Young marriages

January 19th, 2013 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Amelia Wade in NZ Herald reports:

Almost 800 girls under 18 were married in New Zealand in the past decade, and women’s rights activists believe a number of those marriages were against the will of the brides.

It is not illegal for 16 and 17-year-olds to marry with parental consent but activists suggest a number of those marriages are forced by the parents.

I wonder how many 16 and 17 year olds boys got married?

National MP Jackie Blue has drafted a private member’s bill which she hopes would help provide extra support for young women under pressure to marry.

Dr Blue’s bill would make it illegal for anyone under 18 years old to wed without first formalising their consent before a Family Court judge.

“I believe the majority of marriages under 18 are fine and above board, but this would just give an extra level of protection for those who are being forced to do it against their will,” she said.

This seems a good bill to me. I can’t imagine what harm is done by requiring a 16 year old to either wait until they are 18 before they marry – or having a judge ensure the bride is a willing participant.

Tags:

81 Responses to “Young marriages”

  1. Manolo (13,517 comments) says:

    It would be interesting to know how many Muslims there are among these people. A breakdown by ethnicity would be useful.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Andrei (2,536 comments) says:

    Let’s see – about the only legal requirement for a marriage ceremony in New Zealand to be valid is that both parties are asked by the celebrant, priest, wiccan voodoo priestess or whatever, that they both freely consent to this union and that they both respond in the affirmative to this question.

    So now we add another layer of bureaucracy where this part of the ceremony is performed twice, the first time before a “family court judge” and then again at the ceremony proper.

    So what does this extra layer of fluff actually acheive?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. David Farrar (1,881 comments) says:

    So Andrei are you in favour of 16 year olds being forced to marry?

    The Judge will now ask questions at the ceremony, in front of parents and everyone else. I imagine the young person wanting to marry will have a fairly extensive interview with the Judge.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Nostalgia-NZ (5,083 comments) says:

    Not sure anyone could expect that the ‘emphasis’ placed on a forced marriage would unravel in a Court. Seems naive to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    This seems a good bill to me.

    That sounds like a subservient wimper from a pussy whipped sanctimonious man. But do not feel special or even set-upon by my harsh words David. You are the product of our dreary feminised socialist country.

    How about the rights of the man in an arranged marriage ? What sort of moral compass have you got to totally ignore that point ? It is disgusting how you disregard the rights of men, who are, by a considerable degree, the most marginalised group in NZ.

    Women are NOT a special victim group , they are a priviledged and powerful group. They run this country while grovelling submissive kiwi men suck up to them, hoping to get laid. It is pathetic to watch and it is little wonder our women are a miserable angry lot.

    [DPF: It's great you are brave enough to stand up for the rights of 50 year old men to take 16 year old girls as their wives against their will]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Dave Stringer (188 comments) says:

    Kea
    where is the sexism in the proposed bill?
    As I read it any party to a marriage that is ages under 18 years would have an individual session with a judge to determine if they are entering into the marriage voluntarily.
    Ask in a large gathering, including parents, and it would be a brave child who said no, but the timid child may speak up in a 1-on-1 session – not ‘would’ but definately ‘may’.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Almost 800 girls under 18 were married in New Zealand in the past decade

    ONLY that many? And only a tiny percentage of that very very small number will be “arranged” marriages.

    Now to give that small number some perspective, how many women under 18 are on the single parent benefit ? It seems ok with NZ’s feminist harpies, and their enablers, for women to be paid for spreading their legs instead of working, but NOT OK for them to marry !

    Someone please explain this to me …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Andrei (2,536 comments) says:

    So Andrei are you in favour of 16 year olds being forced to marry?

    That is a loaded question which has only one possible answer and is irrelevant and a side track.

    In the real world with real people in it, if this supposed fence is erected then either the bride to be will be coached as to how to respond to the judge or the marriage instead of being celebtrated in New Zealand will happen elsewhere as does happen, certainly in the once Great Britain.

    Alas we have allowed marriage to be trashed in this country and those who are agitating over this issue actually are not that fond of marriage to begin with

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Kea
    where is the sexism in the proposed bill?
    As I read it any party to a marriage that is ages under 18 years would have an individual session with a judge

    Your question is valid, but shows how normalised anti male behaviour is in our society.

