Most upsetting lede ever

“A 12-year-old girl was recently arrested for having illicit affairs with men.” Ugh.

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

42 Comments

  1. kissmypineapple
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

    Why doesn’t that read 15 men arrested for raping 12 year old girl?

  2. Caro
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

    I don’t get it, what is she being arrested for? Was she prostituting herself? And even so, why would she be arrested when the greater crime would obviously be the men who were sexually abusing her? I hope it’s just a poorly written article and that the real situation makes a little more sense.

  3. Doug S.
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

    O_O
    At least they’re getting her out of there… :(

  4. dananddanica
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

    this is quite common with the imported “labor” in several wealthy arab states.
    the reporting/article is a bit shaky but the odds on anything happening to those men are quite long.

  5. Hope
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

    I hope it’s just a poorly written article and that the real situation makes a little more sense.
    It’s in Dubai so I’m fairly certain it’s accurate that she’s been arrested too.
    Remember, same country that
    sentenced
    a 19 year old rape victim to 200 lashes.
    But they’re part of the coalition of the willing so we have no reason to fear the way they treat people.

  6. ShelbyWoo
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

    I hope it’s just a poorly written article and that the real situation makes a little more sense.
    It’s the Dubai, so the story is probably correct. The article also said she would be referred to psychiatrist to “check her mental health.” I hope that means they understand the trauma she endured and are worried about the damage, but I’d bet it’s more likely they are trying to determine if she was crazy or not when she was “having sex” with so many men.
    Hope: I agree with you that the article is probably true, but the particular post you linked to took place in Saudi Arabia, not the United Arab Emirates (they do border each other though).

  7. Farhat
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 5:39 pm | Permalink

    Under Islamic laws, its clearly she who has the greater responsibility.

  8. Posted November 30, 2007 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

    Maury often has men on his show who proudly verbally, physically, and sexually abuse their wives and girlfriends. To scare these men straight, Maury sends them to a funeral home, where their wives are waiting for them in coffins. Maury also often has teenage girls who proudly have sex with many men who are twice their age. To scare these girls straight, Maury sends them to jail. He also sends them to the funeral home, where their mothers are waiting in coffins.
    The message: Beating and raping your wife is not a crime. But being raped by men is not only a crime, but it will kill your mother. I’m glad to see the United States is about as progressive as Dubai when it comes to the social norms of sex.

  9. sgzax
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

    The girl and her mother both sound like victims of human trafficking. They’ll likely get little help (and plenty of punishment) from the government, but I hope some international aid organization is closing in now.

  10. Farhat
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 6:28 pm | Permalink

    Yea FEMily, because a TV show is the same place as a place where authorities could imprison you or punish you all the way to stoning you to death. Everything’s fine. Why don’t we fix Maury first before we comment in this kind of thing?

  11. Farhat
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 6:31 pm | Permalink

    Yea FEMily, because a TV show is the same place as a place where authorities could imprison you or punish you all the way to stoning you to death. Everything’s fine. Why don’t we fix Maury first before we comment in this kind of thing?

  12. Laurelyn
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    I would expect this, after the case with the rape victim being punished with 200 lashes, and it would still be vile and wrong, but this girl is 12.
    12. How can she be held accountable?
    I hate this world.

  13. Farhat
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

    Laurelyn: The Islamic code for minimum age for consent derives from what Mohammed did. Mohammed married Aisha when she was 6 and consummated the marriage when she was 9. This is the reason why 9 is widely used in the Islamic world as the minimum age for women for consent to marriage (effectively sex). Being 12 she is quite a bit into adult territory to be granted any sympathy or leniency.

  14. werechick
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

    What part of C-H-I-L-D is so hard for people to understand? She’s a child, by definition, anyone who would touch her is a slimey, pedophile piece of donkey shit. She can’t be a “whore” or whatever word they would choose to use, because this isn’t even any where near consentual sex. This is the serial rape of a child.

  15. piotrek
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

    I understand that Emirates are an oasis of progress compared with Saudi Arabia. As someone noted, the girl will perhaps receive psychiatric help. Even so, effectively Emirates are a caste society, and the girl is a helote.
    From what I understand, the judiciary in Emirates is fully Islamic, like in Saudi Arabia, but the brand of Islam there is not as oppressive. E.g. the girl is Saudi Arabia had the sentence increased from 90 lashes to 200 lashes for critising the court to media.
    Dubai tries to be a bit “progressive” because they are not an oil rich emirate, instead they are a bussness center relying on being much more open to the West than the neighboring oil rich country. (Historically, they were a regional center of smugglers and pirates, so now, naturally, they are international experts on port security, do you recall when they almost got in charge of port security in USA?) The chief problem is that a minority has money and rights (or with what passes for rights in an absolute monarchy), and majority consists on immigrant laborers with no citizenship and no permanent residence rights, with many being illegal. A paradize for a rich pervert.

