Claire Fahlman

LSJ 366
3/6/17
Child Marriage in Bangladesh: Human Rights and Culture

Child marriage is common in areas of southeast Asia, and Bangladesh

is no exception. In response, the Bangladeshi government has proposed

lowering the minimum age of marriage for girls from 18 to 16 in special

circumstances. (HRW Press Release, p. 1) Many international Non-

governmental organizations (NGOs hereafter) active in the area have

expressed outrage over the proposed change in law, as the marriage of a

child violates her human rights. Local groups, including a theater troupe

called Wedding Busters, meld cultural understanding and international

human rights by speaking to parents directly, as well as performing

educational street shows on the issue. Each different action against child

marriage is due to a different understanding of culture. Sally Merry, author of

Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law into Local

Justice, would find a disjuncture between the understanding of NGOs and

that of the Bangladeshi people due to the anti-cultural worldview of the

transnational elite. Were Merry to choose one response to child marriage, she

would pick the approach of the Wedding Busters, advocating for

internationally-recognized human rights by utilizing local cultural tools.

The disjuncture between the way international NGOs and the

Bangladeshi government understand and approach the issue of child

marriage is due to how the transnational elite view local cultures. Sally Merry

defines cultures as repertoires of ideas and practices that are not

homogenous but continually changing because of contradictions among

them or because new ideas and institutions are adopted by members.

(Merry 11). From this quote, it becomes clear that cultures are not just

changeable, but are instead sets of constantly shifting ideas through which

the world is viewed. Wherever culture exists, there is bound to be conflict

over which members and which narratives hold power. This definition is not

shared by international NGOs. Although the international community is

composed of members from many states, they share more with each other

than they do with locals. For example, most members of the international

community, referred to as the transnational elite by Merry, share a high

level of education. This common background contributes to a sense that the

people they aim to aid are lesser for following backwards cultural norms.

Paradoxically, this anti-cultural view constitutes the culture of the

transnational elite: The fight against culture is a deeply cultural one.

(Merry, 102) In neglecting to see the issue from a local perspective, the

transnational elite fail to understand contributing cultural components and

work in tandem with locals, including the government, to prevent child

marriage.

Regarding child marriage in Bangladesh, Merry would side with the

Wedding Busters, advocating for international human rights by using local

culture. In Human Rights and Gender Violence, Merry describes rights

workers such as the local drama troupe as translators: They are people who

hold a double consciousness, combining both human rights conceptions and

local ways of thinking about grievances. (Merry, 229) These translators are

well versed in local cultures, as well as international human rights, and can

thus communicate with both parties. Instead of discussing child marriage

purely in human rights terms, they understand the forces behind the practice

and use cultural tools to combat them. The troupes combination of door-to-

door outreach and acting has produced hope. As one actor said, if we keep

working at it, I believe that child marriages in our area will come down to

zero. (HRW Video, 8:49) By translating the right of girls to avoid marriage

into culturally functional acting and outreach, the troupes strategy

epitomizes Merrys role of the translator, and is thus the strategy that she

would support.

Although the objection of Human Rights Watch to the proposed change

in the marriage law is understandable, it is too simplistic and ignores the

larger cultural picture behind child marriage. Human Rights Watch and other

NGOs fail to see that many parents do not want to marry their daughters off.

Sharmin, a child bride, describes her familys reluctance to marry her off:

The river took everything that we had. My parents wouldve never let me

get married, but they had to because we became poor. (HRW Video, 0:58-

1:09) For many families such as Sharmins, marriage is not a choice, but

rather the only alternative to subjecting their daughter to extreme poverty.

This is analogous to Merrys analysis of the family law system in India and

the resistance the transnational elite met when advocating for changes.

Indias family law system includes different courts for religions. When the UN
conducted hearings over Indias implementation of CEDAW, they were

unimpressed by the perpetuation of separate religious courts: The experts

noted that ethnic and religious groups tended to maintain patriarchal

traditions and that perpetuating the personal laws of these ethnic and

religious communities was incompatible with womens rights and was a

breach of the convention. (Merry, 111) This view of Indias legal system

ignores the cultural context of sectarian violence the separate courts were

constructed to avoid, and stems from the transnational elites view of culture

as an impediment to progress. When local issues are viewed from the anti-

cultural perspective of the transnational elite, context such as sectarian

violence and poverty is often overlooked.