Ha ha ha ha.....and what diplomatic mission have you applied for?

Well then she will twist my words to make it look like I did.....

+10000

I think we all have been here for a long time and seen the arguments of Alameda..

Apart from supporting  all backwards and primitive behaviours and traditions which we spend almost life time fighting to change, she, even, at some stage, talked about Turkish people´s bad habbit of  not reading books as if it was a good thing!!!.

Of course, you are right.. Most of the arranged marriages impose a degree of force. My parents got married that way.. Arranged marriages were possibly a solution to a society living 100/200 years ago where all the buildings were built as men´s section and women´s section (haremlik-selamlik). It was the way of life and men and women did not mix much for one reason or another. It was the life when the rights of women was not a serious subject (and those braless, non shaving  women were yet to emerge ). Like in ´every society in any given time´, people think sticking to the old way of life they know has a merit or more moral than the new one -more modern one-. Of course, the main reason is the feeling of insecurity with the new way or with the new/ modern way, because it is unknown and not tested. And there is also a comfort of doing the things in the same way as  our parents did: Because their ideas have been tested, they give their consent and their consent gives us some moral support etc..

Basically, those people who try to stick to the existing values or way of life etc are called conservatives. The life and the changes in a society are determined by the fights between people who like to preserve what they have and the ones who want to change it (normally for better). I dont think I need to mention that ´conservatives have always been and will be the losers´.

When it comes to the people living in the east of Turkey and why they are like that, I think the answer will be a simple: The education.. There are serious arguments and proofs that that particular region was left uneducated on purpose.. We all know that when our republic was established we were almost the same.. West and the East were the same.. We also know that the state has been controlling the capital and education etc throughout our republic´s life..When you think why the west has 10.000$ GDP whereas the east has 1000$ GDP NOW in a strongly state controlled country, you will find your answers..

 Well if it isn´t Mr. H trying to get on the slither his way to the good side of DD by slandering me. My, what a brave strong man....I challenge both you and Daydreamer to show your proof...or shut the **** up! You make some very grand statements....I....support "all backwards and primitive behaviours and traditions"

Of course theH has siezed this opportunity to rant on about the oppressed "Eastern Turks"....and all..........

The topic is women cannot marry the men they want, 12, 13, 14 and 15 year old girls who are forced to marry men they did not chose, for god sakes they are still children.  Do those girls get an education?  I don´t think so, they have to performe their matramonial duties...  That means their education is no higher than 5th, 6th or 7th grade 8 if they are really lucky!

To keep the people ignorant is to better controle them, keep them ignorant you can make them beleive the world is flat.  Give them knowledge you give them power.  How do you expect those girls to kow better when they are deprived of the most basic elements in life...  A childhood and an education.

I think this is a rather narrow view of what being conservative is.  I consider myself somewhat conservative but that does not mean that I think its OK for 12 year olds to be forced to marry.  I hold some of my families traditions in very high regard.  They keep me connected to my past, to who I am.  Also, I don´t think that being liberal or modern is always the best path either.  In other words, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.  I strive to hold on to traditions that can still be meaningful yet conform to modern life.  

In my heart I don´t think anyone on this site is condoning what happens to these girls.    

I have been in that site for a long time and I have never witnessed that alameda twists words. She explains herselve well and stands behind whatever she believes.

But, i have seen several times that DD and thehandsom twisted words. Also I have seen they are used to provake their answerers.  

However, even without my previous experiences, i can understand what alameda says clearly. She is against forced marriages but if the groon and bride are willing, she appreciates the parents efforts for the merriage. So do I. The families ideas are important both for Easterns or Westerns. I can´t understand why it is so hard to understand what she says.

But the most important issue on that correspondence is the style. It is ugly to propound some other ones so called ideas. It is double times uglier to insist on a slander if the answerer expresses that she doesn´t think that way.  So why do you insist on that? Why do you force alameda to join the discussion? May be she was not going to say anything on that topic. May be she would. But what makes you feel that you have the right to tell words about her opinions that you don´t actually know?

No DD, thehandsome no. You both get out of the line. You can´t sound off about anyone you want.

And finally, I think alameda is not old fashioned at all! She just have her own respectful way which i feel closer than her answerers ways.

I believe there is nothing wrong with the reaction thehandom has shown. All is in line with the saying:

People with little brains talk about other people.

Normal people talk about happenings.

Intelligent people talk about opinions.

...

Oeince, DD and H are right. Why? I had the same impression of her posts back in the past. I used to hate her for supporting backward customs and traditions. I remember my blood would boil, I suppose not only mine (I reckon GG, Lisa, Cat and many others).

Now, having stated and witnessed all above I call DD not provoke Alameda for "the world peace´s" sake.

I no longer support liberal solutions for family life. Somewhere, you Oeince stated that the West values a family. I strongly disagree with this. Family is not a value anymore, but an individual.

Phew, where do i start?

Alameda - first of all, sorry, if you took my remark as a personal attack. We´ve know each other for a long time, and I thought you got used to my wicked sense of humour. All being said, I still stand by my words, that the difference between arranged and forced is very thin, if there´s any at all, for reasons I stated in my earlier post. Also, let me repeat, I didn´t put these words into your mouth, anyone is free to check our post history where we debate about it.

Vineyards - thank you for the nice words. Worry not, I respect most members on this site regardless of whether we agree or not on most subjects. I´ve always valued Alameda´s input into debates, although 180 degrees different from my point of view, I can see where she´s coming from. Like I said, a bit of teasing on my behalf is a sign of familiarity.

Handsom - thank you for seeing my point. I would only slightly disagree about conservatives, conservatives in the west and in the east differ. While eastern conservatives may be ok with forced marriages and will find it the only system that works for their children, the conservatives in the west would be more about accepting, rather than choosing a spouse for their child. I have to say I am a bit conservative in some respects, not as far as moral conduct is concerned, but in terms of the system of justice or family values.

Elisabeth - just as I wrote to Handsom, there´s a difference between conservative and conservative. Vineyards remembers arranged marriages working one generation above him, I don´t remember it even at the level of my great grandmother on my mum´s side. Still, I don´t know anyone in my family, in my parents generation (they´re in their 50s) who would marry somebody the family didn´t accept. Oh, no! Sorry! My late paternal aunt (19 years older than my father, who´s 58 now) was 14 when a guy asked to marry her. She wasn´t interested but my grandma had a different opinion and would chase her through the village with a leather belt in her hands to change her mind She did, and my aunt married a terrible guy. Luckily for her, the bastard died quite soon. Sorry for the digression. Ahain, I´ll repeat myself, I´m with you on family values, with the restriction that family never comes before reason. If you marry and he is a geebag, divorce instead of being unhappy just for the sake of being married.

Oeince - I don´t think you´ve been following the debates attentively enough. I recommed post search, you´ll then see what we´re talking about.

Lemon - 100% with you on what the values are today. I´d say only few countries in the west put family first, and the definition of a family has changed a lot as well. It can be single-parent family, homosexual family, not always the 2+2 nuclear one. Serial monogamy is still in practice as well as many other types. Surely, it changes on an individual level, but generally I agree with you.