Oh, the Liberal Media, you are so crazy.
So, I'm wandering through the CBC website today (yes, I am a Canadian...also, they have fun games!) and I come across this little gem of journalistic outrage. For those who don't feel like reading, the basic gist is that in Britain, they have a department that tracks down "forced marriages" perpetrated by, usually, middle eastern families against their daughters. My absolute favorite quote it this:
"Forced marriage … is a part of a patriarchal system where parents believe they know what is best for their children," she said.
How DARE those parents think they know what is best for their children! Oh the HUMANITY!
Also,
"As a society we draw a line in the sand," Warsi told British television network GMTV.
"This is not a culturally sensitive issue; this is an abhorrent act which we must stand together on."
Now, I understand that, in some cases, that this practice gets a little illegal. As CBC put it (using as many inflammatory words as possible): abuse, assault, rape, kidnapping and murder.
(Which, PS, happens in un-"forced" marriages as well)
So I'm totally on board with cracking down on things that are illegal, but, in order to make my point, I turn (rather shamefully) to Wikipedia. The point being, that forced marriage is a subset of arranged marriage. The distinction is, essentially, that the child doesn't have any say in their choice of partner. Now, I'm not part of a culture that practices arranged marriage, but it seems to me that there are probably a lot of arranged marriages within these cultures that occur with some resistance on the part of the child or at least no input from the child.
The long and the short of it is, where do we draw the line? I heartily disagree that this is not a culturally sensitive issue. Are we, as "Western Society" really going to tell people that they cannot arrange their childs marriage for fear that the child might not agree? When does an arranged marriage become a forced marriage? You get my point.
So there's my political musing for the day. I understand that people get very up-in-arms about issues like this, so I want to tag on a little caveat. I'm trained in history. We have it beat into our heads that we CANNOT impose our point of view on the events, people, places etc. that we investigate. Our job is to find meaning without passing judgement. So my reluctance to police and potentially illegalize (is that even a word?) what is essentially a cultural practice with long standing tradition comes from this firmly non-ethnocentric point of view.
The end (deep breath)
"Forced marriage … is a part of a patriarchal system where parents believe they know what is best for their children," she said.
How DARE those parents think they know what is best for their children! Oh the HUMANITY!
Also,
"As a society we draw a line in the sand," Warsi told British television network GMTV.
"This is not a culturally sensitive issue; this is an abhorrent act which we must stand together on."
Now, I understand that, in some cases, that this practice gets a little illegal. As CBC put it (using as many inflammatory words as possible): abuse, assault, rape, kidnapping and murder.
(Which, PS, happens in un-"forced" marriages as well)
So I'm totally on board with cracking down on things that are illegal, but, in order to make my point, I turn (rather shamefully) to Wikipedia. The point being, that forced marriage is a subset of arranged marriage. The distinction is, essentially, that the child doesn't have any say in their choice of partner. Now, I'm not part of a culture that practices arranged marriage, but it seems to me that there are probably a lot of arranged marriages within these cultures that occur with some resistance on the part of the child or at least no input from the child.
The long and the short of it is, where do we draw the line? I heartily disagree that this is not a culturally sensitive issue. Are we, as "Western Society" really going to tell people that they cannot arrange their childs marriage for fear that the child might not agree? When does an arranged marriage become a forced marriage? You get my point.
So there's my political musing for the day. I understand that people get very up-in-arms about issues like this, so I want to tag on a little caveat. I'm trained in history. We have it beat into our heads that we CANNOT impose our point of view on the events, people, places etc. that we investigate. Our job is to find meaning without passing judgement. So my reluctance to police and potentially illegalize (is that even a word?) what is essentially a cultural practice with long standing tradition comes from this firmly non-ethnocentric point of view.
The end (deep breath)