilarang Korban;
e. sending message, jokes, picture, photo, audio, and/or video with sexual context to the victim even when the victim forbid the act;
f. mengambil, merekam, dan/atau mengedarkan foto dan/atau rekaman audio dan/atau visual Korban yang bernuansa seksual tanpa persetujuan Korban;
f. capturing, recoding, and/or spreading photos and/or audio recording and/or the visual of the victims with sexual context without the victim’s consent;
g. mengunggah foto tubuh dan/atau informasi pribadi Korban yang bernuansa seksual tanpa persetujuan Korban;
g. uploading the photo of body and/or private information of the victim with sexual context without the victim’s consent;
h. menyebarkan informasi terkait tubuh dan/atau pribadi Korban yang bernuansa seksual tanpa persetujuan Korban;
h. spreading the information regarding the body and/or the victim’s privacy in sexual context without the victim’s consent;
i. mengintip atau dengan sengaja melihat Korban yang sedang melakukan kegiatan secara pribadi dan/atau pada ruang yang bersifat pribadi;
i. peeping and/or on deliberately looking at the victim who is doing a private activity and/or in the private space;
j. membujuk, menjanjikan, menawarkan sesuatu, atau mengancam Korban untuk melakukan transaksi atau kegiatan seksual yang tidak disetujui oleh Korban;
j. coaxing, promising, offering, or threatening the victim to do transaction or sexual activity which not been approved by the victim;
k. memberi hukuman atau sanksi yang bernuansa seksual;
k. administering punishment with sexual nature;
l. menyentuh, mengusap, meraba, memegang, memeluk, mencium dan/atau menggosokkan bagian tubuhnya pada tubuh Korban tanpa persetujuan Korban;
l. touching, strocking, groping, holding, hugging, kissing and/or rubbing part of the body towards the victim’s body without the victim’s consent;
m. membuka pakaian Korban tanpa persetujuan Korban;
m. opening the clothes of the victim without the victim’s permission/consent;
n. memaksa Korban untuk melakukan transaksi atau kegiatan seksual;
n. forcing the victim to do transaction or sexual activity;
o. mempraktikkan budaya komunitas Mahasiswa, Pendidik, dan Tenaga Kependidikan yang bernuansa Kekerasan Seksual;
o. practicing the students, teachers, and education staff culture in sexual harassment context;
p. melakukan percobaan perkosaan, namun penetrasi tidak terjadi;
p. attempting to rape, but there is no penetration;
q. melakukan perkosaan termasuk penetrasi dengan benda atau bagian tubuh selain alat kelamin;
q. rape with penetration including inserting object or any other part of the body aside from sexual organ;
r. memaksa atau memperdayai Korban untuk melakukan aborsi;r. forcing or manipulating the victim to do abortion;
s. memaksa atau memperdayai Korban untuk hamil;
s. forcing or manipulating the victim to get pregnant;
t. membiarkan terjadinya Kekerasan Seksual dengan sengaja; dan/atau
t. deliberately permitting the conduct of sexual harassment; and/or
u. melakukan perbuatan Kekerasan Seksual lainnya.
u. performing any other sexual harassment.(3) Persetujuan Korban sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (2) huruf b, huruf f, huruf g, huruf h, huruf l, dan huruf m, dianggap tidak sah dalam hal Korban:
(3) The consent which being mentioned in the clause (2), alphabet b, f, g, h, l, and m, is invalid if the victim:
a. memiliki usia belum dewasa sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan;
a. underage according to the law;
b. mengalami situasi dimana pelaku mengancam, memaksa, dan/atau menyalahgunakan kedudukannya;
b. experiencing situation where the culprit threaten, force, and/or abuse their position;
c. mengalami kondisi di bawah pengaruh obat-obatan, alkohol, dan/atau narkoba;
c. under the influence of medicine, alcohol, and/or drugs;
d. mengalami sakit, tidak sadar, atau tertidur;
d. feeling sick, unconcious; or asleep;
e. memiliki kondisi fisik dan/atau psikologis yang rentan;
e. having a vulnerable physical or mental condition;
f. mengalami kelumpuhan sementara (tonic immobility); dan/atau
f. experiencing tonic immobility; and/or
g. mengalami kondisi terguncang.
g. experiencing shock/traumatic condition
It’s so detailed since well, Indonesia is still using civil law, but it’s also concerning that the explanation of what someone shouldn’t do in the sexual conduct should be explained line by line because there is no basic common sense yet around the education conduct. A place that mostly consisted of underage and those with a lower stage of the power dynamic.
The great part of this is the victim perspectives is the main arguments on all of the definitions of harassment and consent in between. So, if the victim feels and says so, there is no objection that it isn’t harassment. Which is a big win since it’s been a long journey for a lot of activists to find a law which would actually support the victim rather than discriminate against them.
