I can tell you're upset, but it's hard to understand what you're arguing for with those last two points.
> 1. Let's not pretend that young people... don't make their own terrible decisions too. Look at the divorce rate and the rates of reported DV in the West.
Do you believe that there will be happier marriages and less domestic violence when brides are 16 years old and have little to no agency in choosing who marries them? It seems like your argument should be that people should be more careful in choosing who they marry, not less.
> 2. The Western way ("love marriage" + "women must work or the family will be in poverty") has led to most Western countries being on a downward spiral to literal extinction...
This is just literal ignorance on your part. In every country in the world, higher quality of life (wealth, education, longevity, etc.) has lead to a decrease in population. This is not correlated to "love marriage" or "women must work or the family will be in poverty" -- indeed, women in less developed countries work more hours than their peers in developed countries, though often in the informal sector.
I get that European- and US-based writers often assume their own culture's ideas are best. But your arguments are doing nothing to refute the article. Rather than adding to the discourse, you just seem like you're standing on a soapbox against women having agency.
alt Hacker News
I can tell you're upset, but it's hard to understand what you're arguing for with those last two points.
> 1. Let's not pretend that young people... don't make their own terrible decisions too. Look at the divorce rate and the rates of reported DV in the West.
Do you believe that there will be happier marriages and less domestic violence when brides are 16 years old and have little to no agency in choosing who marries them? It seems like your argument should be that people should be more careful in choosing who they marry, not less.
> 2. The Western way ("love marriage" + "women must work or the family will be in poverty") has led to most Western countries being on a downward spiral to literal extinction...
This is just literal ignorance on your part. In every country in the world, higher quality of life (wealth, education, longevity, etc.) has lead to a decrease in population. This is not correlated to "love marriage" or "women must work or the family will be in poverty" -- indeed, women in less developed countries work more hours than their peers in developed countries, though often in the informal sector.
I get that European- and US-based writers often assume their own culture's ideas are best. But your arguments are doing nothing to refute the article. Rather than adding to the discourse, you just seem like you're standing on a soapbox against women having agency.