[Pseudoscience-is-malarkey (OP)]

It is of course legal in most of Asia to purchase a bride (the purchase usually coming in the form of paying the girl's family a dowry). I don't see too many American guys bringing back home brides they purchased, but from what I understand this happens a lot in rich countries like Britain, Germany, Sweden, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and China. A question people have a hard time answering is the legality of it all. Not too many conversations are had on the topic.

The reason why it is allowed, I think, is that the girls are usually 17 or older and they'll tell anyone skeptical the party line: that it is consensual. In Britain, does this not violate the Slave Trade Act of 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833? These girls are not paid a dime of the "dowry" and the decisions/transactions are almost always done without the girl's say (in most of Asia, and other parts of the poverty, non-democratic world, girls are their parent's or guardian's property until they get married).

A lot of us guys in the democratic first world take umbrage with the empowerment of the modern woman, and wish for  a wife who will perform traditional roles, by not talking back, cooking, cleaning, multiplying our seed, sex whenever we want it, in effect giving us validation on our supposed superiority.

[Bored chemist]

"Are mail order brides another form of slavery?"
Not if divorce is an option.
However there's a world of difference between "not technically slavery" and " actually a good thing".

[opportunity]

What does the UN say? Is there a global agency on this already? Or are there cases of people where this works well owing to their "way" of connecting?

I'm thikning if this doesn't work well, it's a way to become a citizen via mail, right? And, um, anyhting else? Lot's of families comes through, right?

[evan_au]

Australia is trying to clamp down on a common practice where young teenage girls go back to the "old country" for a holiday, and to see the cousins and aunties/uncles.

There they are suddenly married to someone they have never met, at an age which is below the age of consent in Australia. Often this man does not meet the ideals that this young girl is looking for in a husband. Often he is a cousin.

This is another form of "mail order brides".

[alancalverd]

I don't see too many American guys bringing back home brides they purchased,

...probably because most Americans have higher moral standards than their president.

[opportunity]

Say this.....I order a bride.....we get married....no sex....she's a citizen....now....there's a few more citizens right, family.....but, like, they're all paying a-provo.....me......

Who pulls that up? The ethics police?

Who's being a slave there? The dude that had no other occupation than to do that to cash himself?

[opportunity]

If this is a game of slavery, do you want either guilt?

I mean, seriously, who knows what's happening, right?

[opportunity]

We elect people to monitor this stuff, right?

[Bored chemist]

Say this.....I order a bride.....we get married....no sex..

Divorce on grounds of non consummation.

[opportunity]

Right, Chaplains.

Yet that even indicates the whole purpose is to "profit" one way or the other regarding an issue, namely courtship and marriage, that is in this topic case given almost no proper planning or appraisal. Something that is given no proper planning or appraisal, especially when it comes to a relationship, is "very" hazardous, as it does away withe the whole idea of "understanding" someone else. "Arranged marriages" by parents is strangely enough a far better option, as at least the parents know a greater process than simple mail-order, right? Yet even more strangely, if a girl of legal age parent's wish is for her to be wedded by mail order, as an "arrangement" because it will benefit the family, despite the outcome, well, technically, is that "slavery" or an "arrangement"? Kingdoms have been doing that sort of thing on a high level for centuries though, right?

[opportunity]

Lets say 600 years ago you are a King of a province somewhere in Europe, as would have been the case, and you're corresponding with another Kingdom via mail, and they offer you a bride per mail as a way that family can gain entry into your Kingdom. Correct me if I am wrong, that usually happened as a way to appease conflict with the bride-Kingdom, to allow her entry into your own, right? Is that "slavery"?

[opportunity]

The sting of that is today is that when guys do that same thing, they're really succumbing to those nations they take as brides, right? Who's the slave?

[opportunity]

I shouldn't say "succumbing", because it is a "fine art" of diplomacy, not to be made "common" else make the idea seem worthless.

[opportunity]

My initial question was, "what does the UN say about this". I mean, they know about high level ways of appeasing war. But on such a common level as the one suggested here, do they draw the line?

[Pseudoscience-is-malarkey (OP)]

What does the UN say? Is there a global agency on this already?

What will the UN do to nations that allow or look the other way in regards to sexual slavery, other than place the issue on their preliminary list of matters to be included in the provisionary docket? Or propose new agenda items for consideration by the Commission on Human Rights? Or recommend member nations to consider proposal 5A in UN resolution 6729533, which outlines the five reasons slavery is bad?

[chris]

Usually it's because they want a passport. It's funny how this "love" only works in one direction - towards rich countries with healthcare systems and a welfare state. Just saying...

[alancalverd]

Portrait of Henry VIII- National Portrait Gallery

This is the earliest dated painting in the National Portrait Gallery’s Collection. Portraits were employed as part of marriage negotiations, especially between royal families. This function continued throughout the sixteenth century. Often the Royal bride and groom met for the first time at the wedding ceremony and the exchange of portraits beforehand was an essential part of the process. There is a well-known story of Henry VIII comparing the portrait from life by Hans Holbein (1497/8-1543) of his potential bride Anne of Cleves with the real thing when he met her. ‘A Flanders mare’, was his outburst, indicating that Royal portraits were sometimes rather too flattering.

All that has happened since is the democratisation of courtship by portrait, supported by the internet and Consumer Rights legislation requiring delivered goods to be "fit for purpose, of merchantable quality, and substantially as advertised".

We still have some way to go, however, in terms of human rights. Just as we insist on euthanasia for all suffering animals except humans, the courts can ban an unfit person from owning or working with other animals but not from marrying a human.

The ethical distinction is a fine one. There is no UK law against an adult offering his/her body for rent, but it is illegal for anyone else to live off such immoral earnings. Outright sale is considered slavery, but there is no limit on the fee an agent can charge for making an introduction that may lead to casual sex, marriage, or nothing at all, as long as the parties consent freely to the transaction.

[opportunity]

I think arranged marriages are different to mail-order.......I say that because there are different ideas in play, right?

[opportunity]

Mail order, in taking what can be ordered via mail, could only be an issue of the state allowing that sort of thing.....with those obvious results allowed.

[opportunity]

Taking responsibility for what is ordered as a nation is the question, right?