Does Marrying a 9 Year Old Makes You a Pedophile?
The moral line between what makes you a pedophile and what doesn’t.
Are you a pedophile if you married a 17 year old teen? or let’s say a 9 year old teenager? Where do we draw the line,
What’s a pedophile?
A pedophile, by Google’s definition, is someone who finds children sexually attractive. Or, it’s someone who rapes or molests a child whether he/she finds them attractive or not.
Well, what is a child?
A child is someone who’s during the period of childhood. Childhood, by all credible definitions, is the period from infancy until puberty. [This is an important definition.]
Whereas, Teenhood or Teenage-hood, is the period right after puberty starts until the end of puberty, which is right before adulthood. And consecutively, Adulthood, is the period after puberty until old age and death.
Okay, but what is puberty?
Puberty by all biological definitions: is the instance in which adolescents reach *sexual functionality* and become capable of reproduction. The period during which adolescents experinces physical chnages that reach to sexual matuirity.
So, by this definition (and biological facts), anyone who reaches puberty has reached sexual maturity to the capability of sexual reproduction. When girls’ bodies release unfertilized eggs (oocytes) and boys’ bodies start to ejaculate seminal fluids involuntarily in their sleep.
Now, it’s a known fact that girls (on rare cases) do reach puberty as early as 7–8 years old, with the average of 12 years old, which means the majority of girls reach puberty/teenhood at 12 years old. Boys however reach puberty as early as 10 years old, while their average is 14 years old. So, the beginning of teenage-hood varies from boys to girls, girls mature both physically and mentally much faster than boys, almost 3 years earlier. Mind you that the brain doesn’t get fully developed until very late at the age of 25 for both genders. Not 17, not 21, but mid 20’s or even early 30’s. So if you’re younger than 25, your brain is yet to be fully mature. That’s a biological fact.
Now, Does that mean we shouldn’t marry anyone until they are 30 or late twenties so they are mentally mature for such a decision? Is it wrong to marry if your brain is yet to be fully mature? And is it immoral to marry while our brains are still growing and developing?….
Well, No, Marriage isn’t dependent on our brain’s *full* development, but on our sexual functionality and mental *maturity*, which happens way way before the brain’s full development. Which is factual, all of us are very mature years before we reach 30. And by “Mature” I mean, having the mental capabilities to be rational, take calculated decisions of responsibility, and bare the consequences of such decisions and actions. This capability is attained (by majority) in late-teenage years, when we are roughly 15–18 years old. It’s not new to us that teenagers can be very very responsible, which is a sign of maturity.
One of you might wonder, “how can we be mentally mature while our brain’s isn’t yet fully developed?” Well, those two are not mutually contradictory, we can chew food when our teeth are not fully developed, just like we can show clear signs of maturity whilst our brain is developing. You (dear reader) are probably a proof of that if you’re younger than 25. You know that you have clear signs of mature knowing that your brain isn’t fully developed. Even a 12 year old can show grand signs of maturity, that’s both a psychological and social fact.
So, reaching sexual functionality and mentally mature immediately validates you for marriage, by mere logic. And we can tell if someone is sexually functional if they can sexually reproduce offspring, (which is during puberty), and we can tell that they are mentally mature if they act responsible by their own free well. And that’s easily attained by the majority of teen at the age of 15 , and (on exceptional cases) much much younger.
We now know that the brain isn’t fully developed until mid 20’s or late 30’s; however, what is indeed fully developed -for the teleological purpose of marriage- are the sperm cells, eggs, penis, uterus, and other sexual organs. The egg literally “waits” to be fertilized by a sperm to impregnate the teenage girl. At the age of 8! Yes it’s shocking, but biological facts don’t care much about our emotions. The female body at the age of 8 or 9 (literally) sends an eggs into the womb to be fertilized by a mature man with his sperms to impregnate the young teenager, that’s the natural argument. When the uterus fails to find a sperm, it “cries” blood, in what we call “the menstrual cycle” . That male sperm-giver can be of any age from 12 (which is the earliest age of sperms production) ‘till old age.
