THE recent death of 13-year old Yemeni child bride Elham Assi, who reportedly bled to death recently after being tied down and raped by her 23-year-old husband, has sparked outrage among human rights activists in Yemen.
Sheik Mohammed Hamzi
Their anger was compounded when, shortly after, an 11-year-old girl who was married to a man in the country’s Hajja province was hospitalised with genital injuries.
The girl was married last year only under the condition that her adult husband would wait until she reached puberty to consummate the marriage. He did not wait – nor do many of the men who marry young brides, said Amal Basha, director of the Arabic Sisters Forum.
According to the LA Times, protesters are now stepping up their lobbying efforts to push for the implementation of a child marriage ban.
But that may prove a daunting challenge since fierce opposition against a ban on child brides still runs high among some religious leaders and conservatives.
Sheik Mohammed Hamzi, an official of the Islamist Yemeni opposition party Islaah and the imam of the Al-Rahman mosque in the Yemeni capital of Sana, is one of the dolts who can’t see what all the fuss is about.
Although he emphasises that a woman should not get married before she is physically and mentally ready, and that she herself needs to accept the marriage, he believes a law that prohibits child marriage violates the rights of men … or randy teenage boys.
I am against the child marriage law because it restrains the freedom of others. When a certain age [for marriage] is set, it violates the rights of others. For example, imagine a young man of 13 or 14 years of age who wants to have sex. … This is a violation of his rights.
Hazmi claims that women’s- and children’s-rights activists are putting a few isolated cases of child marriage in the spotlight to rally support for the law.
There is no problem here with child marriage. These cases of young girls getting married are exceptions. These organizations that are promoting for this law couldn’t find any examples except for those of Nujoud Ali [the 9-year-old who demanded a divorce from her 30-something husband] and Elham.
However, statistics indicate that an estimated 50 percent of women in Yemen are married before age 18, some as young as 8.
Yemeni women demand an end to child marriages
He added that groups campaigning for the law were harmful to the country, trying to promote a “Western agenda” in Yemen.
It’s all a Western agenda they are following. They get paid from the West to make us to believe in Western culture. This is very bad because our culture is different here … No one wants to marry these women’s-rights activists anyway. They’re just depressed that they are not married, and jealous.
Last week, representatives from various rights groups and independent activists met at the Women’ Media Forum, or WMF, in Sana to discuss ways to convince supporters of child marriage to back a proposal to set the mimum age for marriage at 17.
Lawmakers in February 2009 set the age limit for marriage at 17, but the law was repealed and returned to the Yemeni parliament’s constitutional committee for review after some lawmakers objected to it and billed the law un-Islamic. The committee is expected to make a final decision on the law later this month.
Hat tip: BarrieJohn
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
April 21st, 2010 at 9:37 am
Here we go again, the nasty westerners want to impose their beliefs, values, morals on us nice mussies. Now they wouldn’t dream of trying anything like that…would they? At least what they see as our impositions are in the name of common decency and in the name of humanity, not in the name of some sky fairy and the obliteration of all sense, reason and TRUE freedom. Makes me so angry as a father.
April 21st, 2010 at 9:51 am
Appalling simply appalling but then I’m a women who is ‘just depressed that they are not married, and jealous’ and it’s not my place to violate the rights of a man. Are you sure being gay is not something you can chose because I’d pay real money to be able too chose right now.
April 21st, 2010 at 9:56 am
My first thought was that they’re still stuck in the bloody stone age but that’s not fair. For all I know stone age tribes were more civilised than we think. These people are unique in their depraved savagery.
April 21st, 2010 at 11:06 am
“it violates the rights of others. For example, imagine a young man of 13 or 14 years of age who wants to have sex. … This is a violation of his rights.”
Sothat’s it! back in my teenage years my rights were being violated! I knew it. I was a victim. Who do I sue?
