Lucia

de Vernai

Read Lucia's bio and previous columns

August 25, 2008

Arranged Marriages for 8-Year-Olds, and the Nations Who Protect Them

Parents across the U.S. are uncomfortably watching their eight-year-old daughters aspire to the heights of barely-dressed Miley Cyrus and profess their love for one of the Hobbitt-like creatures known as the Jonas Brothers. Yet the years of stepping on Barbie shoes and purchasing another tube of watermelon lip gloss seem like a parent’s dream compared to the situation in the Middle East.

No, not the one that has us borrowing money from Saudi Arabia, the one we ignore because we are borrowing money from Saudi Arabia. No one would probably even mention it if a Saudi court did not agree to hear the divorce plea of an eight-year-old girl married to a man in his 50s. The girl’s mother filed the plea. The child doesn’t yet know she is married.

Saudi law is based on a traditional interpretation of the Sharia law, and polygamous, arranged marriages involving young girls are not uncommon. The marriages, arranged by fathers, allegedly serve to gather a large dowry and protect the girl from illegitimate relationships in the future. I’m sure that there is some mindless “cultural relativism” argument that can be applied here, not as a moral justification but an excuse to continue discounting the practice.

If there is any hope to be found in the situation, it comes from the girl’s relatives who sought the help of human rights groups – perhaps encouraged by a recent case in Yemen, where an eight-year-old girl ran away from her 28-year-old husband and received an annulment of the marriage. In addition to Saudi Arabia and Yemen, international human rights groups have been battling arranged marriages with girls in Bangladesh, India, Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo for years. Victims making the first move may meet resistance on two fronts.

Depending on the outcome of the case, more instances of this horrific practice may surface, possibly leading to reform. The grassroots origin of the case may have a more powerful outcome than the usually futile attempts of outsiders. Closed-off societies, fearing a cultural invasion, may be less vehemently opposed to change if the demand comes from the inside.

. . . Or they can stone all those protesting the practice.   

It’s good to know that we are fighting a war against countries protecting insurgents with money from a country protecting pedophiles. Democratic principles at their best, folks . . . but I’m guessing that this fact will not make it into the third grade introduction to civics.

We make sexual offenders register and knock on doors, exposing their crime wherever they go. We deny them jobs and many privileges of democracy, reigning in even the most basic freedoms. How, then, does codifying and legalizing their behavior turn a life-shattering crime into a “custom”?

It may be easier to sleep at night knowing that we live under a government where, legally, the biggest threat to your daughter’s innocence is a poster of Zac Efron. The fact that the government is willing to ignore the inexcusable for economic reasons, however, should keep you up at night.

Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.

To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry it.