    Would the 25 year old male of the arranged marriage get to have an “individual session with a judge” ?

    Once again you have been sucked into seeing women as victims. They are not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    I agree with Manolo. I’ll bet that the vast majority of these young women are in the cult of violence – sorry – “religion of peace”.

    Just one of the “benefits” that Islam brings to a country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    I’ll bet that the vast majority of these young women

    Here is another brain washed muppet !

    The marriage is arranged, for BOTH parties. Why single out “young women” for special mention ? Why are the rights of only one group of any interest ? Grow a pair !

    I can also see the racist undertones of this storm in a teacup. 16 is not considered too young in many societies. Our ultra feminised Western society is not the gold standard for anything. And don’t bother with the “it’s not ok in our society” line of bullshit either. It is legal in our society to get married at 16. It is also legal to be pumping out kids well before 16, which is a career option provided by our feminist society.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Andrei (2,536 comments) says:

    Aint nothing wrong with so called arranged marriages Kea – they fill our self absorbed elites with horror but the ones I have encountered actually have worked out better in the long run than a lot of self selected ones

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    I agree Andrei. A friend of mine owned an Indian restaurant. All of her staff went back to India, married an arranged bride and returned back to NZ to work. She had an arranged marriage herself, though she was not from India and was not Muslim.

    Still waiting for answer why it is ok for the state to pay girls 16 and younger to pump out kids, but not ok for them to marry ?

    Why can’t men get paid by the state for getting laid ??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    Kea, one little detail – at what age is the DPB paid? Is it not age 18?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. annie (540 comments) says:

    Andrei (1,647) Says:
    January 19th, 2013 at 12:22 pm

    Let’s see – about the only legal requirement for a marriage ceremony in New Zealand to be valid is that both parties are asked by the celebrant, priest, wiccan voodoo priestess or whatever, that they both freely consent to this union and that they both respond in the affirmative to this question.

    So now we add another layer of bureaucracy where this part of the ceremony is performed twice, the first time before a “family court judge” and then again at the ceremony proper.

    So what does this extra layer of fluff actually acheive?

    It achieves protection of young Muslim and occasionally Hindu girls, NZ citizens, who are forced by their parents to marry against their will. Of the cases I’ve seen, about a score, Muslims are the great majority. The situations often involve a young girl and a much older man, who may already be married. The problem here is that the marriage may be a religious ceremony only, without a civil registration. The legislation wouldn’t help in these cases, but it is at least a good start.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    By country of origin, 2002-2011

    New Zealand
    Brides 410
    Grooms 97

    Overseas
    Brides 388
    Grooms 77

    Brides total 798
    Grooms total 174

    The protection is not just limited to locals but to partners brought in from offshore. In these cases residence would be realised by the marriage – thus this would require civil registration.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    Andrei, have the arranged marriages that worked out included ones where one of the parties was being forced into it against their will when under age 18?

    Why would someone support people being forced into arranged marriages against their will, yet oppose consenting couples getting married?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. questlove (242 comments) says:

    This seems a good bill to me to me too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Kea, one little detail – at what age is the DPB paid? Is it not age 18?

    SPC, how many 15 year old mothers have you seen begging on the street ?

    None.

    If your a women the state will do anything and every thing for you in NZ, regardless of age. It may not be called the DPB, but what ever you call it, they are being paid to have kids.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    It achieves protection of young Muslim and occasionally Hindu girls,

    annie, Yeah fuck the boys, they don’t matter !

    Your sexual fantasy of innocent young “girls” being forced to marry horny older guys, does not fit with reality.

    Go back to your Fifty Shades of Gray and do not interrupt the men again !

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    Kea, what other forms of rape, apart from forced marriage, are OK because you don’t like mothers (age 16 or age 45) getting help from taxpaying men?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    SPC, lets have a little chat.. Marriage (in this case anyway) involves a girl and a boy

    Stop trying to claim the moral high ground while ignoring the rights of half the people involved.

    Why have you not answered my question regarding our society paying girls, 16 and under, for getting laid and pumping out apprentice criminals, but not allowing them to marry?

