Parentally Sponsored Marriage
I suppose some staticians see little difference between statutory rape and a traditional marriage. I read reports citing statistics of teen pregnancy which made no mention of whether any of these girls were married to the father of the child. Other studies delved into the "older male", citing it as a "social concern" but admitting that most of the teen pregnancies were with a teen male. Another article described "older male's" relationships with teenage girls, whether resulting in pregnancy or not, as "exploitative". It might be considered that our culture's abhorrence of "teen pregnancy" might have little to do with a concern for the future of the marriage institution; it rather could have something to do with matriarchal jealousy of the young female, female resentment against males in general, and competition among males for females within coeducational socialization creating resentment against males who compete outside the coeducational cultural structure "unfairly".
There could also be a bit of "population" paranoia involved in a general push toward high culture and marriage postponement. Our constricted economic power makes it difficult for us to deal with procreation- we are bottled up in cities and commutervilles with high ambitions and constricted opportunities. But I have tried to suggest that at least some of this is not a "population" problem as much as it is a relocation problem, easily solved. Our concerns seem strange when placed next to cultures that have women married in their teens. Perhaps it is partly a population problem. Even so, if young people feel they must practice birth control, why shouldn't they do it as married couples? What is wrong with marriage, anyway? What is wrong with parents helping young people? Is the generation gap inviolate? Has it replaced the hymen? Is a "redneck" culture that "gets 'em married young" really more reprehensible than a "high" culture that "get's em laid?" What is wrong with a girl being a virgin on her wedding night? What is wrong with giving a disciplined young man his traditional cultural reward- a virgin to marry?
People need to have a very clear understanding of the difference between "statutory rape" and the marriage of a seventeen year old girl to a 27 year old young man, where the marriage is parentally approved and sponsored. This neo-traditional marriage model is not "exploitative". Rather, it is the high culture pyramid scheme that is 'exploitative.'
In the neo-traditional marriage, the couple not only are obligated to one another, but are obligated to both sets of parents who support the marriage financially through investments in the man's education and the woman's home, in her REAL estate. "Dowry" is not a dirty world. It became so in a culture deceived by the glamour and salesmanship of the high culture pyramid scheme. Marriages and real estate make far better investments than stocks or exaggerated careers.
Statutory rape is against the girl's parents, the 'investors', as well as the girl's own sanctity. The seducer/rapist also dishonors his own family as well as himself. But a proper marriage of a protected girl of 17 years is honorable and fair and financially feasible. She is married to a proven man who has shown that he is ready to be "invested in"- this sort of marriage is invested with honor and financial support by both sets of parents. But among these gifts, the greatest is the word of blessing by the girl's father, which itself is priceless, recalling the blessing of God from the beginning of human procreation. Such a girl is emotionally secure; she doesn't harass her husband with emotional needs that should have been met by her father, or with emotional baggage from many lovers who dumped her. In a neo-traditional marriage, the parents of the girl, who carefully evaluate the suitor and his family, the parents of the young man, who have guided him away from youthful distraction into this place of responsibility, the young man himself, who has worked and saved money, and the girl herself, who has shown propriety in her youth by trusting her parents: all of these rejoice together; they have a real culture; they care for one another effectively; they are a people blest of God.
Corporate culture profits from its monkishness- the high percentage of singles and of later marriages in its employ. As more and more people push into unrealistic expectations of the higher urban culture and the higher corporate positions, the job market is overloaded and becomes "monkish" and sexually kinky while postponing marriage unduly. As only a few can ride the crest of its greatest opportunities, the many become wayward monks, unable to commit to the moral and financial obligations of marriage and children, and yet unable to remain sexually pure in the environment they have contributed to forming for themselves. We ought to remember that centuries ago the only specialized educated class were celibate monks and "clerics", from which we get our word "clerical". Of course we have greater opportunities today, through industrialization and long distance trade, but even these have a "monkish" growth ceiling in the highly specialized fields of metropolitan areas, and only a pioneer spirit in line with the Biblical mandate to "fill the earth", that is, to create new opportunities for growth in less populated regions, such as the American Midwest, with an emphasis on practical, somewhat less specialized training, will provide the escape from this "monkish" constriction to growth in metropolitan areas, which is felt by the high price of real estate especially. As only some can ride the greatest opportunities in the corporate urban culture, many must postpone marriage. Many end up in financial trouble. Many end up addicted to relationships that are non-procreative and hence not fully committed.
As teenage girls grow into single young women, there is a natural distancing from parental control. As more and more young women seek higher education and careers before marriage, they often bypass their sexual prime altogether or misuse it. They compete with men in the corporate job market, use the corporate community as their base for finding a husband, and take as husbands men who might have married a younger woman if they could. The greater distance from parental control of these young women becomes the envy of the next crop of teenage girls. Independence from the older generation is looked upon as the way to romance. When we consider that families in some cultures are very involved in finding and screening mates for their daughters, we ought to wonder if we are really doing right by our women. Many women in the congested growth of our present emphasis on long distance commerce end up unable to find a husband into their 30's, and they get quite nervous about it, complaining about their "biological clocks", desiring to bear children before they get too old. But they are past the prime of their sexual desirability, and men are often only mildly interested- not enough for marriage commitment. The whole cultural and economic situation created by this makes it natural for educated people who care about the poor and about society in general to decry age difference, to call a 30 year old never married bachelor's attraction to a teenage girl "perverse" and "exploitative". "Teen pregnancy needs to be reduced," we hear people say. Why don't they say "teen pregnancy out of wedlock needs to be reduced"? Clearly, age difference is more scandalous to our culture than teen pregnancy. It used to be very much the other way around. Most teen pregnancy now occurs through fairly similar aged males, 17 to 21. These males are 'getting it when they can' knowing that they will not be afforded the opportunity later. At any rate, the statistics for teen pregnancy show that many a teenage girl has strong sexual and childbearing instincts. Insufficient parental control, guidance, love, and economic help cause teen pregnancies to be misguided, but then so is our whole marriage culture and economic situation. Older young women find themselves in a growth-constricted, long-distance, world-trade culture that must postpone marriage unduly for the female as well as the male, obliging both to work before marriage, and swallowing up profits from labor that could be invested in the next generation.
