Thread: Гендерные меньшинства

Originally Posted by hddscan

On the contrary it's very "on-topic", you brought sexual minorities term here and I think it is very important to understand what it is.
When anybody starts talking about sexual minorities the first thing that comes to mind is gay people, it's a hot topic in modern societies. However if anybody acknowledges that gay people are sexual minority and they should have same social right as heterosexuals(I believe you , Lampada, is one of so called "pro-gay" people) it begs a question, what about other sexual minorities? Should they have the same social rights as gays? And if no then why not? If no then wouldn't it mean that gays are somewhat superior than other sexual minorities? Wouldn't it be hypocrisy? And if gays are "socially superior" wouldn't it endanger other sexual minorities and maybe eventually the majority too?

All of your questions are easily resolved if we assume that,

a) Family in legal terms is represented by a couple of two, of the age of consent or higher.
b) The sexual orientation of anyone (either gay or straight) is what they're born with, with no possibility to ever change it.

A lot of social and biological studies conclude a) to be the optimal pick, and prove b) correct.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

All of your questions are easily resolved if we assume that,

a) Family in legal terms is represented by a couple of two, of the age of consent or higher.

why?
I mean why two and why age limit? Both of these statements are not true for some countries. Also some countries state that family is only possible between a man and a woman.
So why anybody would need to accept exactly your statement and not a statement of other social groups.
In other words who gets to decide the universal true answer on such a question: what is a family?

I'll give you a real life example:
There are European countries that allow gay marriages and gay people have no discrimination whatsoever in such countries.
There was an event in Chechnya recently where about 50 years old man took a second wife who was 17 years old. That event got highlighted even in Western press.
Those European countries are genuinely shocked: the age difference, the second wife, it's all unacceptable in those countries. When they are told that it's ok in Chechnya they call it barbaric.
The question is if Chechens call European countries barbaric because such countries have wide gay rights, who is truly correct in this? European countries or Chechnya and who gets to decide?

Originally Posted by hddscan

I'll give you a real life example:
There was an event in Chechnya recently where about 50 years old man took a second wife who was 17 years old. That event got highlighted even in Western press.

Originally Posted by hddscan

Russia does have a law prohibiting polygamy.

Do you not see a little flaw in your logic here?
Maybe Western press highlighted this event because this marriage was against the law (Russian law) and law did nothing about it. Does Russia allow everybody to flout its laws, or do only select few can do it? Who is responsible for enforcing this law in Russia and how is it enforced in this particular case?

Originally Posted by Milanya

Do you not see a little flaw in your logic here?
Maybe Western press highlighted this event because this marriage was against the law (Russian law) and law did nothing about it. Does Russia allow everybody to flout its laws, or do only select few can do it? Who is responsible for enforcing this law in Russia and how is it enforced in this particular case?

I must have written it a little bit differently, like that:
There was an event in Chechnya recently where about 50 years old man allegedly took a second wife who was 17 years old. That event got highlighted even in Western press.

But again to the point:
Russia has a law prohibiting gay marriages and gets bashed by Western press for not allowing it
Russia has a law prohibiting polygamy and gets bashed by Western press for? IDK, for allowing it?
I've recently found a picture that describes the situation perfectly

Originally Posted by hddscan

why?
I mean why two and why age limit? Both of these statements are not true for some countries. Also some countries state that family is only possible between a man and a woman.
So why anybody would need to accept exactly your statement and not a statement of other social groups.
In other words who gets to decide the universal true answer on such a question: what is a family?

I'll give you a real life example:
There are European countries that allow gay marriages and gay people have no discrimination whatsoever in such countries.
There was an event in Chechnya recently where about 50 years old man took a second wife who was 17 years old. That event got highlighted even in Western press.
Those European countries are genuinely shocked: the age difference, the second wife, it's all unacceptable in those countries. When they are told that it's ok in Chechnya they call it barbaric.
The question is if Chechens call European countries barbaric because such countries have wide gay rights, who is truly correct in this? European countries or Chechnya and who gets to decide?

I see what you're trying to say, and I agree with you and Croc. I did push my personal opinion on this, which I shouldn't have done after all. Alright, if we were to restate it this way, that "a family is an union of n people of the age of consent or higher, (where n belongs in [1; infinity), each of which is willingly and knowingly part of it", would it be closer to what it should be? =))

As for your example, I think what's causing so many talks in the media is that,

1. The girl is underage.
2. A lot of people would doubt it's her good will to marry that guy, unless she specifically likes old men.
3. Although it might be completely legal by the local law, many just find it so unusual (even realizing it might be legal), that they can't help discussing it everywhere.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

3. Although it might be completely legal by the local law

Here we go again. It is not legal.

Originally Posted by hddscan

Russia does have a law prohibiting polygamy

Nobody kicks a fuss when a sultan of a country where polygamy is legal takes his fourth wife.

Originally Posted by Milanya

Here we go again. It is not legal.

