Well, while the US is out bringing freedom and democracy to those countries WITH oil, they have made . . . and this will likely shock you . . . some very interesting allies. True, the Saudis are a repressive regime that teaches hate around the world and had their citizens fly into the twin towers after hijacking jets back on 9/11 . . . but they're on OUR side. So is Pakistan . . . who doesn't apparently rate high enough to deserve US imposed freedom and Democracy. Pity. The women and children in that country will have to wait, I guess, until some serious oil reserves are discovered.
Pakistan has what they call vani marriages. A Vani marriage in Pakistan is one where the girls, sometimes as young as a whole year old, and sometimes even girls not yet born., are given away in marriage to compensate for some debt or slight. Examples abound.
In Jacobabad district in Sindh province, for example, five girls were recently given away in marriage to settle a dispute involving a killing by male relatives that happened before they were born.
The news, reported in Pakistan's Daily Times, says that Wahida's father agreed to guarantee a friend's credit. That friend bought an 880 pound bag of rice on credit. The rice was worth 50,000 rupees (about $830). As you may have already guessed, the money was never paid. Bakhshan Khan Pahore, now out the money AND the rice demanded that Jan Mohammad give away his nine year old daughter in marriage to his 60-year old elder brother, Abdul Sattar.
Turns out that's not legal. She needs to be 14 yrs. old. Although this happens all the time, nobody has been convicted for this yet . . . and it's unlikely to happen in this case too. After all . . . they'll just give her back formally when she's 14 . . . he can babysit until then!
There is SOME degree of variation in the different versions of the story out there. Dawn's version, for example, states that the old man who married the girl is called Abdul Sattar Pahore, and he is not aged sixty, but is SEVENTY. We don't know where the old man is as yet, he's apparently not willing to face the music . . . if indeed there is any music to be faced. The 9 yr. old girl's father is in custody and the Muslim cleric who married them is being interrogated by police.
What the Hell Shiite Happens. . . . she looked 14. Pass the rice.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 63
I'm too sad and disgusted to comment right now.
The first thing I thought about was the poor little girls being taken away from their families to settle the score. They are too young.
The second thing I thought about was how little value the life of a girl is. In one of your rollovers, you mentioned Dark Ages or something like that. It truly is. Since when is a life worth less than rice?
The third thing I thought about was what that 60 or 70 year old man would do to his new "wife." Could you imagine being 9 and being expected to pleasure your elderly husband? Back that train up, can you imagine being 9 and being married?!?!
Where is Sheryl. She's going to be pissed.
Well John, this is nothing new really . . . what would be new would be for one of these people to be convicted AND punished. That last link leads to a woman legally sentenced to being gang raped by 'volunteers'. Although some were later convicted and sentenced to death (which seems to be the only punishment these self-righteous freaks know . . . besides chopping off limbs) . . . their death sentences and convistions were overturned on appeal and they were . . . freed. Now the girl is the subject of death threats.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
In some cultures the distinction between humans and property, including family members, isn't as well defined as it is in ours.
In one of my favorite Ab Fab episodes Patsy sells Saffy into slavery in Morocco when Edina isn't paying attention. It takes a while for Edina to notice that her daughter is missing.
Where's Bret???? I would have thought he'd have made an appearance and start using the rice value of the unborn to support his anti-abortion stance. After all, if you've already bargained away the fetus, how could you possibly abort without financial penalties?
I know this is a cultural thing, but Jesus Christ....this type of behavior is rooted in Sharia law and upheld by Muslim faith. Goddamn religion again......they all seem to devalue the life of females, although at least in this case they've put SOME kind of value on the girl, even if it was equal to a bag of rice. Sorry....I have to go puke now.
But when yu write of freedom and democracy, it that what your President calls Freemanmoxy ?
Anyway . . . turns out to be illegal. Shocker, eh?
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
There are a couple things I could probably use... A Winnebago is not one of them.
Incidentally, I would hope that they don't allow 9 year old girls to be forced to wed 60 or 70 year old men. It seems like a variation of pimping and slavery, particularly in Islamic Society.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
That's why, when it comes to the kiddies . . . I had spares. In fact, I suggested my son Damon be named "Spare" but it didn't get approved.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
No kidding.....It's nothing less than an instituionalized way for dirty, wealthy men to buy girls. Incidentally, if you pay, say three goats for a girl, the father normally gives them back to the couple . . . but it doesn't belong to the girl if it doesn't work out . . . she keeps only her jewelry.
"they all seem to devalue the life of females..."
