Considering her culture's attitude toward females, it may very well be that she was old enough to be married, but, being female, would be treated as a child all her life.
Yeah, I think that's one of the complications here - discrimination and abuse don't draw much distinction between girls and adult women, so it makes sense for "women's rights" to encompass both of them. I guess "female humans" would remove the ambiguity, but to my ear that sounds a bit... impersonal, maybe?
And thanks for being so understanding - looking back, I can see that it wasn't at all clear from my original post that the scope of what I was saying wasn't the same as the scope of the article that provoked it. If that makes any sense.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-11-08 12:27 am (UTC)Yeah, I think that's one of the complications here - discrimination and abuse don't draw much distinction between girls and adult women, so it makes sense for "women's rights" to encompass both of them. I guess "female humans" would remove the ambiguity, but to my ear that sounds a bit... impersonal, maybe?
And thanks for being so understanding - looking back, I can see that it wasn't at all clear from my original post that the scope of what I was saying wasn't the same as the scope of the article that provoked it. If that makes any sense.