Child marriage in the USA

I think people can handle the fact I said that without taking too much offence I would hope. Please spare me the mock outrage.

There was absolutely zero offence or mock outrage in my post. But I find it hard to believe you want a serious discussion when you make ad hominem remarks. Thoughtful debate and comments about men-bashing feminists rarely go together.

I definitely think there is a lack of discussion around honour based violence/ forced marriage compared to other feminist issues. I'd be interested to know why?

So start a thread about it instead of derailing this one! Interested posters are going to miss it when it's buried in a thread about the legality of child marriage in the US.

In my state, like many, 16 is the minimum age to marry with parental consent but for younger children to marry there must be judicial permission. There is some protection there, although I really don't understand how any judge could approve younger children marrying.

I'm not angry, and it's hardly a clanger... I think people can handle the fact I said that without taking too much offence I would hope. Please spare me the mock outrage. I definitely think there is a lack of discussion around honour based violence/ forced marriage compared to other feminist issues. I'd be interested to know why? Like I said is it because people shy away from it in the name of political correctness or is it a case of it doesn't affect "me" so we can just not bother?
There have been comments made to me like - we have safeguarding units, it's illegal, may as well add "so that's it, all sorted done and dusted" while ignoring the fact that in the U.K. Lots of women and girls are suffering.

Issues like this should be where feminism focuses to make positive change, instead of the usual man bashing it's obsessed with.

Missymoo, I had every sympathy for your concerns about forced marriage until you came out with this clanger. If you spent any time on the MN feminism boards, as you say you have, you would see that forced marriages, FGM, consent, the rights and wellbeing of children, etc. have all been discussed, though some of them not for a while. What you won't see is an obsession with men-bashing, which is a lazy stereotyping of feminism that bears little resemblance to reality.

I get that you're angry, but why direct it at the people on MN who are amongst the most likely to be aware of and concerned about the issue you care about? If you want to start a thread about forced marriages in the UK, then do! Open up a discussion instead of slinging mud at anyone who questions or disagrees with you.

If you disagree with political correctness being a cause of not helping women from these groups- then why is there not more discussion. I regularly visit this forum and see issues about domestic violence, rape etc
But not about honour based violence? Why..... is it political correctness or do people just not care enough about issues affecting mainly Asian women?

Educating girls may be relevant in some countries- but in uk doesn't apply so much, the girls have access to education but are removed from it, I've had a scan of that document and don't see where it says that political correctness has no part to play in the lack of open conversation about child marriage in the U.K.

I haven't chosen my experts- karma nirvana are a leading charity, they provide training to other agencies- they have significant authority to speak on such matters.
I have had a lot of involvement in this matter myself and contact with that charity. A lot of people are really unaware of the scale of the problem. I raised it here because it's something I feel strongly about and something that doesn't get much coverage and is relevant to a topic covering child marriage. How can people be educated to prevent it, if no one speaks about it?

Theres a lot of 'its illegal so whats the problem' type comments. Lots of abuses are illegal, they still happen. The first step is to make them illegal, the next is to change attitudes so they become immoral.

Its completely possible to do this, drink driving is seen as socially unacceptable. Why isnt abusing children and women dealt with in the same way?

The information about Maine is incorrect actually. You need parental consent for under 18 and parental and judge’s conviction consent for under 16.

Missymoo Have you considered that people are not 'silencing' you on some aspects of what you are saying - they are simply not taking issue with aspects of what you are saying?

That is not silencing.

People are engaging with other aspects of what you are saying - particularly your identification of 'political correctness' as a significant factor in the abuse of young women - because they think you are wrong.

Again, this is not silencing.

I see that you have chosen your experts, who seem to concur with your analysis that 'political correctness' is a primary driver of the continued abuse (through forced child marriage) of young women in the UK.

Others disagree. Here , for example, is a paper arguing that what will prevent child marriage is not an end to 'political correctness' but rather empowerment and education. One can reason backwards, from here, that lack of these is a significant driver of the continuation of child marriage. Importantly, the paper nowhere suggests that a reduction of 'political correctness' will reduce child marriage.

Part of the problem with the Rotherham scandal (and others) was the belief that the children were making "life style choices" rather than being sexually abused. This belief was based on the fact that what was happening was the kind of thing "girls like those" would choose to do. No political correctness in that belief, just people being prejudiced, blind, and plain wrong.

If this becomes focused on "opposing political correctness" obvious wrongs like that will be missed.

I don't disagree with you, but I don't think you have expressed it, in that way in previous posts.

This is why I say language very important.