...and without a mutual respect they end up devaluing themselves. They measure their manhood on the quality of a wife they can buy . . . or that a relative buys for them . . . and not on the character and nature of a wife that they might be able to attract based on being nothing more than an honest man. A wife that might want to be with them.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
(Adding this to my list of reasons NOT to become Islamic.)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Sheryl . . . Philosophy, religion and culture are simply not excuses for this stuff. People are not and should not be property. ANY thought otherwise should be attacked.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
For a change Don, this is the history of foreign relations in our government since the overthrow of Mossadegh and the installation of the Shah in the 50s. They just have a much different criteria for who they support . . . and that criteria has nothing to do with freedom OR Democracy.
You're welcome Marilyn!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
And yet, Jimmy Carter was derided by many in this nation for wanting to inject respect for human rights into our foreign policy. I wonder how many of the people who derided Carter are repulsed by what happened this girl? There are many kinds of hypocrisy and deriding an idea because of who proposed it is one of them and distributes the guilt for allowing the continuation of the abuse of human rights.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Indeed Sheila . . . indeed. But I suspect they're not "our" priorities.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
That said, I also offer the following comments, for what they are worth.
A few years ago, my exchange student returned from a church program in tears. It seems some missionaries had come back from her country with videos of people living in squalor, and appealed to the congregation to despise the horrible people in her country who were responsible for these conditions. Of course, the girl in my home had never seen anything like what these people caught on film. I consoled her by telling her that I could take her places right here in my city where people lived outdoors, without food or healthcare – whose parents and/or children, neighbors and government had turned their backs on them. I believed her that those missionaries had found "the worst of the worst" to report, so her story made me even more cautious about taking one incident as evidence that a total society was lost or abusive.
I have friends who live in some of the countries that stories like this one come out of, and they tell me they don't know anyone who lives this way, or anyone who approves of such circumstances. I believe my friends, but also know that because they don't live this way or know people who do, does not mean these things do not happen to others.
I'll continue to be sick over this story, but cautious about riding the high horse where differences in customs are concerned and especially where it comes close to the pot/kettle situation.
Darn you, Doyle. This is not comfortable.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Doyle, please know that my goal is to talk this through. I do not disagree with anything that you (or anyone else) have said here.
To play devil's advocate, what do we have a right to actively seek to end in another country or culture? Where is that fine line, and how do we decide that our way is better than their way - especially when we can't even agree on what is right in our own country? The Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction comes immediately to mind as a not-nearly-as-important-as-this example. Some people in this country screamed that their children had been damaged for life over that nanosecond of a bare breast when others of us thought they were ridiculous because we expose our children to more than that every day.
In my grandparents' time, 14-year-olds married. When I was young, teens were forced to marry if a pregnancy was involved. Today, many American parents still try to force their children to marry the right race/religion/income level, which isn't exactly the same as arranged marriages but not so far off. And children in America are given away for less than the cost of a sack of rice – maybe not to marriage, but sometimes to family members who don't want to raise them or into foster homes, where they will be abused, often sexually. Is it really so different? Do we want other countries to bomb us into "actively ending" what they think might be an inferior way of life?
I don't want to turn my back on the world, and I don't want to wait until we have solved our own problems to reach out to the world. I'm just thinking aloud (or a pecking) here, trying to decide where those fine lines are for me.
They still do this today . . . though less commonly. They also become parents on ocassion at these young ages. While this is not the same thing as being wed (at the age of 9) to someone 61 yrs. older to settle the debts of another . . . I agree, it too is a problem. But where to draw the line?
Interesting perspective. When it comes to Human Rights I suspect that this Nation would be much better off if it would at least attempt to reflect the culture and mores of the citizens that it represents. I believe it should support those that at least tend to move in that direction, and not always the most brutal and repressive dictatorships. Though there are SOME, like North Korea, that we do not support and befriend, I have little doubt that would North Korea offer this country access to vast oil fields and a willingness to roll over for International corporations to rape the country and ravage the citizenry, we could find our way to becoming friends, or at least that's what the history has been since Kermit Roosevelt helped topple the results of the popular election in Iran in the 50s and made our country aware of how little it would take to control other countries.
