IMHO, moral absolutism is perilous within a society, all the more so when applied by one society to another. Ultimately I do and always will hold individual self-determination higher than any tradition, my own or others, but I also acknowledge that means nothing unless individuals are free to uphold traditions I myself find distasteful. Now one could argue that young women and men do not know any better and rely on their parents, which is part of how tradition propagates. The problem with arguing against a tradition by saying people only follow it because they’ve been indoctrinated is that it leads easily to arguments by false consciousness which between cultures has been used to excuse forcing a more “civilized” culture on “savages” who were said not to know any better. In my opinion, a tradition will prosper or fail on its own merits when the people it belongs to are given access to education and economic opportunity.
I’m not asking this sarcastically, but did you watch the entire video? If you truly believe this is slavery, then Article 4 would apply. But that seems like a very unrealistic assessment of the practice shown in the video.
As @some_guy mentions, Article 16 seems far more relevant.
I kind of felt that the speed-dating comparison was a bit off, despite some similarities. This is watered-down arranged marriage from what I saw.