Well, that even strengthens that point. And I just assumed it might be, but I wasn't saying it was.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

I see what you're trying to say, and I agree with you and Croc. I did push my personal opinion on this, which I shouldn't have done after all. Alright, if we were to restate it this way, that "a family is an union of n people of the age of consent or higher, (where n belongs in [1; infinity), each of which is willingly and knowingly part of it", would it be closer to what it should be? =))

yes, I think theoretically the universal answer should look very similar to what you write.

However let's look through a prism of behavior on three social groups:
One group is ok with polygamy but not ok with gays
Another group is ok with gays but not ok with polygamy
And last group is not ok with either polygamy or gays

Taking the universal approach we could conclude that all three groups are wrong and one group shouldn't have more "rights to say" on the family subject than any other. Since neither of the groups would admit that its believes are wrong I could only conclude that believing in a "right family" is somewhat a belief, a religion in a sense.
Thus if one group is forcing its "religion" to other groups it essentially violates human rights of people in other groups. It is somewhat similar to what ISIS does.

It also shows how it happens in a real world: Russia, as a whole, prohibits polygamy and would not register a polygamy family on paper. But since Chechnya has a long history of polygamy and it's socially acceptable there, Russia itself wouldn't resist much in unofficial marriages. (as for 17yo girl, it's actually completely legal by Russian law)

let's take the US as another example: many marriages in the US are concluded in churches but a church does not issue a marriage certificate, thus making it unofficial marriage. To get it official people would need to register in a Clerk's office - and it's an official marriage. It's exactly the same thing as in Chechnya/Russia

Originally Posted by Eric C.

1. The girl is underage.

That is highly questionable. For example, according to the US marriage laws, you can marry at 17 as long as you have parental consent. Would you really believe in a muslim place like Chechnya a marriage could have been settled without parental consent?

Originally Posted by Eric C.

2. A lot of people would doubt it's her good will to marry that guy, unless she specifically likes old men.

What kind of proof do you think would suffice in order to address those concerns? After all, she openly said "I do" in some way, so...

Originally Posted by Eric C.

3. Although it might be completely legal by the local law, many just find it so unusual (even realizing it might be legal), that they can't help discussing it everywhere.

I think the more realistic reason for discussion is that is not how the European customs are. And since, obviously, the European customs are the best of its kind and hold the true cause of every wish of all people for all time and all places, ergo..

Originally Posted by Crocodile

I think the more realistic reason for discussion is that is not how the European customs are.

Please do not confuse law and customs.

Would you really believe in a Muslim place like Chechnya

If it is a part of Russia it lives by Russian law, it it is not a part of Russia ...why so many lives on both sides were sacrificed?

Originally Posted by Milanya

Please do not confuse law and customs.

If you wanna go by strict law then nothing illegal has happened
1. 17 years is a legal age in Russia in special cases (I believe in some Russian republics minimal age is actually 14 years). It is a special case, because parents agree.
2. Russia wouldn't register polygamy marriages, AFAIK it didn't happen on paper, because he was married unofficially with his first wife (thus not married by Russian law)
3. Age difference is not illegal

So what we have as a reaction in media is "unacceptable customs" not laws.

Originally Posted by Milanya

Please do not confuse law and customs.

I think I can confuse those to some degree. The laws get their legitimacy by the public consent which is primarily based on the customs. When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Originally Posted by Milanya

If it is a part of Russia it lives by Russian law, it it is not a part of Russia ...why so many lives on both sides were sacrificed?

Nice question, but I'm not the one who could properly answer that since I haven't fought those wars. The only thing I could say on the case is that in a typical Western country a male has no legal limit on how many stable sexual contacts meaningful relationships he could have and how many children would be born as a result. The male would have financial obligations to support all of those children and their mothers, despite the fact that legally the male and those females are as close as the "separated couple". Speaking of which. If a man is married three times and have kids with all his divorced wifes, he is legally obliged to support all of them. Both cases are a de-facto polygamy acceptable (and rather widely spread) in the Western countries. If you're interested, I could give my opinion on the monogamy (which I like), but that would be another discussion, I guess..

Originally Posted by Eric C.

I did push my personal opinion on this, which I shouldn't have done after all.

I personally think expressing your personal opinion is the best thing you could do. I truly do not appreciate people expressing someone else's propaganda which I could easily get elsewhere. And, since the source of the propaganda is often practically unreachable, there could be no productive discussion.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

All of your questions are easily resolved if we assume that,

a) Family in legal terms is represented by a couple of two, of the age of consent or higher.
b) The sexual orientation of anyone (either gay or straight) is what they're born with, with no possibility to ever change it.

A lot of social and biological studies conclude a) to be the optimal pick, and prove b) correct.

I think both assumptions are arbitrary and alas can't serve a basis to anything, really. With respect to A, if more than two persons of the age of consent want to be a familty, what makes you rule them out in such conclusive manner? With respect to B, please have a look at Bisexuality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia to widen your horizonts a bit.