11 Year Old Forced to Marry 20 year Old Rapist in Backwards Country

I have to say this whole idea of it being "harmful" to have sex at an early age is pretty far fetched to me.
Of course, since you weren't the one risking pregnancy.

The alternative high school I tutored a year at did a world of good for some of the students there. I think they're a suboptimal, yet super useful tool in the education box. Progress, baby steps, all that!
Alternative schools weren't around at the time I was referring to. It wasn't that I didn't want to go to school. I just didn't want to go to that school.
 
Of course, since you weren't the one risking pregnancy.
Uhh... what?

Anyway. Condoms are great. And they do exist in extra small. 8)
 
A mitigation of a risk is not an elimination of said risk. Particularly when addressing children and activities that must be self-selected.
 
A mitigation of a risk is not an elimination of said risk. Particularly when addressing children and activities that must be self-selected.
True, but her post sounded to me like she just assumed that no protection was in place.

I think she has probably not yet registered that you're a woman :p
Not too surprising given my gender-swapping roulette! I could be anything, male, female... tomorrow I might be a tomato.
 
So, should marriage laws track age of sexual consent laws? It would seem pretty sensible to me if they did, which is what I thought did indeed bear discussing rather than taking as an article of secular contractual faith that child+marriage rights=barbarism. I think that would be a backwards conclusion.

I don't know, I think there are some pretty good reasons not to allow people to enter into marriage contracts until they reach the age of majority.
 
True, but her post sounded to me like she just assumed that no protection was in place.
Most 12-year-olds aren't that responsible.

Am I mistaken in thinking you're a man? That's why I said you're not the one risking pregnancy. Even a 9-year-old can become pregnant if she matures early enough.
 
Last edited:
Ryika recently made a thread about being pressured into getting a boyfriend by her mother, so yeah.
 
Ryika recently made a thread about being pressured into getting a boyfriend by her mother, so yeah.
This is a question I'd prefer to be answered - seriously, without snark - by Ryika.
 
Maybe you should stop trying to use the sex of the person you're talking to against them...just an idea.
 
Of course, since you weren't the one risking pregnancy.
The risk is for both in most cases.
When I was in high school, two girls got pregnant when they were 15. One was my classmate. They both married and kept babies.
 
Maybe you should stop trying to use the sex of the person you're talking to against them...just an idea.
Maybe you should stop getting into the middle of a conversation that's not about you... just an idea.

Or why don't you call out everyone who ever said, "Valka, you're a woman so you don't understand this."
 
The phrase "two wrongs don't make a right" exists for a reason.
 
Maybe you should stop getting into the middle of a conversation that's not about you... just an idea.
This is a public forum.

Or why don't you call out everyone who ever said, "Valka, you're a woman so you don't understand this."
I would but I've never seen this happen, and I'm sure if it did there would be several people immediately calling it out.
 
This is a public forum.

I would but I've never seen this happen, and I'm sure if it did there would be several people immediately calling it out.
The matter of Ryika is between Ryika and myself. More people getting in the way just muddies things unnecessarily.

As for you being "sure" that several people would be calling out such behavior... you'd lose a bet on that. In the threads I'm thinking of, not one person ever did call that out. Not. One.
 
I don't know, I think there are some pretty good reasons not to allow people to enter into marriage contracts until they reach the age of majority.

If we're going to allow them to screw, they should be entitled to the rights commensurate with that status. It should be telling that the law while it gives parents the right to say, "No" also seems to give the courts the leeway to override them in the interest of protecting the minors ' access to said rights.
 
If we're going to allow them to screw, they should be entitled to the rights commensurate with that status. It should be telling that the law while it gives parents the right to say, "No" also seems to give the courts the leeway to override them in the interest of protecting the minors ' access to said rights.

So should they be able to vote too? I'm just trying to suss out what you mean by "rights commensurate with that status"
 
If we're going to allow them to screw, they should be entitled to the rights commensurate with that status. It should be telling that the law while it gives parents the right to say, "No" also seems to give the courts the leeway to override them in the interest of protecting the minors ' access to said rights.
I was going to say that it would not be possible to allow marriage of two minors because marriage requires the partners to live together (not sure how that's handled outside of Germany), but then I realized that minors are allowed to live on their own, if their parents give the okay (and can guarantee financial security), and that there are no unusual circumstances that would endanger the minor.

I can't help but to feel fascinated about how much wiggle room there is in German law for the specifics of every case, and how stiff and overly broad the American laws feel in comparison.

For the actual question though... I don't really see a good reason against. Assuming that once again it's people of roughly the same age in a "healthy relationship", and both are mature enough to understand the consequences as much as your average person of the age that has blank permission to marriage does... yeah, why not.
 
Rights to thier partner, such as visitation in hospital, say during birth, rights to presumed custody of children, the like. Those aren't the same thing as voting rights and they are not extended on the same basis, are they?
 
As for having an equal number of men and women running, that would be nice. But you can't force women to run for Parliament if they're unwilling.

You can't force women to take on cabinet positions either.

And fair enough, if there isn't a female Liberal candidate that you'd want to run in one district, run a woman in another district. If the Liberal party is really striving for true gender equality, they should have enough women to run in half the districts in the country.

If they don't have enough female politicians to do that, then they should address that before they start making the cabinet a 50/50 split. Which I don't have an issue with, but it does seem like a more "photo op" type decision. If they really wanted to address the issue, they'd first have tried to have a 50/50 split in their own party. Then if they win the election, there you go, you have a 50/50 gender split to pick your cabinet from. Problem solved.
 
Top Bottom