Al: this all stems from the behaviour of the prophet, the perfect example of virtuous conduct that all good muslims should strive to emulate. He “married” Ayesha when she was six and virtuously waited until she was nine before having sex with teh lucky girl. Of course he did have another wife or two to dally with while he waited for Ayesha to be all grown up. Barbarians.
April 21st, 2010 at 11:40 am
What about the lads who fancy a pork pie and a pint? Their rights are violated too – but for ever.
April 21st, 2010 at 12:55 pm
The international blame-game is on! Clerics of every major religion running amok, blaming outsiders or co-religionists with different views of plotting against them and their precious faith. United Morons of God, all of them.
April 21st, 2010 at 12:56 pm
Quote: “For example, imagine a young man of 13 or 14 years of age who wants to have sex. … This is a violation of his rights”. Nothing about the rights the women then! Of course this is islam, the most misogynistic religion of all where men are free to rape and abuse, and women blamed for “allowing” them.
April 21st, 2010 at 1:17 pm
At least it is now clear that basic human rights are “un-Islamic”. He’s made that much plain.
April 21st, 2010 at 1:54 pm
I don’t want to go into this nut’s arguments, but I notice he’s wearing a watch and his jacket seems to have a zipper and buttons! Shouldn’t stuff like that be against his culture as well? Another pick and choose religious nut.
April 21st, 2010 at 2:17 pm
“it violates the rights of others. For example, imagine a young man of 13 or 14 years of age who wants to have sex. … This is a violation of his rights.”
well have sex then! you don’t have to marry to do that. daft muslims!
April 21st, 2010 at 2:44 pm
It’s funny that the guy mentions 13 and 14 year old boys wanting to have sex but the only people who are of less than acceptable Western marriageable age are the girls.
It just makes me sick.
April 21st, 2010 at 4:32 pm
That Mohammed Hamzi is a real charmer, isn’t he? There he squats on his fat arse, dressed in his ridiculous fancy dress, stupid decorative dagger stuck down his front and looking as smug and self righteous as he no doubt feels. Immam is he? He is also a prime example of the scrapings of the human family; the detritus of of the species; the human equivalent of dog shit that any decent person would scrape from their shoe.
This man is about as low as it gets.
April 21st, 2010 at 5:12 pm
wow what a stud muffin! I’m hugely jealous and depressed that at 43 i’m probably at least 35 years too late to bag a prize like him!
April 21st, 2010 at 5:55 pm
My first reaction to turds of Hitler shit like this sheik is that what the world really needs is an airborne AIDS virus that can only be neutralized by eating a corned beef and ham sandwich that has been marinated in white rum. But then I realize that such a virus would only kill the sincerely brainwashed, since hypocrites like the sheik, who are the real enemies of the human race, would not hesitate to take the cure. So another good idea shot down in flames.
April 21st, 2010 at 6:25 pm
When one rightfully criticizes Islam for, say, child abuse, some leftists immediately argue that we have similar problems with Christian fundies as well, as if that somehow justified Islamic “fundamentalism” (more like moderatism by Yemeni standards). However, they’re missing the fundamental difference between the West and the Muslim world which is that we don’t revere our pedophiles or advocates of paedophilia such as this Hamzi sob. Our pedophiles, abortion doctor killers and rapists are in jail, not running the show.
April 21st, 2010 at 7:44 pm
I believe that a few years back there was another evil western plot to eradicate polio. This evil plot had a pretty good chance of succeeding but fortunately there were enough Muzzy clerics around to warn people against allowing the evil west to poison their children with their evil vaccine and so save the day. As a result polio is still with us in certain parts of the world.
April 21st, 2010 at 8:47 pm
I hope he moves suddenly and that dagger cuts his dick off. I saw a post on a news site once where some western-born woman who had been living in Libya or some such place for years. She was pleading with people to stop calling Mo a pedophile, and she tried to describe the relationship he had with Ayesha (sp?) as being wonderfully romantic and blah blah blah, he waited for her to hit puberty and blah blah blah, and girls of that age were frequently married all over the world at the time and blah blah fucking blah.