    Because it would reveal your hypocrisy ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    The right to rape?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    Kea, so once the change to marriage laws occurs this year, you want it to be legal for boys under 18 to be forced into arranged marriages to older men?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Andrei (2,536 comments) says:

    Why would someone support people being forced into arranged marriages against their will,

    I hate the thought of people being forced into arranged marriages against their will and I particularly detest the thought of older men being given teenaged brides, it churns my stomach actually.

    Realistically, if someone is determined to give their daughter to a fifty year old man a family court judge will not stand in the way of this because that part of the process will be subverted or bypassed one way or another.

    More government is never the solution to a cultural problem

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    SPC, I am opposed to ANYONE being forced to marry.

    I love the way women wipe their feet on the sorts of doormats I see posting on this thread. No wonder so many kiwi women moan about the lack of real men in this country. Just look at the double standards and moral distortions being presented in order to portray women as victims and maintain the hard line feminist narrative. I have some bad news for you all, women do not respect wimps and neither do I. They are not stupid and can see the double standards presented by pussy whipped needy men.

    Still waiting for that answer SPC you little coward….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Kea

    Since SPC seems to be a little busy at the moment I’ll have a go at answering. The DPB was never aimed at the slags who would rather stick their legs behind their ears as opposed to getting out of bed & doing some form of honest work although I concede that that is what happens too often.

    The benefit was made available to provide for the raising of the kids born to mothers who previously were forced to offer up the baby for adoption or rely on their own parents to support them. Note the childrens’ welfare was paramount…..not the teenage mother.

    I’m not suggesting that the outcome has been anything other than socially disastrous but that was the original intention of the enabling legislation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    Can someone tell me why the hell an NZ MP finds it necessary to draft a bill that is obviously aimed at Muslims?

    Deport them if they have a problem with our existing law.

    Just because Helen imported them doesn’t mean we have to keep them! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. annie (540 comments) says:

    Kea (1,739) Says:
    January 19th, 2013 at 2:16 pm

    It achieves protection of young Muslim and occasionally Hindu girls,

    annie, Yeah fuck the boys, they don’t matter !

    Your sexual fantasy of innocent young “girls” being forced to marry horny older guys, does not fit with reality.

    Go back to your Fifty Shades of Gray and do not interrupt the men again !

    Kea, what planet are you on?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    nasska, I agree. I am not opposing the benefit generally. My point was sponsoring 16 year olds, and under, to have kids, then getting all sanctimonious about the thought they may marry !

    Johnboy, It is very common in many societies, that are not Muslim. And this is not about “existing” laws. It is about forcing our marriage beliefs on others.

    annie, What did I just tell you ! ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    If people chose to live here Kea because they are not subject to the oppression they suffer in the countries they leave I have no problem.

    When we feel obliged to change our law to suit them them I have a problem.

    If they have a problem with that then they can fuck off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Kea

    If you’re okay with sixteen year olds being forced into arranged marriages you are wittingly or unwittingly condemning them to being nothing other than uneducated baby factories. I’ll pre empt you here & state that I care not for the “marriage beliefs” of recent immigrants to our secular & free country…..should they wish to carry on practices more suited to their desert shitholes then they can stay in them, return or adapt to our social mores.

    The point is that if a child is married at sixteen within a culture where contraception is not permitted, it is extremely unlikely that she will ever have the chance of other than a basic education or any vocational opportunities.

    This is of little import where women are merely a means of producing the next generation of camel drovers but I query that an advanced country can afford to ignore the potential contribution to the advancement of society of 50% of its population.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    Well said nasska.

    If they were producing the next generation of sheep herders then that would be different! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Andrei (2,536 comments) says:

    If you’re okay with sixteen year olds being forced into arranged marriages

    Whoa whoa, hold it there – how do you know that they are being “forced”, one of my grandmothers was 17 when she got married, why not?

    They might be quite happy to be married, it might beat getting a job in the public service stamping bits of paper and moving them to the out tray for the rest of their lives the way some kiwi women end up or worse yet an old maid list MP of little no real accomplishment.

