Eight-year-old wins divorce

[sowhatifit'sdark]

Omigawd, he's a pedophile! would make sense if they had a notion that early marriages are wrong. They don't, so there is no sense of wrongdoing. Calling them pedophiles is not going to change their ingrained cultural tradition, in fact, more likely it will make them more resistant to change.

1) the pedophiles are not likely to be reading this so my labeling them here is not the way I would approach them, there. You are saying I must couch my writing here AS IF it were a communication with them. That is absurd.
2) if I see slave master relations I will label it that way also. I do not have to inhibit myself to how some listener somewhere views themselves.
3) So you agree that they should change?

 

[S.A.M.]

1) the pedophiles are not likely to be reading this so my labeling them here is not the way I would approach them, there. You are saying I must couch my writing here AS IF it were a communication with them. That is absurd.
2) if I see slave master relations I will label it that way also. I do not have to inhibit myself to how some listener somewhere views themselves.
3) So you agree that they should change?

I think they should be free to develop their society as they see fit. If I do not agree with it, I won't live there.

 

[S.A.M.]

You are respoding to me as if my gunboats were heading toward their shores. I am deploring a dynamic that is abusive. I am thrilled that that one girl had the guts and support to get herself out of that abuse and believe her lawyer who says the problem is widespread.

Well I am glad they met with your approval. :shrug:

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

Well I am glad they met with your approval. :shrug:

I never said anything condescending like 'I approved' their behavior. But nice rhetorical twist.

Originally Posted by S.A.M.
I think they should be free to develop their society as they see fit. If I do not agree with it, I won't live there.
”

You are respoding to me as if my gunboats were heading toward their shores. I am deploring a dynamic that is abusive. I am thrilled that that one girl had the guts and support to get herself out of that abuse and believe her lawyer who says the problem is widespread.

Your response also implies that national boundaries are the ones I should respect when thinking in moral terms. As if those men have a right to those girls - who do not have the option to 'not live there'. I feel a connection to children who are abused - sometimes this abuse is sanctioned by the cultures, sometimes it is not, I have been on the bad end of both kinds of abuse. I am glad when people in other countries see themselves as connected to people in my country or others and are concerned about abuse of children or adults. I think it was good for example that many countries were critical of slavery in the US even after the importation of slaves had stopped. I do not think that that should be the cutoff point. Oh, now it's an internal affair. Zip my mouth.

And what do I do when the national boundaries are not clear? Who version do I take? Can I critics of Israeli policy, or could I have 20 years ago, that you can't put your criticisms in those terms. If I don't like Israeli policy I won't live there.

Me, I feel like a citizen of the world. I get on my country's ass for its fucked up behavior. I criticize institutions for at home and abroad for their abuses and I see no reason to assume that I cannot be critical of immoral behavior somewhere else in the world.

If I am invited to some internation delegation that is going to speak to people in countries where marriages like that take place, well, golly, I will not trot out the pedophile word. I am a pretty flexible communicator and I know a lot more about how to deal with cultural differences than your posts aimed at me assume. In fact most of my work for the last 10 years has been all about cross cultural communication.

But here in this forum I am calling what it is: institutionalized pedophilia:

“
ped·o·phil·i·a
n. The act or fantasy on the part of an adult of engaging in sexual activity with a child or children.

I cannot see where pedophilia does not apply.

 

[GeoffP]

I think they should be free to develop their society as they see fit. If I do not agree with it, I won't live there.

If you don't agree with it and you're a little girl, you don't have a choice if you're committed to breathing and such. You're implying that domestic culture and policy are somehow so integral that they cannot be criticized, because the body politic itself rejects such criticism, without any reference to those who are the victims of such policies.

How are these kids going to "not live there"? By not living? For comparison, how about Iraqis under US 'occupation', if one cares to call it that? If they don't like the new regime, can one dismiss their concerns by telling them they don't have to live there either? How about the inmates of Guantanamo? How about religious minorities trapped behind the Iron Veil? Women? Homosexuals? How about them? Are they - because of their social values or beliefs - somehow not citizens, then? Because they won't conform to not merely questionable social memes, but actually repressive ones, they should just go away.

 

[S.A.M.]

If you don't agree with it and you're a little girl, you don't have a choice if you're committed to breathing and such. You're implying that domestic culture and policy are somehow so integral that they cannot be criticized, because the body politic itself rejects such criticism, without any reference to those who are the victims of such policies.

How are these kids going to "not live there"? By not living? For comparison, how about Iraqis under US 'occupation', if one cares to call it that? If they don't like the new regime, can one dismiss their concerns by telling them they don't have to live there either? How about the inmates of Guantanamo? How about religious minorities trapped behind the Iron Veil? Women? Homosexuals? How about them? Are they - because of their social values or beliefs - somehow not citizens, then? Because they won't conform to not merely questionable social memes, but actually repressive ones, they should just go away.