I was wondering if this bitch had talked to a 9-year old girl. Romance is easy when they are that young because, at least the ones I’ve known, are thinking about their weddings and future husbands and fantasizing about all that bullshit; pretty easy target for somebody with no morals or ethics. I also wondered what she did until she hit puberty, seems like a waste of a large chunk of her formative years. And yes, back then Europeans and others married that young, one of the reasons we put an age of consent in the law books. Most 16-year olds know shit about the world, which is why we have the special term “statutory rape”, because the elder is supposed to know better.
April 21st, 2010 at 8:55 pm
What ridiculous things to say. Some of these people really do need a separate gene pool to swim in.
April 21st, 2010 at 10:31 pm
My mother was 16 when she got married, and she stayed with my father until he died. She is and was a harpie, fundamentalist, presumptuous bitch, but they made it work.
I know a woman who was married at 14, another fundamentalist, had five kids, her doctor gives her enough pills to keep her convinced that she’s happy.
We the wise western world. The state of Washington has a law on the books that no one is allowed to have sex until they’re eighteen on penalty of prison. The idiots imagine that legislation is more powerful than hormones. Yemen doesn’t have a monopoly on shitwits.
The state of Utah still has a law on the books against oral sex, even between married couples. That’s a giant leap into modern thought.
Not so long ago, children were being married here,too. The “sweet sixteen” tradition was a coming of age, and putting the girl on the open market. In Hispanic countries, the quinsenera is the same, only at age 15.
While I agree that age 8 is ridiculous for marriage, and no eight year old has the ability to consent to a contract of marriage, I think some thought has to be given to the fact that throwing stones endangers our glass house. Maybe the murder of a child bride, or the sexual assault of a child bride should be prosecuted as murder and rape, and not try to put the society on trial.
But, on the other hand, quoting the threadhead:
” but the law was repealed and returned to the Yemeni parliament’s constitutional committee for review after some lawmakers objected to it and billed the law un-Islamic.”
That gives me pause. Do they think somehow that Islam requires them to marry toddlers? And can’t thirteen year old boys, stripped of their rights, just jack off? It worked for me.
NeoWolfe
April 21st, 2010 at 11:42 pm
Islam = male rights. Sorry, rites, of course. Anything else is blasphemy.
April 22nd, 2010 at 12:56 am
NeoWolfe – If we wait until we have completely cleaned our own house, we won’t ever be able to stand up for others. How many people do you know who have never done wrong, even by their own standards? (Sociopaths notwithstanding). Still, order must be kept, and greater injustices may be fought alongside lesser ones.
April 22nd, 2010 at 2:11 am
Janstice,
Shouldn’t we figure out what we believe in before we go to war for it?? No one wants to see a child murdered and buried like garbage. No one wants to see a child raped by her legal husband.
The fact is that those with herims of wives and concubines, throughout history, were property of the rich. Farmboys got to fuck their hands. Like the “lost boys” of Utah. It isn’t right.
Probably, the prime focus should be on women’s rights, but as western society sounds it’s horn, we have a really bad past, too.
Weird, though, the more rights we give to women, the higher the divorce rate goes. That’s not an opinion, its more like a punchline that makes me double over with laughter as we wise westerners try to teach the world how to live.
NeoWolfe
April 22nd, 2010 at 4:24 am
The way you write this gives the impression that 50% of the population are bestowing rights on the other 50%.
Wouldn’t it be more correct to say something like ‘The more success that women have in being recognised as equal citizens…etc.