So, biologically, if a man wants to marry a young female at that age, it’s biologically fine, on the condition that she is mentally and physically mature enough for marriage. If she wasn’t biologically and mentally mature enough to be a wife, she mustn’t be wedded. But if she was indeed exceptionally mature both mentally and physically -for the marital lifestyle, then there’s nothing wrong or immoral for her to marry any man no matter the age, and vise versa. I’ll say that again, both biologically and morally, a mature man (of any age) can marry a mature teen (of any age, even 9 or 10) if they are both *mentally mature to consent*, the government doesn’t dictate who is and who isn’t mature, because everyone matures in different years. Although the government doesn’t take its legal repercussions in allowing or disallowing such marriages. So, teenagers certainly can’t wed themselves willingly, because not all teenagers are exceptionally mature at such a young age… some are, but the vast majority aren’t. Therefore, all teenagers can only marry by parental consent, or in some rare cases, by a judicial consent. That means both adult parents must give their “adult consent” to the teenage marriages of their sons and daughters. This alone protects teenagers of both genders (who are not yet mature) from being manipulated or brainwashed to marry someone older.
Some might raise the biological argument that pregnancy for teenagers is both painful and fatal. And that’s true, but no girl at the age of 20 or above ever said that pregnancy is not painful or not dangerous. All pregnancies are hard and painful for all women of all ages. So that’s not an argument. It is a valid argument however that teen pregnancies are *more* painful and fatal for the mother and child when giving birth at that age, which is true, but a big increasing portion of them don’t even go through it naturally, more and more girls are preform the C-section operations, where the mother goes to the hospital, gets sedated, and then wakes up with her child in her hands; something which teenage women as well could perform (and are performing). By stating that, I’m not advocating for teenage pregnancies, I’m only pointing out possible alternatives for such marriages. In fact, I’m absolutely against all teen pregnancies until the age of 18, and I think everyone should be. However, that’s not our discussion, our discussion is the validity of such a marriage. Pregnancies don’t hinder the argument for marriage, becuase we all know that the union of a *marriage* between a man and a women isn’t for the purpose of (early) pregnancies or producing children. It’s essentially for the intimate, mental, sexual, and social union of two couples, Facilitating children is only the manifestation of that union. Rarely one ever says “I want to marry you for the purpose of children. And after I have them, I don’t need to stay married to you.” That’s comical. (I do -however- acknowledge the rare minority of girls who buy sperms for the goal of having a child, but I’m not talking about such anomalies, I’m talking about the marriage/intimate union of two individuals.)
So.. the assumption that -dangerous teen pregnancies is an argument that refutes teen marriage- is absolutely invalid, its not a moral argument, it’s a precaution. Just like unwanted pregnancies (in adult marriages) is also a precaution. We already know that teenagers can have sex enjoyably at the age of 9 till 18, because, they already do. We even expect them to be mature, responsible and carful when they do, by giving them the full responsibility to do it and use protection methods. It’s a social fact. — Now, answer me this, how is (unwanted) teen pregnancies in marriages different than (unwanted) teen pregnancies outside of marriage during experimental sex.., other than the age difference of course, which isn’t a problem biologically speaking. Both are done by sex and both could lead to accidental pregnancies. One is a socially acceptable short term relationship, and the other is a long term relationship which could easily be broken any time by divorce.
If one still believes that teen marriages is wrong because of the potential (harmful) pregnancy on teens, then they should also believe that teenage relationship below the age of 18 are all wrong because of the potential harmful teen pregnancy. However, most modern societies and their individuals don’t think it’s wrong. In fact, it’s the social norm in most of modern societies, for example ~83% of girls in the U.K said they started to have (promiscuous) sex somewhere form the age of 12–15 years old, whereas 12% of them said they had sex before they even turned 12 years old. That’s a total of 95%, which means roughly 95% of girls in the UK have had teenage sex before they turned 16. So, modern societies by majority have no problem with teenage intimate relationships, that if the age gap in these teen relationship is just a few years. So the problem here seems to be the age gap rather than the long term commitment, so if an adult man in his 30’s or 40’s married a teen, somehow that’s socially wrong, even though (biological speaking) the uterus doesn’t discriminate an old penis from a young penis. So, the only remaining “problem” is not the physical age difference but the mental age difference, the difference in knowledge, maturity, and intelligence, all of which are not -in any way- a problem. On the contrary, having a more mature intelligent significant other is a reassuring sign of financial security, marital assurity and social stability.
Let me state again, that I’m not arguing for the moral validity of teen pregnancies, but for teen marriages, those two shouldn’t necessarily collide. I established that the teenage wife must be mature enough both mentally and emotionally for the marital life, and the responsibilities surrounding sex and pregnancy. If she’s not mature or responsible, then she’s unqualified for marriage for lack of maturity and her parents should never consent to that marriage, and the law should never allow it.