For once, I’m saying that I am wholeheartedly in love with this new regime by our education minister.
Tho, it wouldn’t be as much of a talk if everyone's agreeing just like me. Below, some known politicians set a totally different notion as the response to the Permendikbud 30/2021.
From the opposition’s side, the theme is always coming to the question of: ‘if there is consent, is that mean the sexual activity between the consented adult is permitted?’ ‘Having consent = administering zina’. Quite a far jump over the conclusion, I supposed.
The usual song of morality, religious belief, east culture, another administrative burden to the university became the fence to stop this Permendikbud to be implemented. I guess they are so out of touch with reality to realise that none of the things that they mentioned ever stop the increase of rape cases. In fact, some even blurred out the important meaning of consent. (Hello, patriarchy norm that forced women to only ask ‘how high’ when the men asked them to ‘jump’ otherwise we are a sinner.)
It feels like the opposition set a scenario in which after regaining the power of consent, every student would just take their clothes off and engage in the public orgy left and right. The concerned so-called ‘parents’ and ‘educators’ and ‘moral police’ are having this baseless assumption out of nowhere. Was this conduct that happened during their time or they are part of the flawed system in the first place? When it’s taboo, shove it down and never talk about it. You know, kinda like some people who refuse to believe if ‘marital rape’ is a thing.
Clearly, there is a different level of understanding within the sexual concept itself. The logical fallacy blow my mind, but let's as usual depict it part by part. Zina and free sex, had it ever been regulated? Why assumed the increase of it when there is nothing much change in between?
Zināʾ (زِنَاء) or zinah (زِنًى or زِنًا) is an Islamic legal term referring to unlawful sexual intercourse. According to Indonesian law itself, the term ‘Zina’ is ruled under KUHP 284, which stated that ‘having sex outside the marriage relationship when both or one is married to the other’, in an easier term ‘zina’ equal ‘adultery’ under the legal term. On repeat, by definition is the act of one partner being sexually involved with another without their partner’s consent.
We do have a pornography law though, so really conducting sexual activity in public or even spreading it on the internet is forbidden by law. A lot of different and separate matters are being discussed there. Still, none of it talks directly about consent and anything in between that ‘persuade’ people to do
(I mean, our RUU PKS/sexual harassment/abuse law draft is still in debate, look at how hard the fight is to actually not be forced to get involved in any sexual tendency rather than actually doing it. In which part of it do we actually send a signal that we want to do the act???)
So, even though sex before marriage within two sexual consented single adults are frowned upon in the society, it never once actually being ruled out under the legislation itself. Unless the country’s law would be based on the specific religious belief law, I don’t think it would ever be regulated nor do I want it to be regulated in any way.
Having the power to be consented to doing a sexual act doesn’t equal agreeing to do it without restraint. Opposing this Permendikbud based on the assumption that ‘if there is consent that all can be done without repercussion’ is really illogical. Even without the legislation, I bet someone gonna throw a stone at you if you have sex in the classroom. Our moral police are free of charge.
Perhaps, let me offer you to see it in another way.
We are so done to be sexualised that we really want to make it hard to be engaged in the act itself. Mind you, confirming consent isn’t as easy as it sounds. And if now without clear consent, you would actually be punished when reported, isn’t that mean most people wouldn’t even be bothered to do the deed itself? Which is in line with wanting the reduced amount of sexual conduct outside the marriage. (Because we all know those people who see someone get beaten in the marriage, then said if we aren’t supposed to get involved in someone else’s household. The irony.)
Moreover, the whole agenda of Permendikbud 30/2021 is to stop sexual harassment, the non-existence regulation regarding sex before marriage is just showing the limited capability of the Permendikbud itself. No one should expect one clause to contain everything in life.
Of course, if the concern is the increase of the ‘free sex’ just because when consenting adults choose to do so, it’s better to push another education session in understanding the impact of sexual activities itself rather than erasing the whole notion of consent in the first place. You know, protection, pregnancy prevention, sexual disease transmissions, abortion, child marriage, etc. We have a lot of homework and we need to start talking about it.
Consent doesn’t make the sexual definition become grey, it actually put it into a straightforward agreement. Yes or no in every step of sexual conduct.
Then what about flirting? Love, if the other person is not comfortable, you aren’t engaging in flirting yet. Flirting goes both ways. Other than that, it’s harassment. You know, you always can ask whether this and that is okay or not and back off when it’s not. I mean, if you see and notice the other party is feeling uncomfortable, why would you even continue unless you really are getting high from forcing yourself to others.
It’s a start, something we should support and celebrate. Yet, our journey is still long since proving the attempt and the lack of consent would also be nasty based on my experience. But nevertheless, bravo for finally putting down the ground rules.