I also don't think political correctness is wrong as such. It does have a place. Its when it is applied in a manner which is unthinking and does not think of other vulnerable groups or individuals, that it is a problem. This is in essence, a management issue, rather than a political correctness one.

I think the failure to grasp what the primary concern should be at all times, is the fundamental issue.

All I said about religion is that it isn't to do with religion but a culture where honour is important.
Political correctness does influence- as I said even karma nirvana, expects on this agree. It is the reason why issues are silenced, which was even acknowledged in the inquiry into the Rotherham abuse scandal. It's not make believe. I'm simply saying it shouldn't come in the way discussion.
It's operating here because my whole point has been minimised down to "it's not all...." and disagreeing with me about political correctness.

No you are blaming political correctness and religion in the wrong way. Thats not the truth.

Redtoothbrush- what angle that I take, the truth?
Seriously why has the focus become "political correctness". It's about not being blind to an issue that's occurring that doesn't get much attention because people feel uncomfortable.

Squishysquirmy- That's it tho it's not hard to marry a child off abroad, children do go missing from education, they are taken abroad in the summer holidays. It's not a rare occurrence. Children are scared to report because it can put them in real danger.

Sash- no I'm not ill informed, quite the opposite and I've met victims of honour based abuse first hand. You know nothing about me.
People don't want to give this issue any acknowledgement yet it is deserving of more attention than it receives.
Issues like this should be where feminism focuses to make positive change, instead of the usual man bashing it's obsessed with.

Missy, I think on a lot of points most would agree with the nitty gritty of what you say. Its how you say it and the angle you come at it which is the problem.

The sad thing is that when authoritarian policy is poorly applied - in the same way in which political correctness is applied - through poor management and understanding of the policy which focuses on the wrong thing, you end up with persecution.

There is common ground here, but language and how you use it is important. Don't lose sight of what the real objective and goal is.

Thats why you have been accused by others of whataboutry

Any child married off young is one child too many, and British children being married abroad is a problem.
However, at least the fact that it is illegal within Britain makes it harder for those who try to marry/marry off children. The more barriers, the more children are protected. When a child has to be sent abroad to be married, it creates more opportunities for the marriage to be stopped.

My blood runs cold when people defend sex with underage children as 'freedom'. Children cannot consent, it removes their freedom. Its the point of an age of consent, and its concerning that the US does not treat this as a federal issue.
Some churches force underage rape victims to marry their abuser. India has banned child marriage, the US could manage to if it had the will to do so.

''A 2011 study found that some 9.4m US women were married before age 16. ''
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/11-year-old-girl-forced-to-marry-rapist-florida-church-child-marraige-a7761816.html

No not countries like USA- like Pakistan, where children from U.K. And US are taken to marry- it's happening all the time! We could do something about that but no one seems to talk about it

You are incredibly ill informed. Child marriage is forced marriage and things are being done about it.

This is why we have 'forced marriage protection order's. This is why civil servants in Pakistan will look for and bring home girls who have disappeared.

Yes it still happens but laws are in place.

The problem with the "freedom" argument is that children should not be given the same freedom as adults.
Surely even extreme libertarians don't support the idea of children doing whatever they want?

So either the "freedom" is about allowing children to decide whether or not they marry, with all the long term legal, emotional, social and physical consequences that can lead to, or it is about allowing parents the freedom to marry off their children.

The former doesn't make sense because children are not equipped to make that kind of decision. Even if you think that some 15 year olds are, surely you agree that 10 year olds cannot consent? Or 8 year olds? Do you really think there should be no minimum age?

The latter doesn't make sense because legally you need the consent of those getting married. Should parents have the freedom to force their children to marry in the name of Liberty?

Even if a marriage is not consummated until the child is older, they have still entered into an agreement (religious and/or legal) they are not capable of fully understanding.

It's exactly political correctness- people feel uncomfortable saying things. It's evident on here- me raising anything being called whataboutery, it's not all x,y,z discussions detracting from a genuine issue that gets little coverage. I feel I haven't said anything wrong.

I'm not trying to demonise any group but it is more prevelant in South Asian, middle eastern countries, it's just a fact- it shouldn't be controversial to say that and it shouldn't detract from raising awareness. It is a big problem and yet hardly any attention is given to it, things are improving but still lacking. Yes professionals have training but it's inadequate, the general public have very little knowledge of it.
This shouldn't come down to, me saying it is more prevelant in certain groups to being shut down and no more discussion.

RTB That is a very eloquent defence of liberalism and principle. I'm glad you posted that. I sometimes forget that it needs saying when 'political correctness' (with the scare quotes) is invoked.