April 22nd, 2010 at 4:27 am
This is a response to NeoWolfe:
You stated how amusing it is that the more rights women receive, the higher the divorce rate goes. Perhaps one should review exactly what marriage has meant and continues to mean for most women in order to understand why women, once given full human rights and the means by which to support themselves and their children, coupled with the social stigma and religious prohibition on divorce being lowered, would leave such an institution. Marriage meant a civil death for women. They lost their names, heritage, right to own property, make decisions about their own bodies, etc. Today women are still considered the property of men, yes, even in the West. When was the last time you heard of a man taking his wife’s surname? And yet when a woman choses to retain her name she is viewed as being manhating and a harpie.I love men and am very happily married, but I understand why many women would not be happy in a union where they are consider, by law, inferior and little better than children for life. Why are women divorcing when they receive their rights? Much like why rock stars marry supermodels: because they can.
April 22nd, 2010 at 5:58 am
I wonder if muzzies marry pre-pubescent children in order to guarantee themselves a virgin? We know how important that level of certainty is to them.
The husbands are told they must wait until their child brides are physically able to consumate the marriage. The many that do not have become paedphiles who I believe are more likely to marry a girl once more.
A muzzipaed could load his conveyor belt every few years to ensure a regular supply of fresh meat. I bet his interest wanes when his current squeeze manages to grow tits.
April 22nd, 2010 at 7:37 am
“it violates the rights of others. For example, imagine a young man of 13 or 14 years of age who wants to have sex. … This is a violation of his rights.â€
What rights? Don’t these boys learn what their left hand is for?
April 22nd, 2010 at 7:46 am
@NeoWolfe:
I agree with Urmensch. You have it backwards. Truth is, the more independent, self-reliant and confident we women become, the less willing we are to remain in a hopeless relationship.
Keeping women barefoot and pregnant while the man is out enjoying his life meant that she had no choice.
In the world of Islam she has to pay him to give her a divorce, while he can throw her penniless onto the street any time he feels like it. When a women’s rights activist suggested giving her the same right, the men went OTT with disgust. A women deciding her own fate! Consensual sex – what is the world coming to.
As to teaching them “how to live”, would you stand by and watch your neighbour beat up a child because “it is none of your business”?
Of course, if you were being ironic – sorry.
April 22nd, 2010 at 10:08 am
As always, I am misunderstood. But, that’s okay. If I could write a book as each post, maybe I could be more clear. What I meant is the “law of unintended consequences.” I support women’s rights, in the home and in the workplace. But, western civilization is on uncharted ground, and as we move toward what appears to be right and just, repercussions occur. One of the most profound is divorce. And children in a single parent home, or children in a divided home is not a good thing, generating yet another wave of repercussions.
I am no guru, I cannot see the answer. I just think it is prudent not to become arrogant and pretend we have the answer. Then project our ideas upon other cultures, or judge them by our standards, because our capitalism has resulted in a shadow government of the rich, and our social standards have resulted in broken homes. When we can prove our system works, then we can play “high and mighty”.
NeoWolfe
April 22nd, 2010 at 10:21 am
@NeoWolfe:
As the product of a so-called “broken home”, I can assure that a huge sigh of heartfelt relief was the reaction for all involved – children and other relations.
Maybe if divorce was less ‘messy’ and people less possessive, the word “broken” would no longer apply.
Of course, you are right, this is not a perfect world and we do not have all the answers. But while there may be any number of good choices – and each person should choose their own – there is one reoccurring evil: slavery! Whatever you call it, a non-consensual, inescapable ‘marriage’ is slavery. Add rape and of course us women’s libers are going to start shouting.
It just makes me rabid that so many people consider being polite or tolerant to slave-owners and slave-traders is more important than freeing the slaves.
(my rant of the day)
April 22nd, 2010 at 11:00 am
gsw,
Ah, slavery. The US is the posterboy of embarrassment on the subject. Not only did we legalize the purchase of Africans, we decimated the native American population in our expansionism. NOW!!! we represent ourselves as the example for the world of tolerance and rational behavior. Meanwhile, the supreme court decides that multi-billion dollar corporations can contribute unlimited funds to political campaigns. Progress?