I think one should be able to differentiate between locally accepted cultural traditions and a violent military occupation.

And if you read carefully, I said that change should happen from within the society, not imposed from the outside. The women and homosexuals will fight for their rights, the inmates from Gitmo will have to wait for a more enlightened USA to shut down the prison.

 

[GeoffP]

"Locally accepted" by who? Little girls? Apparently not. Locally accepted by 30 year old men? Apparently. How many more victims are there? Who knows? Who cares? Nothing there will change so long as the cocoon gets wound tight every time someone questions just how much role religion should have in law and society.

 

[S.A.M.]

I never said anything condescending like 'I approved' their behavior. But nice rhetorical twist.


You are respoding to me as if my gunboats were heading toward their shores. I am deploring a dynamic that is abusive. I am thrilled that that one girl had the guts and support to get herself out of that abuse and believe her lawyer who says the problem is widespread.

Your response also implies that national boundaries are the ones I should respect when thinking in moral terms. As if those men have a right to those girls - who do not have the option to 'not live there'. I feel a connection to children who are abused - sometimes this abuse is sanctioned by the cultures, sometimes it is not, I have been on the bad end of both kinds of abuse. I am glad when people in other countries see themselves as connected to people in my country or others and are concerned about abuse of children or adults. I think it was good for example that many countries were critical of slavery in the US even after the importation of slaves had stopped. I do not think that that should be the cutoff point. Oh, now it's an internal affair. Zip my mouth.

And what do I do when the national boundaries are not clear? Who version do I take? Can I critics of Israeli policy, or could I have 20 years ago, that you can't put your criticisms in those terms. If I don't like Israeli policy I won't live there.

Me, I feel like a citizen of the world. I get on my country's ass for its fucked up behavior. I criticize institutions for at home and abroad for their abuses and I see no reason to assume that I cannot be critical of immoral behavior somewhere else in the world.

If I am invited to some internation delegation that is going to speak to people in countries where marriages like that take place, well, golly, I will not trot out the pedophile word. I am a pretty flexible communicator and I know a lot more about how to deal with cultural differences than your posts aimed at me assume. In fact most of my work for the last 10 years has been all about cross cultural communication.

But here in this forum I am calling what it is: institutionalized pedophilia:


I cannot see where pedophilia does not apply.

Its called the white man's burden, we had 200 years of it in India.

 

[S.A.M.]

"Locally accepted" by who? Little girls? Apparently not. Locally accepted by 30 year old men? Apparently. How many more victims are there? Who knows? Who cares? Nothing there will change so long as the cocoon gets wound tight every time someone questions just how much role religion should have in law and society.

Religion? Its got nothing to do with religion, but hey, whatever makes you feel better.

 

[GeoffP]

OK then, since it has nothing to do with religion, there should be no cultural argument for keeping it, and certainly not one that starts "If yer don't like it..."

 

[S.A.M.]

OK then, since it has nothing to do with religion, there should be no cultural argument for keeping it, and certainly not one that starts "If yer don't like it..."

This may sound strange to you but child marriage in Asian and African communities as well their attitudes to sexuality transcend both religion and culture and are the norm rather than the exception.

 

[GeoffP]

References?

Apparently, it isn't always true that they're happy about it. So just how happy about it are these little kids, on average? Very happy? Moderately happy? Frightened out of their minds? Forced into it?

I'll cite the modern Western model since you'll probably froth the strongest about it: the point of having both partners of a mature age - 18 and up being the best guideline so far produced - is that it has a higher chance of ensuring their mental and emotional commitment to their partner. Also, by ensuring they've reached the age of legal adulthood, it allows them to make their own legal decisions instead of their fathers using them as movable chattel or barter. It prevents or delimits to some proportion the kind of abuse that can be inflicted on innocent, helpless women. Perhaps that attitude also doesn't straddle some cultural boundaries - but it bloody well should.

 

[S.A.M.]

References?

Apparently, it isn't always true that they're happy about it. So just how happy about it are these little kids, on average? Very happy? Moderately happy? Frightened out of their minds? Forced into it?

I'll cite the modern Western model since you'll probably froth the strongest about it: the point of having both partners of a mature age - 18 and up being the best guideline so far produced - is that it has a higher chance of ensuring their mental and emotional commitment to their partner. Also, by ensuring they've reached the age of legal adulthood, it allows them to make their own legal decisions instead of their fathers using them as movable chattel or barter. It prevents or delimits to some proportion the kind of abuse that can be inflicted on innocent, helpless women. Perhaps that attitude also doesn't straddle some cultural boundaries - but it bloody well should.

Most of them are married for life. And live in societies that are communities of their families and relatives, who all live the same kind of lives. I think anyone who reaches the age of 20 without getting married is considered unmarriageable and sent away to far off villages, where can be married off (or not, but at least they won't be constantly before the family, a source of shame). At least in rural India its like that. If the parents cannot afford to marry them off, they selll them into prostitution, so they can feed themselves. Or put them to work as child labourers. Marriage is usually the best option available to the girls.

