Forced marriages in the news again

[cressida]

My bold

 

They might have the theoretical right to reject - but I doubt if it always happens in practice. I saw the news clip of the 13 year old girl who was taken from this country and made a forced marriage - she didn't seem to have been given the opportunity to reject her bridegroom.

 

I think it's more about cultural traditions than actual religion - and most cultures usually manage to finds bits of "their" religion to support whatever traditions they follow.

 

Personally, I don't much care how old the girls are - under 16, over 16, doesn't matter - what does matter is that they are being denied the right to a basic freedom, which everybody who lives in this country should have.

 

Not clear if it's the parents of the prospective bride who can reject the groom or the bride herself.

 

They can't choose which laws they should obey, perhaps they should be made aware of our laws before they come here and if our laws aren't suitable maybe they should join the bride in the country of her new husband

[Rupert_Baehr]

You're in denial about forced marriages being a particular problem within Pakistani community in this country.

 

Actualy, you're not in denial, you know full well that it is but whenever these incidents come to light, the lefty spin machine goes into overdrive.

 

Not at all, I recognise it can be a problem.

 

It seems to shock and appall you more than me, so what are you doing about it other than banging on endlessly about it here?

 

Why is it a problem? England is a multi-cultural society. If people want to come to England and if they prefer set up their own colonies and follow their own cultural morés rather than attempt to integrate into the existing society, they are perfectly entitled to do so.

 

There's nothing new about forced (or arranged) marriages in the UK - and I'm not thinking about the dim and distant past, either.

 

There was a guy called Charlie Windsor. It seems he wanted to marry Camilla Shand in 1970. it didn't happen - well not then, anyway.

 

He had an aunt called Margaret. She wanted to marry somebody called Peter Townsend. That didn't happen either, and he ended up being sent a long way away.

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised that arranged marriages still happen amongst families which have lived in England for many hundreds of years.

 

If there are people whose families come from cultures where forced marriage is acceptable and if those people choose to follow their culture, then if the country really does intend to accept multi-culturalism it will have to accept the bits it doesnt like along with those it does. The alternative is integration and we can't have that, can we?

 

What the people of other cultures do in their own homes is up to them.

[spindrift]

It really is appalling.

 

What work are you doing to try to stop it and help the victims?

 

 

So , it seems the concern is limited to moaning and whining about arranged marriages here, on this forum.

 

 

What would you call someone who bangs on endlessly about the faults of a few backward people and uses these faults to attack an entire section of society?

 

 

I'd call them a racist.

[Shy talk]

Why is it a problem? England is a multi-cultural society. If people want to come to England and if they prefer set up their own colonies and follow their own cultural morés rather than attempt to integrate into the existing society, they are perfectly entitled to do so.

 

 

You aprove of the particular "cultural morés" under discusion in this thread do you? you aprove of forced marriages?

[Shy talk]

 

What the people of other cultures do in their own homes is up to them.

 

Change the word homes to countries and i'l agree with you.

[ricgem2002]

It's a pity you can't see things for your rush to post your polemic.

so apart from you trying to tell everyone on here that they are talking shy .do you think this should be outlawed or should these women be forced to suffer

[Rupert_Baehr]

Why is it a problem? England is a multi-cultural society. If people want to come to England and if they prefer set up their own colonies and follow their own cultural morés rather than attempt to integrate into the existing society, they are perfectly entitled to do so.

 

You aprove of the particular "cultural morés" under discusion in this thread do you? you aprove of forced marriages?

 

Not at all. But then again, I had nothing to do with the immigration policy of the UK over the last 13 years or so. I didn't vote for the people who did, nor did I vote to re-elect them when it became obvious that they were screwing things up.

 

I do not approve of multi-culturalism. I'm a proponent if integration, not segregation (even if it's voluntary segregation with both sides agreeing to it.) Multi-cuturalism is a euphemism for segregation.

 

Wherever possible, throughout my adult life, I've chosen to live in small communities. It's difficult to break small communities into ethnic areas - they tend to be well-integrated and they tend to suffer less interracial friction.

 

I have lived in places where there is segregation (not mandated, but it's segregation, nonetheless.) - Shortly after I moved to Mississippi, I needed some stuff for my house so I went to a shopping mall to get it. The next day, a colleague of my wife asked us whether we'd found what we needed. "Yes we did", we said and we told her where we had bought it. "Oh, you shouldn't go there - that's the Black people's Mall." she said. "You should shop at the Highland Village Mall. It would've been OK for her to go where we did, but we shouldn't go there because our skin is a different colour.

 

I've read and heard - on so many occasions - "It is wrong for the people who live in England to force their culture on those who immigrate."

 

I agree. it is wrong to try to force people, but (IMO) it's a very good idea to encourage them to adopt your culture. - That culture will change over time -not only will the immigrants be absorbed, but their culture will, to some extent, modify that of the group they join.