    This is of little import where women are merely a means of producing the next generation of camel drovers

    You might like to ask yourself who is going to produce the next generation of voters and MPs and it just might be those girls married before 18 whose cultural values you abhor

    Just sayin……

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Andrei

    Human females are capable of breeding from puberty to menopause…..say thirty plus years. Surely you are not suggesting that delaying breeding for an extra couple of years is going to have a huge influence on the supply of likely MPs.

    I also query that a patriarchal society that requires females to be married while they are still children represents a culture where the wishes of the girl would count for shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    “They might be quite happy to be married, it might beat getting a job in the public service stamping bits of paper and moving them to the out tray for the rest of their lives the way some kiwi women end up or worse yet an old maid list MP of little no real accomplishment.”

    It would be a real career move if Benedict allowed them to become Priests! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Kea

    If you’re okay with sixteen year olds being forced into arranged marriages

    Here is what I really said:

    I am opposed to ANYONE being forced to marry.

    I actually have no idea what your talking about. Are you another one who can not get it through their head that an arranged marriage involves a woman AND a man ? Why the focus on just the woman ? Are you getting into the sexual fantasy of some older guy having his way with a sweet innocent little virgin girl? I think you are and you are playing into the hands of the vile hate filled feminists who have done so much to destroy our society.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    I query that an advanced country can afford to ignore the potential contribution to the advancement of society of 50% of its population.

    Says the guy ignoring the rights of 50% of people in his posts on this topic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Kea

    No….the tack I’m taking is that regardless of when a boy gets married it won’t greatly effect the course of his life. From the POV of a young bloke growing up in one of those suffocating societies he is probably going to jump at the chance of marriage, arranged or not, as it’s about the only way he’ll ever get a root.

    The girl however, is almost certain to fall pregnant & that is the stone cold end of any options she may have unless baby production, cook & punching bag is the sum of her wish list.

    I’m well aware of what feminists have done to society but I still consider that we can do better than turn back the clock to the days of child marriages if we want to sort out the problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Kea

    The “right” to what….child marriage & indentured houseslaves?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    When we feel obliged to change our law to suit them them I have a problem.

    Oh I see Johnboy, you did not read the article !

    Some feminist harpy wants to change the law to target them. Currently there is no problem, so some jumped up bitch wants to make one. It is just more preferential legal treatment for women in our already deeply anti-male legal system.

    The bitter man hating harpy, Jackie Blue, is NOT concerned about “people” being forced into marriages, only women. The guys can forget their rights being considered. This is “you go girl” NZ !!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. MT_Tinman (3,092 comments) says:

    I’m with Kea on this.

    I doubt there is even a problem but if there is fix it by one simple measure – ban marriage by children. If necessary, ban cohabitation by children.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    She does have a rather strange haircut I must admit Kea. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    nasska, you are a wimp, trying to play the White Knight. You have been sucked into the “women are helpless victims” thing by your feminist masters. Your lost brother.

    Some of you may understand that the boy has to support the woman and the kid, working like a slave. No escape. But fuck him, he is a guy…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    We probably have to have equal numbers of them on our side as the opposition does on their side! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Kea

    I doubt that I quite measure up to your unflattering description but it’s the net…who cares? :)

    Okay….if it’s possible that the young bloke is being pushed into something he doesn’t want then include him as a candidate for a chat with the judge….I don’t give a stuff.

    My basic contention is that sixteen is far too young an age to commit to a lifelong arrangement & I see no need for the practise to develop in NZ.

    Bugger the cultural sensitivities of the immigrant petals.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    I agree with Kea. You are a wimp nasska! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Okay JB…..you’ve got me. I’ll hand in my man card on Monday. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    I almost became gay with Manolo on the other thread.

    What are you doing tomorrow? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Andrei (2,536 comments) says:

    I also query that a patriarchal society that requires females to be married while they are still children

    Well granted that 21st century Kiwis are slow maturers Nasska but when does exactly childhood end?

    And does “patriarchal” society really mean one where a man takes care of his children and their mother? And not leave it up to nanny state to take on his responsibilities and usurp them in many cases.

    Funny thing is that the one woman the herald could find to illustrate this story was neither born nor married in this country. She was shipped to some unnamed other country for her nuptials and her husband it would seem has never set foot on our soil.

