World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Ah yes, enforcing norms like 'human rights' and 'consent' on other cultures. So chauvinist! /s
Look, I understand your point. That's exactly why I would like to know is this is supported by actual research or if it's just an "ick, brown people do things differently." Let's face it, BBC has an abysmal history of jingoism, and Australia has a powerful Right Wing. Who sponsored this legislation?
"Brown people"? There are plenty of brown people around the world who don't practice arranged marriage. Also, it was very common in Europe prior to the Enlightenment (I may be off on the exact timing).
It has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with human rights, as the other person said.
Mostly among nobility, given that it was quite similar in different places (e.g. Rome (cum manu) vs. the Germanic tribes (Muntehe)) it's probably something that got imported by the Proto-Indo-Europeans. It never was the sole form of marriage, and much less common to unheard of among people with less political power to inherit.
That form getting outlawed was past enlightenment (16th and 17th century), at least in Germany the right of a woman to annul a forced marriage was considered as established in the 18th century... before that it was probably hit and miss, depending on suzerain, etc. Love marriage becoming the ideal was only in the 19th. That's not to say that people didn't marry for love earlier, but that was the point where economical considerations were put second place at best. Also couples of course have eloped since time immemorial. Also nobles. Say, Mary Tudor.
And then we have to factor inheritance practices into it -- again, in Germany (a, by and large, stem family culture) single heirs were the norm (until that was outlawed you can give a single kid at most 50% of everything nowadays), with the property transfer generally being done while the parents were still alive: Transfer of the estate to a freshly married couple (one of them your kid) in exchange for support in old age, archives are full of transfer contracts like that. If you wanted to marry someone your parents couldn't stand it was very possible to hear "then your younger sibling is going to inherit". The non-inheriting kids would set off elsewhere, get a stipend to learn a trade, become clergy, or be employed by the inheriting sibling.
see edit above
As a practice, it is far more common in south and Central Asia and Africa, and is more culturally significant in those places. However, I was wrong to equate arranged marriage and forced marriage. Australian law makes that distinction, and research supports it.
Fuck your research.
Does each person willingly consent to being in the relationship? Yes or no. That's the only fucking thing we need to know.
Does consent mean something different depending on skin color? The fuck?
Go far enough left or right and y'all MFs care way too much about skin color...
Okaaaaay, you clearly did not look at what I posted.
You seem to be rebutting the idea of legal protections with 'but their culture'.
Pretty close? Is it proper to assume violence is cultural?