  16. Devil's Advocate
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, it’s wrong on many levels. I don’t agree on the “most upsetting” part though, BBC had an article yesterday about an 11-month-old girl who died following a rape in DRC. I have to say that one upset me a little more.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7119567.stm

  17. Laurelyn
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

    She may have been considered an adult by religious standpoint, but if she’s ‘been used to sleeping with men since she was 10″ her vulva probably hadnt even developed into something that was safe to be penetrated, let alone even start menstruation. I respect people’s faiths, but you cannot hold a child (by scientific and natural terms) accountable for being raped by a plethora of men. Even if the faith of the country considers her an adult, it is obvious she hasnt developed into one, and no story, no matter how sacred, is going to change that.

  18. Posted November 30, 2007 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

    Yea FEMily, because a TV show is the same place as a place where authorities could imprison you or punish you all the way to stoning you to death. Everything’s fine. Why don’t we fix Maury first before we comment in this kind of thing?
    Give me a break. Don’t get your thong in a freaking knot, okay? You know damn well I wasn’t saying that one was more important than the other. In fact, I never rate oppressions because what happens in a country like the United States, one that is supposed to be the role model of other countries and one that imposes its values on other countries, does influence the world.
    And you’re one to talk. You didn’t comment at all on the sexism of the story. All you commented on what the Islamic law is, not even whether you agreed with it, and on my post. You obviously thought that was more important than commenting on the actual issue. Don’t be a hypocrite.

  19. Farhat
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 9:25 pm | Permalink

    If you aren’t comparing situations then why bring Maury up at all except to make the real thing appear not so bad in comparison? What does statutory rape in one country have to do with a TV show in another?

  20. sgzax
    Posted November 30, 2007 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

    It really is a pot/kettle situation. You only post when you have the opportunity to say something to the effect of “Islam bad.” I didn’t really agree with FEMily’s juxtaposition either, but you used this horror to flog your pet issue.

  21. Posted December 1, 2007 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

    That’s insane.
    I don’t know why–obviously it doesn’t help the girl–but for some reason these two statements seemed like a relief. Largely because as of late I half expected the men to testify against her, and the police to let everyone else who was complicit go free, or something:

    The official said the mother and the men are also under custody.
    The official said it is the first time police came across such a case.

  22. Farhat
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

    sgzax: If there is a way to check someone’s history use that, I’ve posted on a number of other issues. This one is close to me so I do post more when such as issue comes up.
    Sailorman: Unless the men are immigrant labor as well, I am sure they are already free.

  23. BluePencils
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 2:19 pm | Permalink

    Ugh, that’s horrible. But I doubt it’s all that unusual. Foreign prostitutes are common in many Islamic nations. I spent time in Syria after the fall of the Soviet Union, and I–tall and blonde–was frequently mistaken for one of the many Eastern European prostitutes in Damascus and Aleppo at that time.
    That said, having read this, I’m pretty sure they had to arrest the girl. To us, she’s an abused child, but she was definitely breaking the law–we would arrest a twelve-year-old who had just shot someone. But that doesn’t mean she’s going to be punished as if she were an adult. Just reading the article it’s obvious she was being pimped by her mother, and the fact that they sent her to a psychiatrist hopefully shows that they think she’s not really responsible. It’s not as if they routinely check the mental health of an adult prostitute. Still, who knows what will happen to this girl. Nothing good, unless someone helps her. Her mother will be jailed and/or deported–and if they don’t know who her father is, she has no right to be in the country.