    Still there is nothing MPs like better than passing a new intrusive law that doesn’t actually fix anything……….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Andrei

    I’m uncertain when childhood ends but I’m pretty sure that it’s not on someones sixteenth birthday. Of the sixteen year olds I’ve met (& raised) the boys are immature promises of what they may become & the girls are giggly airheads. The next couple of years is where they develop into adults.

    So a generalised answer would be about eighteen which strangely enough is the age of majority for most things though the fact that they can sign up for HP on a car hardly equates with accepting responsibility for bringing up the next generation.

    As for the “patriarchal” bit I have considerable respect for the man who shoulders responsibility for his own family & tells the state to stick it. The wife & I however, brought up our three & one of our granddaughters without dictating when they should marry or who they should marry.

    It can be done.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    MT_Tinman

    Why ban marriage by 16 and 17 year olds because some are being forced into marriage at that age. All that is required is some attempt to verify no one is being forced into the marriage.

    It’s like banning sex because some women may change their mind and call it rape.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    “It’s like banning sex because some women may change their mind and call it rape.”

    Men never change their minds……sheeesh! :)

    I rest my case folks! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    nasska,

    The DPB was established to provide for women who divorced their husbands, so the children born were provided for (the ex husband paying child support as they were able). It of course also covered widows and women who chose to keep their children after giving birth outside of marriage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    Johnboy, so you have neer sobered up (the mroning after)? Or just never known a sheep that you did not remain fond of.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    SPC is obviously a male! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    SPC. You are such a dick! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    SPC

    Yes, but the question raised (I think) was why someone could qualify for the DPB yet be considered too young to marry. I pointed out that the intention was not to allow the teen mum to do her own thing but rather to provide for the baby.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    kea, I’ll write this slowly … the … DPB … is … not … paid … to … those … under … 18. Teen mothers under 18 do not have the sort of unconditional support (such as the DPB) that makes it an incentive to choose this as a lifestyle choice. And given the new requirement to seek work when the child is 5, the sterotypical view about the DPB is no longer valid.

    And what is the connection to this issue anyway. It is like arguing that as there is no tax on capital gain, this makes tax evasion ethical.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    Johnboy

    I think our friend may be another who has woken up & realised that what he saw was what he’d shagged the night before.

    Many men have gnawed their own arms off when faced with a similar dilemma. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    nasska, fair enough – and the focus is now on the baby, with the expectation that the teen mum under 18 be in teen mother centres and continue education etc and also the spending controls in place.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Johnboy (15,891 comments) says:

    SPC has never been faced with that dilemma. Can’t understand why! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    nasska, kea nailed it, I am too cowardly (to knaw my own arms off).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. SPC (5,532 comments) says:

    Johnboy, it is the higher ethics of the man on the left. We do not get women drunk so they can be exploited, we pretend to be feminists. Then they let us drink with them and they buy their own drinks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Lance (2,614 comments) says:

    Ha ha ha

    Kea is vociferously demanding PC wording.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Steve (North Shore) (4,538 comments) says:

    Almost 800 girls under 18 were married in New Zealand in the past decade, and women’s rights activists believe a number of those marriages were against the will of the brides.

    So that is 80 per year. How many under 18 with 3 sprogs decided not to get married?

    Think about it.

    All of them ffs

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Monique Watson (1,062 comments) says:

    You guys are uckin filarious.
    Personally I never knew a 17 year old chick who couldn’t fuck her way into a better financial position. Never feel sorry for the weaker sex; as it is just possible that we might be cupping your besties with a firm grasp of basic economics.
    Can’t speak for the towel-heads of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Michael (903 comments) says:

    How many aged under 18 marriages are the Cooperite Community on the West Coast responsible for?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Mary Rose (393 comments) says:

    Plenty of women prepared to prostitute themselves to one man, in exchange for shiny baubles, or a passport, or food, Monique.
    You only have to look at the 80-year-old billionaires with their 20-something wives.

    Doesn’t mean it isn’t reasonable to ask kids of school age (boys and girls) if they want to get married or are being forced to against their will.