This concludes that, If a man in his thirties or forties married an *exceptionally mature* 9 or 10 year old teenager (with medical precautions), that’s biologically and morally permissible, it doesn’t mean that thst man is a pedophile or attracted to children. A pedophile by definition: is someone who sexualizes children. And we already proved by logical definitions and empirical facts that children are those who have yet to reach puberty, the sexual maturity to reproduce offspring, and we all know that all teenagers can (and already) reproduce offspring, even if it’s socially frowned upon by societal standards. So consecutively, marrying a teenager is not in anyway wrong or correlated to pedophilia, equating the two is a false equivalence fallacy. And I’ll be proving this main conclusion both legally and statistically.
Marrying a teenager is permissible (legal) worldwide by the majority of countries, whereas molesting or sexualizing a child is completely illegal and absolutely revolting both intrinsically and socially worldwide. So, you can clearly see the legal and societal difference between the two.
The majority of countries on earth (if not all) allow the marriage of teenagers, but they only differ at what age that consensual marriage should be. Legally, when it comes to teen marriages, there are two ways such marriages could be permitted, either by judicial consent or by parental consent. That means, if two couples want to marry and one of them (or both of them) are teenagers, then they can only marry themselves at the age of 18 for the majority of countries. But! when it comes to parental consent, that legal age drops to 11 years old and varies a lot from one country to another. Now I’ll prove these facts with a few stats which I think are crucial to know.
Until 1885, the legal minimum age of consent (for sex) in the U.S. for more than half of the states -was 10 years old. Meaning a 10 year old girl can agree to have sex with a stranger legally. Today however they raised it just 3 years. For example, the minimum legal age of consensual sex In Minnesota for both girls and boys is 13. The minimum legal age for (promiscuous) sex today in Spain is also 13. Whereas in Italy, Germany, Austria, it’s 14. For France, Sweden, Denmark and Sweden, the legal minimum age is 15. And as you’ll see in the map below, there is no clear consensus to what exact age a girl should be able to consent for having sex, it varies from 10 years old all the way to 18.
So, deductively, it’s illogical and contradictory to believe that a teenage girl can consent to having sex with 5 or 50 different strange men from the age of 10 or 13 till old age, but (somehow) can’t consent to marry one man till old age.. ? How is that logical? Consent comes form mental maturity and self-responsibility. If you’re mature enough to be responsible enough to give consent (to sex, for example) then you’re mature enough to be responsible enough to give consent to other things. consent is an act of maturity and self-responsiblity.
Logically, Since the majority of modern societies agree by law that teenagers at the age of 12 or 13 have the mental and physical maturity for sex (and it’s ramifications) and have relationships with several men if they want, then, consecutively, they can also handle having a marital relationship with *one* man in a loving marriage. This is logically factual, it needs not any convincing.
What’s affable however is that the majority of countries on earth allows girls at the age of 13 to consent to having consensual sex with many men, but somehow they can’t have a law-abiding marriage with one of them? The world is basically telling young girls to have promiscuous sex with how many men they want, even if it’s a hundred, but don’t have a loving marital relationship with one of them, until the age of 18.. That’s not logical..,, and as you can see in the figure blow: (The only logical exceptions are Saudi Arabia, the U.S, and Yamen)
You can notice again that there’s is clearly no definite/exact legal (or moral) agreement to the minimum age for marriage. Again, because countries don’t know what is specifically required of a person to be wed, so they put 18 for the age of independency, which is the beginning of adulthood, the legal age for alcohol and other accountabilities. But it’s utterly unfounded. You need not to be an adult to marry, both biologically, mentally, and socially. In fact all those countries (in green) allow teen marriage, but the conditions of parental consent, which Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and the U.S also abide by.
When it comes to marriages by parental consent or a judge, the minimum legal age drops drastically in all countries. For example, the minimum legal age for marriage (by parental consent or a judge) in Massachusetts is 12 years old, whereas in New Hampshire it’s 13.
When you take the total average for the minimum legal age of marriage, by parental consent, in the 50 most modern countries in the world, you find that the average age to be 13.5 years old. So you can conclude that the majority of other 3rd way countries on earth allow the marriage of girls and boys roughly at ~13 years old. Some of those 50 countries have the minimum at exactly 13 years old, but the majority of those countries agree on the age of 12, mind you that there are some at the age of 11. Notice the Red and yellow:
So you can clearly see that countries by majority allow the marriage of a 12 (or 11) year old girl to marry a man any age if her parents agree to the marriage by law. And again, it’s obvious by the map above that there is no clear consensus to the exact minimum age for marriage by parental consent. It varies from 11 years old to 19 years old. Hence, there’s no consensus for -when a girl is thought to be mature enough to marry or mature enough to have consensual sex. It’s both based on speculations. Because they don’t know what are the specific basis for such judgment.