  24. Mina
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

    “I would expect this, after the case with the rape victim being punished with 200 lashes, and it would still be vile and wrong, but this girl is 12.
    12. How can she be held accountable?”
    I suspect this has something to do with the “you got your period so you’re a woman now!!!” attitude.
    “She may have been considered an adult by religious standpoint, but if she’s ‘been used to sleeping with men since she was 10′ her vulva probably hadnt even developed into something that was safe to be penetrated, let alone even start menstruation.”
    Unfortunately some people think physical reality only applies when someone’s culture’s custom gives it permission to apply.
    You know, like when people think the increased risk of inbreeding from birth defects only happens in cultures that don’t encourage double cousins to marry each other (as if recessive genes somehow know and care about those traditions)…

  25. badnfluence
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    Yes, she is clearly still a child who was taken advantage of against her will. However, under Islamic law, she is a woman (and they probably consider her more at fault than the men who raped her). This serves to emphasize that the traditional Islamic laws are incompatible with modern life and modern concepts of morality and need to be changed. It doesn’t have anything to do with the “you got your period so now you’re a woman” attitude. It has to do with morally bankrupt laws based on what some “prophet” may or may not have done many centuries ago.
    The message: Beating and raping your wife is not a crime. But being raped by men is not only a crime, but it will kill your mother.
    FEMily — Putting a 12-year old girl in prison for a few hours is going to have much more of a shock effect than doing the same to a 30-year old man (who may already have a prison record already given that he has a penchant for abuse). The message is not that beating and raping your wife is not a crime, it’s that these are fundamentally immoral and hurtful, and may lead to your wife’s death, which is obviously far worse than a crime. Furthermore, you yourself state that the teenagers “proudly have sex” with men far older than themselves–therefore it is not “rape”, but statutory rape, which is completely different. Obviously both the teenager and the older men are at fault, but Maury only has access to the teenager, who he is trying to “scare straight”. I never thought I would defend trash TV, but your twisted logic to make Maury seem like a rape apologist has zero credibility.

  26. Mina
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

    “This serves to emphasize that the traditional Islamic laws are incompatible with modern life and modern concepts of morality and need to be changed. It doesn’t have anything to do with the ‘you got your period so now you’re a woman’ attitude.”
    Traditional Islamic law didn’t come out of nowhere. It came from people, some of whom probably had that attitude.

  27. EG
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

    Statutory rape is, in fact, rape. Putting your dick in someone who cannot meaningfully consent because she is not of an age at which her consent can be meaningful is no different, morally, from putting your dick in someone who cannot meaningfully consent because she’s passed out. In both cases, you have a man taking advantage of an overwhelming power disparity to get off.

  28. Hope
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 10:46 pm | Permalink

    Just wanted to post my apologies for linking to a post not about the United Arab Emirates but about Saudi Arabia instead. I was thinking of Duba when I heard Dubai. I wish my geography was better. Thanks for catching the slip Shelby.

  29. badnfluence
    Posted December 1, 2007 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

    Traditional Islamic law didn’t come out of nowhere. It came from people, some of whom probably had that attitude.
    It doesn’t have anything to do with attitudes–it came from sycophantic followers of ONE man, a supposed “prophet”, who wanted to marry a 9 year old girl (which, ipso facto, made it ok to have sex with 9-year olds, him being a prophet and whatnot). Note also that the vast majority of 9 year olds HAVEN’T HAD A PERIOD YET.
    Statutory rape is, in fact, rape.
    It is obviously wrong for an older man to have sex with an underage girl with or without her consent. However, you cannot tell me there is no meaningful difference between forceably raping a girl, and statutorily raping a teenager who wants to have sex. Any MORON can see there is a world of difference. Furthermore, who are YOU to say that the consent given by the girls on Maury wasn’t meaningful? Is it because they are younger than an arbitrary age of consent picked by the patriarchical legislators who make your laws? Or is it because you wish to label every man over 18 who has sex with a consenting 17-year old girl not a statutory rapist, but a flat-out RAPIST?

  30. EG
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 12:03 am | Permalink

    Excuse me? Did you just call me a moron? Really? That’s classy.
    I do label grown men who have sex with minors “rapists,” because that is what they are.

  31. Mina
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 12:23 am | Permalink

    “It doesn’t have anything to do with attitudes–it came from sycophantic followers of ONE man, a supposed ‘prophet’, who wanted to marry a 9 year old girl (which, ipso facto, made it ok to have sex with 9-year olds, him being a prophet and whatnot).”
    You say that as if he, whoever had custody of the girl, and whoever else in charge in their society let them get away with marrying or marrying off a 9-year-old didn’t have any attitudes before the wedding.

  32. badnfluence
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 1:36 am | Permalink

    EG-
    Do you stick your fingers in your ears and simply repeat yourself whenever you cannot form a coherent rebuttal? Moron it is then…
    Mina-
    When quoting me, you conveniently left out the part about how 9 year olds don’t have periods. It has nothing to do with “you got your period so you’re a woman now!!!” attitude, and everything to do with fundamentalist Muslims thinking women and girls are flat out inferior.