    I think some posters on KB must have been bitten by a woman when they were a child, or something ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. gump (1,608 comments) says:

    @Kea

    What’s wrong with you? Spending too much time on the MRA sub forums at Reddit?

    The figures are posted above – 798 girls and 174 boys. There is clearly a preponderance of older men marrying younger girls.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    So what this proposed law is saying… is that at age 16 a person can’t be relied upon to decide about marriage for themselves, while our law find them sufficiently mature to:

    – sit a driving test and get a learner driver’s licence

    – leave home if he or she has a place to live and can support himself or herself financially

    – decide which parent he or she wants to live with and whether they want to visit the other one

    – legally consent to sexual activity, both heterosexual and homosexual

    – leave school

    – get a firearms licence

    – give or refuse consent to medical or dental treatment

    – be tested for STDs without the doctor having to tell your parent/guardian if the parent/guardian asks for that information

    – give or refuse consent to treatment for a mental disorder

    – work full-time and be covered by the new entrants wage

    – get a passport without parental consent.

    I’m not sure what I’m opposed to more strongly: forced marriages, or stupid laws that won’t work.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    BTW, I was married young… and I arranged it myself :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    krazykiwi

    ….”I was married young… and I arranged it myself”…..

    A little too much information! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    nasska, If I told you I had some support would that have been better? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. nasska (11,078 comments) says:

    I’m not sure KK…..I didn’t need much support until I was well into my 40’s.

    Now however it’s sildenafil citrate or iceblock sticks with bandaids. Something to do with the early excessive days of sex, drugs & rock’n roll is my guess. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. mara (759 comments) says:

    Perhaps we should also allow female circumcision at age 18. Multiculturalism and all that. Our lawmakers are still too PC to use the M word they REALLY refer to here … Muslim.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    mara, a friend of mine employed a number of Indians. ALL of them were in arranged marriages. ALL were men. They did not choose who they married. My friends first marriage was arranged, she was christian and her husband Buddhist. NONE of them were Muslim. None of my Muslim friends have arranged marriages.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. mara (759 comments) says:

    Kea. I also know Indians who had arranged marriages .. they were consensual, though I concede that some others may not be. It’s the secrecy of some of the Muslim “arrangements” that should concern society, according to a Muslim woman who confides in me. She knows exactly what goes on in Muslim communities here. Also Buddhism does not wish to change our laws to accommodate theirs; Islam does.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    mara, the Muslims are not asking us to change our laws, in this case. Why did you mention it ?

    I have no illusions about what goes on in Muslim communities here. I also have no illusions what goes on in society generally. Like allowing 15 year olds to be mothers, for example.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Here is something to give some of you much needed perspective: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

    Lina Vanessa Medina, from the hamlet of Antacancha (in the Ticrapo District of Peru), gave birth by cesarean section in Lima at age 5 1⁄2.

    Yelizaveta “Liza” Gryshchenko, who had celebrated her 6th birthday several days earlier, gave birth with the aid of forceps and retractors in Kharkov, Ukraine, after being impregnated by her 69-year-old maternal grandfather, a former sailor.

    The 6-year-old known only as “H.” gave birth by cesarean section to a girl weighing 4.19 lb (1.90 kg) at Victoria Zanana Hospital in Delhi. She was initially admitted for what was thought to be an abdominal tumor, as she complained of localized pain in her lower abdomen. Her father said she was 7, but civic records gave her birth date as October 11, 1925, making than 6 years and 7 months old at the time of labor. She had never menstruated and her breasts were still far from being fully developed, yet she was able to breastfeed her child for 9 months.[8]

    Henry Dodd of Rillington, Yorkshire reportedly delivered a baby weighing 7 lb (3.2 kg) to a nine-year-old gir

    Dr. V. I. Pittman of Cadaretta, Mississippi reported to have delivered a boy weighing 7 lb (3.2 kg) to nine-year-old Estelle P.[20] [21] She baptized her baby Cindy Alejandra after….

    Those of you open minded enough to check out the link I provided, will note the large amount of Ten Year Olds giving birth in the USA, the worlds biggest christian church goers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Note that MOST of the kids (remember we are starting at FIVE YEARS OLD here) having babies, are from Christian countries.

    Well fancy that !

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.