My take on it is strictly biological and psychological, not legal, if the female body is ready to be fertilized by a male sperm, then she’s biologically ready for sex/marriage, on the condition she is mentally mature and responsible for a martial life, only the parents that raised her know how mature and responsible she is for the marital lifestyle. Which means, if the teen girl doesn’t act mature, and most of her acts are childish or lack responsibility, then she isn’t ready for sex or marriage. Whether she’s 10, 18, or even 25. Because the only condition for a marital life is physical, sexual and mental maturity, which could occurs from the age of 9 (on rare exceptions) until old age.
So, for a teen (even as young as 9) can be married to a man any age to the conditions that they are both physically, sexually, and mentally mature for a marital lifestyle; moreover, the parents of the teenage girl must consent to such a marriage by law, if there is no parental or judicial consent, or not all conditions are met, then the marriage should be illegal, and punishable.
Leaving social expectations aside along with our fickle emotions and societal standards that varies from one society to another. There’s nothing morally, biologically or legally wrong with a man in his 30's, 40’s or even 50's to marry an 8 or 9 year old, given the validation of the three strict conditions above. Our emotions might not take this fact easily, but emotions are fickle and not always true, they are majorly effected by some form of societal conditioning, active or subconscious, by the norm, or the media, or societal traditions.
— the teenage wife can grow more and more mature during the marriage than she was before, because we all grow more mature and responsible with marriage, a teenager is no different. The teen wife has the ability to divorce her husband whenever she want to if she grew to realize along the way she doesn’t want to be married to the man she’s married to. Marriage isn’t obsolete, marriage isn’t about anything else except intimate, social, and sexual security, and the love between two (mature) individuals. No matter how different that love is.
I’m not advocating for child marriage, because a teen is not a child, and a child is not a teen. Those two are mutually exclusive, equating the two is a “false equivalence fallacy” that refutes your argument immediately.
What’s really shocking, and quite detesting, is that most states in the U.S have no age floor whatsoever for marriage by parental consent, which means a man can legally marry an actual child at the age of 8 or much younger if the parents of the child agreed to it. That’s basic raping someone who has yet to reach sexual maturity. That’s pedophilia.
Luckily however, no marriage ever actually took place for such instances, but, it does seem to be permissible, which is utterly revolting.
The minimum age of marriages and the cases that were actually recorded (thank god) are all teenage marriages with 12 years old teenagers, by parental consent. Which is fine in all aspects.
To conclude the soul of this essay,, Teenage marriages are permissible, biologically supported, and legal in the majority of countries world wide. Therefore, they *should* be socially acceptable. I’m not saying we should be happy about such marriages, but at least we must be open minded enough to acknowledge that they are morally permissible and there is no serious moral argument against them.
The teenage’s body and biology advocates for procreation, sex, and marriage, and the brain gets mature years before it’s full development, and teenagers can be mentally and emotionally responsible for sex, because they already do, by law, That’s evident by teenagers sex life in western societies (as well as other societies). Consecutively, they are mentally and emotionally mature to marry the one they love given that the parents consent to it. If one assumes that a teen can’t yet consent because they are not adults, remember both parents of the teenager are consenting adult, and can give their adult consent after the teen consents to the marriage, so no teen marriage will ever occur without adult consent, either from her parents or the judge.
Clarifications which I must declare:
I’m not advocating for teen marriages, I’m simply writing an essay, an essay of logical, biological, and statistical facts. I don’t want to marry a 9 year old or young any teen, In fact, I’m against today’s teen marriages below the age of 15. Because most teens todays (specially ones at 9 or 10) are treated like children, and therefore, act like children, even though they are not. Rarely it is the case that a teen is exceptionally mature for a marital lifestyles at the age below 15, both physically, mentally, or emotionally. All I’m stating are the facts that proves there’s nothing *inherently* wrong or immoral with marrying a teen, even if it has some minor, negative predicaments, because all marriages do. But I am wholeheartedly against any sexual contact (or even thoughts) with a child or someone who hasn’t yet reached puberty or sexual functionality. And just to easy the hearts of some emotional readers out there, you can relax, I‘m planning to marry an adult, someone above the age of 18, inshallah.
Feel free to drop any questions or comments about this subject, I’m welling to answer any question or debate any point about this matter.
Thanks for reading till the end,
If you benefited from this article, follow for more, recommend it ♥️, & share it with the world.
Twitter: @Feras_H_ Modern Thinker💡™
… Peace 🌼✌🏼.