Debate Three: Marriage

برعاية مركز تك لاين - تعز

Debate Three: Marriage

( debate conducted by Hakim British council trainer and David MAO teacher )

“Are you in favour of arranged marriages? Or do you support the notion that people should fall in love and be free to choose their partners.”

On the 12^th of January 2011, the third debate in our first series of debates was held. The debates, were organised by Hakim a British Council Trainer. He brought in David van Doesburgh a trained Teacher and Barrister. Together a skill set, including persuasive speech and debating skills were presented to the students. Students were guided and encouraged to think critically and outside of their comfort zone. Prior to the debate students worked in small groups to focus their thinking, share ideas and test their skills of persuasion.

The third topic in the series was deliberately chosen for its controversial nature. Once again the group was a mixed group (of 16 students). The ratio of male to female students was roughly 50:50. The students attending were from various parts of the Tiaz Governate, and they represented a diverse cross-section of Yemeni the populace.

The Debate was organised by Hakim, British Council Trainer and chaired by David van Doesburgh, a Barrister from the UK, currently teaching at Mohammed Ali Othman School in Taiz.

Students were now familiar with the principles of debating and making persuasive arguments, but they were encouraged to express their views in the knowledge that they would be respected by all.

An initial poll was taken at the start and it indicated (10 votes for arranged marriages -6 votes against). Initial indication suggested that most of the group were for arranged marriages.

“Personally my eyes were opened to the Muslim culture, and the experiences of both men and women.

The most astonishing fact for me was that a male groom might only find out who his bride was a few minutes before the wedding. However, in some cases the couple may be engaged, for a time and the man may request to see the hands and face of the bride at meeting (10 minutes in duration) sometime prior to the wedding.

My view remained unchanged. A man and a woman should be allowed to meet and get to know each other (often intimately) before marriage. Especially as my fundamental belief is in the premise of freedom of choice/expression and this would need to be exercised.

could not accede to an arranged marriage, unless of course it was with ‘mmm’ perhaps Jenifer Aniston.

No, in reality my view remains, for the integrity of the union, and the existence of a successful marriage, there needs to be freedom of choice to enter into the agreement and likewise to exit it, as well as a process of mutual selection.”

It was pleasing to note that, a good number of students held the view that the arranged marriage was not a suitable method of spousal selection. Fellow trainer Hakim shared some very personal details from his own experiences, which re-enforced the philosophy that there should be an element of freedom of choice and involvement in the selection process.

A number of students argued that love, comes later. From this I understood the process briefly to be that, your mate is selected for you by your parents, and you enter into the marriage. This marriage is an arrangement (which includes funds passing to the bride’s father) and the bride and groom are expected to fall in love later and make it work.

Personally I still can’t agree that this is correct. Even in the animal kingdom the animals are free to select there own mate. However, our students produced convincing arguments for and against and after a lengthy and thought provoking debate we had to take another vote.

So finally after a good number of hours of debating, a second vote was taken. The result of which was surprising, considering the level of argument that was made for the case of “Love Marriages”.

The final outcome was 12 votes (for arranged marriages) and 4 votes (against arranged marriages).  So our group believes that arranged marriages are they way forward.

This poses a further question; “Perhaps there is scope for both?” Those who wish to opt for an arranged marriage may do so but those who do not can decline any offers and hope to find that True Love, which so many people search for.

Conclusion:

These first three debates were a huge success, both in challenging the thinking of our students, especially with regard to their own culture and personal beliefs. As well as, in creating an opportunity for students gain experience in debating and arguing persuasively, as well as being succinct in their argument.

It was voted by an overwhelming majority that the debates be held on a six weekly cycle, and students were encouraged to bring along friends and other interested parties. It is worth noting at this juncture, that we had an enquiry via the internet from as far a field as Sanaa. Enquiring into where our debates were being held and how to get involved.

The positive response from the students and all involved has led to the following commitment from David and Hakim. Debates will be run on a six weekly cycle, topics to be nominated and selected by students. Furthermore, due to a huge desire from students to improve their English, David and Hakim have agreed to prepare a programme which will be run over the course of the year. Both Hakim and David will be involved in the preparation and delivery of this programme, which aims to be unique in its style.

Hopefully the programme will be diverse in its methodology, using drama, poetry and various techniques to improve the English language skills of the group. There has already been discussion on how this programme could potentially be rolled out nationally to assist both teachers of English and students in their studies.

David van Doesburgh

Mr.David

David and Hakim

photos during the debate

A song was performed by AL-Hakimi one of the participant