I doubt they have the liberty to think about their social status or liberation, more likely where the next meal will come from and how to avoid being sent away for prostitution or marriage to an unknown person far away from the family.

One could of course, take a few signs and campaign for their emancipation. But one better bring a basket full of alternatives. I remember the last time the government tried to ban child labor and teh parents simply sold the children into sexual slavery. Maslow's hierarchy and all.

 

[GeoffP]

Most of them are married for life. And live in societies that are communities of their families and relatives, who all live the same kind of lives. I think anyone who reaches the age of 20 without getting married is considered unmarriageable and sent away to far off villages, where can be married off (or not, but at least they won't be constantly before the family, a source of shame). At least in rural India its like that. If the parents cannot afford to marry them off, they selll them into prostitution, so they can feed themselves. Or put them to work as child labourers. Marriage is usually the best option available to the girls.

I doubt they have the liberty to think about their social status or liberation, more likely where the next meal will come from and how to avoid being sent away for prostitution or marriage to an unknown person far away from the family.

One could of course, take a few signs and campaign for their emancipation. But one better bring a basket full of alternatives. I remember the last time the government tried to ban child labor and teh parents simply sold the children into sexual slavery. Maslow's hierarchy and all.

Your point about poverty is well taken - and may the be lesser of two evils - but a moment ago you were saying that if they didn't like it they should lump it.

 

[S.A.M.]

Your point about poverty is well taken - and may the be lesser of two evils - but a moment ago you were saying that if they didn't like it they should lump it.

I was speaking of outsiders imposing their morality. Clearly, the people living in a society have every right to change it. Not that I think outsiders should not speak out, but cultural insensitivity has endangered more children. e.g. banning FGM without addressing the need for education of the community means that instead of a scalpel and anesthesia in a hospital, its broken glass and some inept old woman butchering the child in the backyard.

 

[everneo]

SAM

Western acceptance of various sexual perversions excludes child abuse because it cannot be justified in any culture especially if the girl, the child, is as younger as 8 year old, not even attained puberty. That 28 year old man who had sexual intercourse with this kid must be a brute at heart.

 

[S.A.M.]

SAM

Western acceptance of various sexual perversions excludes child abuse because it cannot be justified in any culture especially if the girl, the child, is as younger as 8 year old, not even attained puberty. That 28 year old man who had sexual intercourse with this kid must be a brute at heart.

Clearly anyone who does not have western moral values of visiting child prostitutes in Third World countries must be a brute.

It is North America and Europe, however, that have been driving the multi-billion-dollar global child sex tourism industry all along. American citizens alone comprise 25 percent of the industry, according to ECPAT-USA, an organization fighting sexual child abuse. These Americans travel overseas and pay to have sex with boys and girls, mainly 5-to-14-year-olds.

http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magazine.article&issue=soj0509&article=050921

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

Its called the white man's burden, we had 200 years of it in India.

No, it's childrens' burden and it's been going on for thousands of years.

But let me know when I set up a colonial outpost in these places. Oddly I've always been against that shit also.

Anti-imperialist AND anti-rape/anti-child abuse. Amazing how these things can go together.

I am am also against when my country - see Rocky Flats nuclear facility - or a country like China dumps radioactive waste into the environment.

I don't give a shit who thinks they get to abuse kids and I don't give a shit who thinks they own a piece of the planet so they get to fuck it up.

I didn't know this was the white man's burden. In fact if it is, then my skin would give me a ready excuse. I thought of it as any caring person's concern.

But let me know when my gunboats land and then I'll apologize cause you'd have me pegged in that case.

 

[S.A.M.]

No, it's childrens' burden and it's been going on for thousands of years.

Yeah, now its making a resurgence in Europe.

Pedophilia Party Launched in the Netherlands

by Hilary White

AMSTERDAM, May 30, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The newly formed Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party of the Netherlands has introduced itself to Dutch politics as a champion of children's rights and has vowed, "We are going to shake The Hague awake!"

The NVD is Europe's first political party dedicated to promoting and legitimizing pedophilia. In a press release, the NVD's spokesman and co-founder, Ad van den Berg said among their goals is lowering the age of consent for sexual activity from 16 to 12 and eventually eliminating it completely.

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

Yeah, now its making a resurgence in Europe.

OK, watch this.

That's fucked up too. What you think I don't care about sexual and child abuse in 'the West'? Oops. Wrong.

Both bad.

This isn't my team against your team, close ranks and protect Daddy. My Daddy is raping my sister, the cops can haul his ass to jail. My neighbor's Dad is raping her. They can haul his ass to jail.

It is way too late in our history to play this is my team so they are OK.