At the post-Cabinet media briefing last Thursday, Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley rejected the position adopted by President Carmona that the Chief Justice is entitled to take sabbatical leave.
You are here
TOO EARLY MARRIAGE HAS CONSEQUENCES
An historic victory was won last week when child marriage was prohibited by amendments to the marriage laws of T&T.
This was a victory for the women’s movement, supported by male allies and working across race, class and religion, despite how fraught that can be.
I was relieved both PNM and UNC MPs voted for an amended law. I was sorry the change failed to happen under Kamla Persad-Bissessar as early as 2010.
The call first came from the Hindu Women’s Organisation (HWO) more than six years ago. Organisations such as the IGDS and FPATT became involved by 2013.
Lobbying expanded over the last two years, as a coalition of civil society organizations, including Womantra, Caiso, the Network of NGOs of TT for the Advancement of Women, the Association of Female Executives of T&To (AFETT), the YMCA, Cafra and more, was brought together by Folade Mutota and Winad.
It was discriminatory for girls to be marriageable earlier than boys.
There was no contemporary reason for this other than girls’ sexual vulnerability at a younger age.
The solution isn’t marriage, it’s transforming such vulnerability to older male sexual predation.
That this was overwhelmingly an issue affecting adolescent girls points squarely to how gender inequality leads to denial of full self-determination at a much younger age for girls than boys.
The majority of these marriages were between girls under 16, and boys and men who were, at times, much older.
This is not the Ram and Sita or Romeo and Juliet story of two teen secret lovers nor of their unwed adolescent sexual experimentation, nor of family protection of two secondary students supported to finish both this and tertiary schooling.
Largely working class girls, perhaps with limited educational support or options, and definitely limited prospects for occupational advancement, were experiencing the greatest vulnerability to early sexual initiation by adult men, who usually also had low educational or occupational achievement.
Marriage may have seemed like a secure economic option because an older man promised to look after them.
Perhaps, they were seduced by a feeling of adulthood that sexual relationships bring. Maybe they were in love or escaping oppressive and insecure family conditions, or they got pregnant and marriage seemed the next step.
It’s likely they didn’t have a clue about the compromises, conflicts and responsibilities that come with partnership with a hardback man.
Rather than “the destruction of family life”, what was destroyed was the legal access of adult men to teen girls. This was necessary if we recognise how gender, religion and class unequally impacted thousands from lower-income families.
There were recommendations that teenagers over 16, but within three years of age, be allowed to marry. Such an exception had merit.
That the exception was unfortunately excluded from the legislation is a complicated story about the AG vs the HWO and the coalition.
What happens to the babies of unwed mothers? Families and partners can still love and support them such that teenage girls finish schooling, can secure their own income and can decide what they want out of their lives. A change to the marriage law in no way affects this.
If lack of respectability associated with unwed pregnancy is a major fear, then the solution is to give girls knowledge, support and access to contraception.
Adult hypocrisy, rather than “strict family values”, is at stake here for no one wants girls to have sex, whether by choice and desire or by grooming and predation, without the threat and likelihood of dire consequences. So no one wants to prepare them to protect themselves if they do.
When they are made pregnant, everyone can treat them as if they are responsible for the shame. The solution can’t be marriage to the same adult man who didn’t know or care enough to use condoms or protect a teenage girl’s future freedom in the first place.
Too early pregnancy isn’t a more important issue than too early marriage. Like child sexual abuse, they are consequences of adult failures to acknowledge girls’ sexual vulnerability and empower even poor girls to secure better options.
If we care as much as we say, all the other work must now gain momentum.
User comments posted on this website are the sole views and opinions of the comment writer and are not representative of Guardian Media Limited or its staff.
Guardian Media Limited accepts no liability and will not be held accountable for user comments.
Guardian Media Limited reserves the right to remove, to edit or to censor any comments.
Any content which is considered unsuitable, unlawful or offensive, includes personal details, advertises or promotes products, services or websites or repeats previous comments will be removed.
User profiles registered through fake social media accounts may be deleted without notice.