  33. EG
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 2:10 am | Permalink

    And I’d show you the respect of reasoned argument because…you call me names?
    I have a little sister already, thanks. Do go away.

  34. Mina
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    “When quoting me, you conveniently left out the part about how 9 year olds don’t have periods.”
    A few 9-year-olds do, and in some Sharia areas the minimum age for marriage is 9 years or whenever the parents can get a doctor’s note verifying that the kid reached menarche (whichever comes second).
    “It has nothing to do with ‘you got your period so you’re a woman now!!!’ attitude, and everything to do with fundamentalist Muslims thinking women and girls are flat out inferior.”
    There you go again, assuming that the manner in which Muslim fundamentalists treat women and girls as inferior came out of a vacuum instead of having anything to do with any attitudes common in the society in which the religion was founded.

  35. Farhat
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

    There you go again, assuming that the manner in which Muslim fundamentalists treat women and girls as inferior came out of a vacuum instead of having anything to do with any attitudes common in the society in which the religion was founded.
    And that excuses them how?

  36. Mina
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

    “‘There you go again, assuming that the manner in which Muslim fundamentalists treat women and girls as inferior came out of a vacuum instead of having anything to do with any attitudes common in the society in which the religion was founded.’
    “And that excuses them how?”
    It *doesn’t* excuse them at all.
    I don’t have to approve of an idea to wonder where someone got it from. I can easily wonder “where did those assholes get that stupid and cruel idea…?”

  37. Farhat
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

    I think we can try to ask people to drop a stupid idea regardless of where it came from. Also, one might suppose that 14 centuries is a long enough time for people to make some progress or alternatively their religion in that time as acting as a reinforcer to those beliefs.

  38. Mina
    Posted December 2, 2007 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

    “I think we can try to ask people to drop a stupid idea regardless of where it came from.”
    I totally agree!
    “Also, one might suppose that 14 centuries is a long enough time for people to make some progress or alternatively their religion in that time as acting as a reinforcer to those beliefs.”
    One would hope so.

  39. Doug S.
    Posted December 4, 2007 at 5:50 am | Permalink

    The oldest oppression is probably that of children. Other oppressions are frequently justified by declaring that the oppressed are “like children” in that they are incapable of making correct decisions on their own.
    If a 15 year old and a 30 year old, neither of whom are in a position of direct authority over the other, want to have sex, why should we use the force of the law to stop them?
    Why is a 17 year old genius prevented from voting while an 80 year old with dementia is not?
    In Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, Juliet was 13. Alexander “the Great” was 18 when he led an army and conquered much of the world. Adolescence is not a “natural” stage of life; it is a creation of modern industrial civilization. Throughout history, people have been doing great things at ages that today would get them labeled less than an adult.
    For more information:
    http://psychologytoday.com/articles/index.php?term=pto-20070302-000002&page=1
    http://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-Adolescence-Rediscovering-Adult/dp/188495670X
    Sorry about the rant, but youth rights is one of my pet issues. Oh, and for the record, I’m currently 25 going on 16. :P

  40. Mina
    Posted December 4, 2007 at 6:04 am | Permalink

    “If a 15 year old and a 30 year old, neither of whom are in a position of direct authority over the other, want to have sex, why should we use the force of the law to stop them?”
    To err on the side of caution, just in case the 15-year-old is saying “yes” to sex with the 30-year-old because she or he can’t afford to leave the parents or guardians who *are* in a position of direct authority over her or him yet…which includes the authority to keep corporally punishing her or him until she or he caves in and stops refusing to follow their orders. Even if their orders include sex with the 30-year-old “good provider” they picked for her or him.

  41. Mina
    Posted December 4, 2007 at 6:45 am | Permalink
  42. Doug S.
    Posted December 4, 2007 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

    To err on the side of caution, just in case the 15-year-old is saying “yes” to sex with the 30-year-old because she or he can’t afford to leave the parents or guardians who *are* in a position of direct authority over her or him yet…which includes the authority to keep corporally punishing her or him until she or he caves in and stops refusing to follow their orders. Even if their orders include sex with the 30-year-old “good provider” they picked for her or him.
    That sounds like something that can happen at any age. Age is no guarantee of economic independence (should employers who have sex with their employees be charged with statutory rape?), and anyone can be threatened with violence. I suppose the legality of corporal punishment of minors complicates things, though; my current opinion is that parents should not be allowed to inflict punishments that courts cannot inflict upon criminals.
    In general, any freedom that an irresponsible 25 year old should have, a responsible 15 year old should also have.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

213 queries. 1.447 seconds