 

The exhortation not to force people to accept another culture seems - in all too many cases - to be interpreted as meaning: "You shall do nothing which might be seen as an attempt to change the way in which they choose to live."

 

What the people of other cultures do in their own homes is up to them.

 

Change the word homes to countries and i'l agree with you.

 

But when they came to the UK, it seems that many of them were told: "This is a multi-cultural country. Don't bother to integrate - Set up your own community and do you own thing." If you tell people to do that - or even if you act in manner which suggests that it's OK to do that - you can hardly be surprised if they take you up on it.

 

On this forum people talk about 'Asian areas', 'Somali communities' and other ethnic colonies. If such things are encouraged, surely it's likely that the people who live in those communities will observe the practices and customs they observed in their countries (or their parents' countries) of origin?

 

And their homes are in their countries. When they (or their parents or grandparents) came to England, England became their country - even though their England may have completely different customs and culture to yours.

[Suffragette1]

Not at all. But then again, I had nothing to do with the immigration policy of the UK over the last 13 years or so. I didn't vote for the people who did, nor did I vote to re-elect them when it became obvious that they were screwing things up.

 

I do not approve of multi-culturalism. I'm a proponent if integration, not segregation (even if it's voluntary segregation with both sides agreeing to it.) Multi-cuturalism is a euphemism for segregation.

 

Wherever possible, throughout my adult life, I've chosen to live in small communities. It's difficult to break small communities into ethnic areas - they tend to be well-integrated and they tend to suffer less interracial friction.

 

I have lived in places where there is segregation (not mandated, but it's segregation, nonetheless.) - Shortly after I moved to Mississippi, I needed some stuff for my house so I went to a shopping mall to get it. The next day, a colleague of my wife asked us whether we'd found what we needed. "Yes we did", we said and we told her where we had bought it. "Oh, you shouldn't go there - that's the Black people's Mall." she said. "You should shop at the Highland Village Mall. It would've been OK for her to go where we did, but we shouldn't go there because our skin is a different colour.

 

I've read and heard - on so many occasions - "It is wrong for the people who live in England to force their culture on those who immigrate."

 

I agree. it is wrong to try to force people, but (IMO) it's a very good idea to encourage them to adopt your culture. - That culture will change over time -not only will the immigrants be absorbed, but their culture will, to some extent, modify that of the group they join.

 

The exhortation not to force people to accept another culture seems - in all too many cases - to be interpreted as meaning: "You shall do nothing which might be seen as an attempt to change the way in which they choose to live."

 

 

 

 

 

But when they came to the UK, it seems that many of them were told: "This is a multi-cultural country. Don't bother to integrate - Set up your own community and do you own thing." If you tell people to do that - or even if you act in manner which suggests that it's OK to do that - you can hardly be surprised if they take you up on it.

 

On this forum people talk about 'Asian areas', 'Somali communities' and other ethnic colonies. If such things are encouraged, surely it's likely that the people who live in those communities will observe the practices and customs they observed in their countries (or their parents' countries) of origin?

 

And their homes are in their countries. When they (or their parents or grandparents) came to England, England became their country - even though their England may have completely different customs and culture to yours.

 

Wherever such intimidation and control occurs it is fundamentally wrong and constitutes gross abuse. Women are not chattel to be used as pawns and bartered with.

[Rupert_Baehr]

I agree with your comment completely.

 

I'm not sure why you quoted my post before you wrote that comment. There is nothing in my post which suggests otherwise.

 

What I did suggest (admittedly in a verbose manner) is that if you give any group of people (or an individual, for that matter) the impression that they/(s)he can ignore the customs of your society and instead 'do their own thing' then when they/(s)he do something which is acceptable in their own culture but unacceptable in yours, you can expect an uphill battle if you want to make them change that behaviour.

 

You can also expect cries of "You're forcing your culture on us."

[Suffragette1]

I agree with your comment completely.

 

I'm not sure why you quoted my post before you wrote that comment. There is nothing in my post which suggests otherwise.

 

What I did suggest (admittedly in a verbose manner) is that if you give any group of people (or an individual, for that matter) the impression that they/(s)he can ignore the customs of your society and instead 'do their own thing' then when they/(s)he do something which is acceptable in their own culture but unacceptable in yours, you can expect an uphill battle if you want to make them change that behaviour.

 

You can also expect cries of "You're forcing your culture on us."

I'm not sure either, to be honest.

 

I think that the problem has been a reluctance on the part of the authorities and agencies to tackle this issue head on which has somehow given a tacit endorsement to such practices. Most sane people find it abhorrent, however, many are loath to publicly condemn it because they're accused of racism and cultural arrogance. To advocate that it is acceptable in your back yard but not mine is the root of apartheid and wrong. Some rights are universal and should cut across cultures.