Freethinkers understand that getting rid of religion, while a major step in the right direction, is not the end of the issue of the human condition. We are left with our greed, our racism, and our selfishness. I can’t fix the world, but I learned to laugh at how unforgiveably stupid we are while we pride ourselves in how smart we are.
NeoWolfe
April 26th, 2010 at 11:22 am
It goes without saying that this cleric is a crack pot of considerable stature.
The question that really struck me when reading of the true horrors of child marriage and rape, however, was how can something this morally reprehensible not attract more public dissent in Yemen considering 50% of women are married off by the age of 17? Why does it take the West and some brave feminist activists to challenge these ugly preconceptions of female and child rights?
As evidenced in this article, I think the male dominated conservative element in Yemen play upon an ‘us and them’ mentality which castigates anything remotely ‘western’ or progressive as an absolute and default infringement on Arabic and Islamic values and culture. Through this lens, stronger moral and political tenets can be dismissed out of hand as invasive and conspiratorial.
But to frivolously appropriate the belief that women should be able to choose their husbands and that young girls should not be allowed to be put into positions where they could be abused in the worst ways possible to ‘the West’ is insulting. It would also be the patronising position of a cultural relativist. And yet these values hold currency in many places outside of Europe and America, and (without wanting to sound too vitriolic) should be practised everywhere.
Unfortunately, this is just one of a catalogue of civil rights issues that have plagued the ultra-conservative Islamic states in recent years. As the perceived threat of the West has heightened, so has the regression into archaic cultural and religious traits, behaviours and signifiers. Whilst this battle of ideas is ultimately a political one – religion has undoubtedly made a resolution much harder. When one side thinks their world views are sacred and unchanging, middle ground is scarce and progress slow. The victims of this stagnation are the future generations of girls subject to this most abusive of traditions.
May 24th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
NeoWolfe,
As I scrolled down the comments (before I got to your brave thoughts), I couldn’t help but worry about the reactions to this story which is itself sensationally biased against the whole of a culture we simply do not understand. The crime needs to be brought out into the open but it should not be an excuse to make assumptions about an entire culture we have no motivation to comprehend.
No doubt the assumption will be made here that I don’t care about these poor girls who so suffered at the hands of mal adjusted mentalities (regardless of religion or culture). I do care, and I don’t want their suffering to be lost on any of us.
To that point I worry about us too, about the escalation of blanket prejudice from us -an increasingly secularized West toward religion and in particular Islamic culture. I keep looking for the principles of worldly intelligence (that we think of ourselves as having here in the West) within our arguments, but despair of finding much evidence of it anywhere. Then, you spoke and I heard a rational voice in the system. Unfortunately, what you tried to say got lost to a secondary point.
What I want to offer here, is that in India, children also marry. But then they return to their parents house until they reach a certain age… for the girl I believe it is puberty, and for the boy when he has a dwelling to provide is wife. If I have the conditions wrong, someone will let me know, I hope.
Anyway, it does seem that the issue shouldn’t be whether or not children should marry as that is a cultural precedent. What may be a more to the point (and effective for world focus) is how to protect married children until such a time when they are physically capable of performing the duties of marriage. Puberty notwithstanding, mental maturity will be a bit different from culture to culture and should be viewed within the sensibilities of that culture. This is, after all, what we in the west expect for ourselves. The crux of implementing change, especially within a culture that is not our own (and in a sense none of our business) is that we have to respect the culture since so much of any individual is wrapped up in their culture and their own people.
And, if we are working to protect those who cannot protect themselves, then we need to work within the framework of change already set in motion by members within that culture. The correct goal should not be to westernize anyone, particularly those who reject westernisation as is their human right. A better approach might be to actually educate ourselves about the culture in question and to be open about how best to help it (uniquely) continue to rise to its own highest level. And, to do so with full humility, aware that we too struggle everyday to rise to our own cultural ideals.