if left alone to their own resources , millions of eligible young girls would die from malnutrition if they were not taken in by wealthy or well to do westerners

That is another fine issue to discuss! It wasn't exactly what I was pointing out, but it is an important issue too.

For instance, Masha Allen was adopted from a Russian orphanage by a single American pedophile. He used her sexually since the first day she arrived. Of course all Victims after their discovery claim they never liked it, but many elements in this story do point to her case being one of true sexual abuse. However, certainly after her discovery and that she was sent to a new adoptive home; but maybe even before it when she was living with a sexual abuser; she was probably having a better quality of life than she would have had in the Russian orphanage. She had good access to food, to health services, to fun (remember that she was discovered after pics of her in Orlando Disney got to police) and she had no physical abuse, or if any, much less than she'd have had in Russia from bullies or even authorities supposed to be caregivers. She has a lazy eye: that wasn't born; that was a permanent scar of physical abuse - in Russia, before her adoption.

And we are talking about an extreme case. A pedophile who went to lengths many of us would not be willing or able to go for a girl; and further a pedophile who is believably a sexual abuser who wanted the piece of flesh as much or more than the girl. But it is also extreme from the other side: this was a girl from a middle income country, not from a really poor one; and further a girl who could be monitored by child protection authorities, not a girl who was unknown to any. Even with all the circumstances that could have made it so that her life was good in Russia or bad in America; her life quality still improved with that paperwork and plane trip. So much so that she still wrote a letter to Putin advocating FOR adoption when Uncle Volodya threatened to forbid American adoptions of Russian children after one had been beaten to death by his adoptive parents.

Now multiply it, by many other pedos who are not going to be sexual abusers and who are not going to be deceitful (after all, it is lying when you apply for an adoption when what you want is really a marriage) and by many other children who will be in such dire or direr situations in countries much poorer than Russia.

There is absolutely NOTHING immoral or unnatural about the concept of youthful pregnancy ,because nature's unbreakable and infallible law is "if she can bleed she can breed . " For thousands of years , up until last century , girls were considered ripe enough as soon as they reached men-arch and if this were not natural law then it would not be possible for it to happen .

Agreed. We have become the only species for which fertility isn't the mark of adulthood.

Although... there are many species where fertile adults are sexually inactive.

You know how and why that happens?

Because those fertile adults are not alphas. And only the alphas are allowed to reproduce. And they will fight, to hurt, to maim, and to kill, both the proletarians trying to reproduce, and their offspring if they manage to bring it to term.

An adultist elite has become those alphas. They have banned the proletarians, in this case the young, from reproducing, and will use force to hurt, maim and kill them (both PR campaigns and extensive use of all the repressive capacities of the state and the police apparatus) and their offspring (abortion.)

In all such species, however, what happens is a re-enactment of the last century of Roman Republic. Today's elite crumbles after a coup from today's proletarians. The elite killed, the proletarians become a new elite. Who create their own proletarians. Until the cycle repeats again. We should at least do the coup part.

If antis REALLY wanted to protect childhood and "let girls grow up" they would spend every extra dime they had and limit all their spending to save up to donate all their savings to children's charities ,but since they are NOT doing that , they have no right to complain while doing nothing towards their goal ,

Agreed.

But hypocricy is their goal.

I think that because it isn't something that started yesterday when they may be blind to the consequences of their actions. It started years ago, decades even (if we count when it started in the West itself, more than a whole century,) so they very well know what the consequences are.

As I was researching for this post, I came across several infographics. The level of stupidity, lying, or biased language is already amazing. But I found also that the most defensible possible claims, which are at least prima facie factual, are cases of lying through statistics. Lying by telling prima facie truths. In those cases, there is extensive use of the correlation = causation fallacy and an obvious denial of factors which undermine either side of the correlation, the correlation itself, or the argument behind treating it as a proof of causation.

That is plain dishonesty, scientifically. Criminally so, politically.

putting down people who want a genuine loving relationship with young girls from impovished nations .

Which has created worse strains on their economies too.

It seems everybody forgets that, across all history and every culture, women could have upward social mobility for themselves and their children, by "marrying up," a path that was not available to males.

Sure it may not be the ideal to have upward social mobility through factors that are not meritocratic. But it certainly is better to have some upward social mobility even through non-meritocratic factors than none at all. Westerners, partly in the quest for equality, and partly because they no longer live in that world themselves, have forgotten this.

The pedophile who marries little girls from poor countries and gives them a loving home allows for more kids to be saved then the current policy . It is a moot subject to argue about "harm" caused by such relationships while the alternatives are either shutting down the captialist machine and spending all of their personal money on charities or letting the kids starve to death .

Exactly.

People complain of child marriage; then of child prostitution; then of child labor; then of child recruitment into crime. But for all the moralizing of people who can't even locate where the children live on a map, the children need to eat, need to have a home, need water and shoes, and they are going to go get them even if that bothers those people they've never met and never will.

Even this happens in the West itself with orphans, runaways and throwaways; and even in the West they treat them the same. But it is more patronizing, self-righteos and condescending when spoken about countries with different cultures and where it happens also to children with no family dysfunctionality to speak of.







(In theory this post belongs with the Freedom siggie but since the sub-thread is about the child marriage siggie...)