"Do we want other countries to bomb us into "actively ending" what they think might be an inferior way of life? "
No. Nor do I want to see us bombing our culture into their countries. I am adamantly opposed to violence as a method of attaining Peace . . . understanding is what gets Peace . . . violence makes more violence. Opposition, communication, understanding and, yes, bribing will get results. But we're not even seeing this . . . the only bribing going on is US support based on political considerations FAR removed from Human Rights considerations.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
First, as a somewhat liberal humanists, I'm often defending some human subgroup being attacked by those that feel differently, whether we're talking immigrants (illegal or otherwise), Muslims or other nonChristians or homosexuals who (gasp!) feel like they should choose their own life partners. Part of my argument is always the risk in painting a diverse and complex group of people with one brush and one label, picking out specific incidents and deciding that these worst case situations define the whole lot of them, part and parcel.
So, why my first reaction is abhorrence to this incident, I have to ask myself, is this typical? Is this indicative of an entire culture or country or is this a singular incident that, whether it sneaks past the culture or not, is out of keeping with the nominal and distasteful even there among others of the same culture. The truth is, do we have enough information to make that judgement?
It would be a simple matter to search out distasteful incidences and activities here that could give a very twisted notion of the culture here. I knew someone (not a friend) who once that tried to sell her baby for a carton of cigarettes. There are dozens examples of excess, decadence, crime, corruption,etc. that someone could readily pull out of our papers and pass along in another culture as proof that we're disgusting soulless creatures. But, I don't think we are or that those events, while influenced by our culture, define our culture. Since I feel that way, I must be wary not to do the same when faced with horrific stories that describe specific incidences. I'm very leery of pulling out my paintbrush to paint a culture; I dislike hypocrisy, especially in myself.
The second aspect that came to my mind is: is this the whole story? It's easy to sit here, surrounded by children that are immeasurably precious to me, with a comfortable job and insurance and relative wealth, and condemn the actions of others. I remember reading about Chinese families drowning their daughters during famine and being sickened and appalled. Then I read books describing how dire their lives were, how parents were faced with watching multiple children literally starve to death and asked myself, what if I had to choose between a whole family starving or relatively quick death of a child. What if my daughter could have been "sold" to someone who would make sure she was clothed and fed with a payment that feeds the rest of my family or see them all starve. I didn't know what I'd choose, really, but I realized that, never having had to make those choices, I needed to be careful about judging their actions. Those are the sorts of choices I wish no one had to make.
So, I asked myself, could there have been more to this story? Maybe it's face value and shocking under any circumstances. On the other hand, $830 worth of rice might have paid for the feeding of a family for a year; that's a pretty significant thing. Maybe the marriage was symbolic, basically a sign of good faith that saved face between the loan guarantor and the vendor so that they could maintain a good relationship despite the default, with the child safely in the hands of a trusted friend. I'm not saying that's the truth either, but the point is, is this necessarily less likely than the other extreme? Do I know enough to judge?
I'm not happy with a culture where children and women are bought and sold, misused or have fewer rights than anyone else. I'm not, and I'll continue to believe, whether I'm right or wrong, that cultures that misuse a segment of their populace will either end in failure or have to learn the errors of their ways. But I'm not being fair if I assume the worst because of my personal views or paint an entire culture with the stigma from the actions of a few.
Let me add that it may be that this is (a) typical and (b) endemic, that I'm just too poorly informed. All the more reason for me to be cautious of my condemnation, as I am quick to complain at others who are ill-informed, but quick to judge.
Just my thoughts.
"It would be a simple matter to search out distasteful incidences and activities here that could give a very twisted notion of the culture here. "
True enough. I hvae had some VERY religious friends who were Islamic. I currently have some wonderful friends who are female and in Tehran . . . and I'm also a good friend with their sister, an brilliant student from Iran who also studied in Italy and Denmark. I was in no way trying to paint a whole culture . . . I was condemning an abhorrent practice that is being permitted despite the fact that it is illegal.
Perhaps the illegality is a sign of progress (the old guy is on the run) . . . although a symbolic one. Without teeth, such laws serve only political purposes. I'm not so slow, though, to condemn the practice where-ever it may occur, in which a 9 yr. old girl finds herself wed to a 60 or 70 yr. old man in answer to a debt.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
There should be no question of numbers when it comes to human rights. There should be no question of culture, in my opinion. Who are we, who am I to make these statements? Just another human being. The litmus test for me will always be to put myself or my children in the place of the afflicted. Any culture that barters in females, that treats them like tender, regardless of age, regardless of quantity, regardless of majority support or acceptance, needs to be highlighted on the world stage and needs our reproof. Jesus was right about that done to the least amongst us.
What I can't say, even though I believe it is true, is that such practices are absolutely wrong. I am not omniscient nor am I knowledgeable enough about the subtleties about many cultures to judge. My hands aren't clean enough to begin casting stones except on the most heinous of specific instances. And, even then, I can be wrong. The world is not only not monochromatic it - it is a spectrum of color, filled with choices and necessities I cannot fathom.
What I also believe is that most people, in every culture and every country, love their children, male and female. Even in cultures where male children are very much favored, where technology exists to limit female births and/or births are limited/rationed, female children are still born. And I don't believe a religion can spread across the world trying to negate the overwhelming urge for people to love their children. But, again, I'm not omniscient and I could be wrong there, too.
I hope I'm not. I believe, despite the ugly stories I've heard about every culture, including my own, that people are generally and basically good, even if they are often readily led, often using hatred and fear. I don't want to be part of that culture of hatred and fear. I want to deal with people as individuals. I want to continue believing that people are, basically, good. That can be a mistake, but judging otherwise puts me in very uncomfortable company, too uncomfortable for me.
Bear in mind, this is how I reach where I am, why I feel the way I feel. I can't tell you how you should feel or whether you feel judgment is justified. I can't even tell you when action is justified or not; the best I can do is tell you when I feel impelled myself. I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for feeling like this sort of thing is actionable, abhorrent, shocking. I'm shocked and saddened myself. But I'm not yet where I feel like action is called for. And that's my opinion.
And that Stephanie . . . is where you and I will HAVE to agree to disagree. I simply cannot find the strength, even if I'm wrong, not to strenuously object to and denounce ANY action that leads to this kind of thing happening. As Sheryl pointed out . . . even if it's one incident . . . I'm apalled. I absolutely DO guage the actions of others through my moral compass. It's a shame I do, I think . . . life would be easier if I could accept this . . . but I simply cannot.
Thanks for sharing your opinions so openly and honestly. I do respect that. (And you).
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Doyle, I admit that this exchange and the willingness of many people I've communicated with in recent years to buy almost anything passed their way that will ease the social conscience plays a big part in what I consider my cautioning position on this topic:
"Do we want other countries to bomb us into "actively ending" what they think might be an inferior way of life? "
No. Nor do I want to see us bombing our culture into their countries. I am adamantly opposed to violence as a method of attaining Peace . . . understanding is what gets Peace . . . violence makes more violence.
I need more time to think about this, and sincerely thank you for bringing this topic up for discussion, Doyle.
"It's sad and disgusting that a culture would have such evil mores."
It's sad ANY person (forget culture) would have these mores. I have yet to be convinced that this is cultural since the "culture" has deemed it to be illegal.
"I need more time to think about this, and sincerely thank you for bringing this topic up for discussion, Doyle. "
Think well on this Sandy . . . I sincerely believe this is one of the penultimate values I have arrived at . . . And you're ALWAYS welcome!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
But, there is still a portion of the argument here (and I mean argument in broad, global terms) that leaves me very uncomfortable and, sometimes along with Doyle, outraged. There is culture, and there is assault on the core of every human's right to be free, to determine their own destiny and to have access to basic necessities and a chance for self-fulfillment and happiness. And where I see what I consider to be every human's basic rights (and yes, that is based on my moral compass and intelligence) being denied, I will speak out. This is not only for women, or children, or people of a certain religion, or sect, or color, or economic level.
And the argument of "who are we to judge" and "let one without sin cast the first stone" business.....well, I find that to be a very weak argument in recognizing and fighting against injustice. If that were the case, we would have no ground for trying to improve anything, for bringing any wrong to justice, for having a moral compass even. And the fact that religious people like to use that phrase to justify wrongs when its in "their camp" makes it even worse for me.
I have no problem with judging....I judge myself by the same stick that I judge others. And the fact that I DO judge myself, and take stock of my failings, allows me to look at them with honesty and try to fix them the best I can. In my opinion, if we all did a little more of that in this country, and around the world, we'd be a whole lot better off as individuals and as a global society.
There IS a limit for me. I suspect . . . there is one for everyone, whether they know it or not. The cultural tradition of abandoning female infants on Mountains in China due to the limits imposed on family expansion by the government and the drive to have a male child. What if a culture recognizes a sacrifice of children? I see this as not so far removed from that as a cultural tradition . . . but . . . like Sheryl, I'm a world traveler and I truly adore the variety of cultures.
But wrong is wrong. Perhaps there is some ethnocentricity in that. I prefer to think of it as enlightenment. Education? Spirituality, perhaps. At what point does one 'draw the line' between cultural differences and right and wrong?
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
In Morrocco, 9 years is acceptable, according to a fatwa. It apparently was good enough for the prophet Mohammed.