A pedophile is that whose (sexual) lust is toward children.
From the Islamic viewpoint, if a person has marital sufficiency, both physically and mentally, then marrying is allowable. That is not a child. Puberty is normally the start of physical sufficieny.
For people who never achieve puberty, some (sunni) Islamic mezhebs (law sect) have set the legal age of terminating childhood. (For marriage, too?) For shafii mezheb, 15.
Pedophilia is a trouble. But, parents and courts weigh appropriateness of a marriage.
Thus, a pedophile is unlikely to get a child (pre-pubescent) to marry and have sex.
If settling for a teen, a pedophiliac again lacks any advantage, because he would need to divorce his wives, soon, because they would get "too old" in the pedophiliac's view. That pattern would soon label him as a pedophile, not a stable-husband. Then, he would not get approvals. Thus, pedophilia has no future, if people reflect honestly.
Pedophilia is visible through short-term and/or long-term behaviors of a pedophile.
For a long-term test, look at the marriage history of that person. If marrying with pubescents (because younger is not allowable), but divorcing soon (within months, or decade), then that is probably a pedophile, who is willing to have only young mates.
For a short-term test, reflect with the question: If two girls differ only in age (both beautiful, both good natured), who would you take, if both are terminally (non-contagiously) ill, with a few months left to live? Wilma (pubescent, 8), or Mary (21)?
Probably, only pedophiles would prefer Wilma, for short-term. In contrast, if to marry for a long-term (not daily, nor months), Wilma has a few advantages. For example, the freshness of her personality, for tuning, in her pubescent times -- as her best friend.
Thus, allocating makes sense. Sex is not the cause. Personalizing, fine-tuning is.
Aisha (r.a.) was 9 (pubescent) when starting to live with her husband, Muhammed (s.a.s).
The two (s.a.s. & r.a.) were engaged while she was six. Some hypocritical bigots try to label that as "pedophiliac," but where would you find a pedophile who postpones sex until after puberty, although she was available in her prime times of pedophilia (6, 7)?
That was obviously not any pedophilia -- neither in the short-term, nor long-term.
That was valuable, obviously. Wisdom for tuning with his (s.a.s.) prospective wife (r.a).
A hadith (in Sahih-ul-Bukhari) is telling that, Muhammed (s.a.s.) saw Aisha (r.a.) in his (s.a.s.) dreams, as his (s.a.s.) prospective wife. That was how she (r.a.) was chosen.
For tuning to the spouse to the finest, starting to talk at puberty, is valuable, when mates are key to study/reflect personalities. Hadiths report Muhammed (s.a.s.) visiting Aisha (r.a.) before her puberty, and joining her (r.a.) playing-families with other girls.
The glamor of the story of how Muhammed (s.a.s.) and Aisha (r.a.), is in sharp contrast to what critics list as "child marriages." But, most of what they list, is not actually about "children" (nor, pubescents or teens), but what would apply to the context.
The girl has the right to veto. (Normally, she would have no cause to veto, but has the right to veto.) If she is truly under coercion to marry, then that is not Islamic. But how is that about only pubescents? Other than running away, what would old girls have more? Worse, the old girls might have grown some hopes about marriage, but they would be under coercion, all the same. That is, in that worst-case world of, total coercion, again, marrying young, is the optimal for happy life.
Category-crossers is not about at what age you allow marrying. That is supposed to be forbidden, if you would follow the rule of the Quran. Otherwise, you are left to the material advantages, which people might find sufficient to neglect the rules. If parents might neglect, grown-up girls might neglect, too. (Actually, laxness is not only because of material advantages. Lots of people in Britain, are known not to bother with condoms, while sleeping with their first encounters.)
Malaria is a trouble. Killing all of the mosquitoes, is the remedy, inshaellah. If pregnancy is a time of immunity deficiency, then pregnants might need extra cautiousness to have their mosquito-nets, DEET/naturals, etc. (Lots of children, normally die of malaria, too. Pregnancy is not "the culprit." By stopping reproductivity, you would not have saved the children who normally pass away. Killing all of malaria, is necessary.)
Muhammed (s.a.s.) was the prophet, and his (s.a.s.) following his (s.a.s.) dream, might not necessarily fit your case -- especially, because satans [and witch gangs] have capabilities of messing with (most, non-prophet) people's dreams (and when awake, too). (Saints & scientists might fight back, against satans. But, until there is a sure remedy, keep cautious, think well.)
Islamic rules (so far as I know), give the wife the right to consummate her husband.
If Muhammed (s.a.s.) would postpone that after puberty (9), then he (s.a.s.) would have to invent a good excuse, to keep Aisha (r.a.), out of bed, for more than three months.
That is, after marrying, if your taste or the laws in your country, would not allow sex until some old age, then you would have to have the permission of your wife to keep away -- probably, need to inform her about the case, before she would nod your marriage.
In some parts of the world (Africa), people sew the genitals of girls, about age 10.
-- presumably, to keep chaste. Marrying those girls, makes a lot more sense.
In USA, sex among teens, is not a crime, but marrying is unlawful until relatively old.
About 50% having sex before 18, [1], [2]] and probably most, out-of-wedlock.
It is hypocritical, to support only (both of) the extremes (abstaining from sex, or otherwise, having contraceptives), while outlawing marriage. When people talk about marriage, they contrast that to their favorite "pious/free" extreme, rather than honestly acknowledge the half-half (50%) statistics. Marriage is the optimal middle-ground.
Worse, even those with the Islamic style, like Kansas (USA) until 2006, next have been taken out of the right path (to some extent). The times seem antichristish.
Ironically, if you list post-pubescents as "child" ("pedo"), and you forbid marrying, while youngsters turn out to have sex, then pedophiles might truly have their niche.
In the case of how Kansas lawmakers got to think to follow the fashion, I might list some bits of news. The ridicule of a single (non-Kansas) prosecutor, about Kansas,[3] and the Kansas governor's follow-up initiative,[4] were sufficient,[5] it seems. (Ironically, other news [6] reports that, that prosecutor refers to the boy marrying the pregnant girl, as good, but the first ridiculing of the Kansas marriage law,[3] was effective, it seems.)
(( Esoterica: So, if that was the antichrist gang (or, things like ibne-telepaths) who were lobbying by puppetizing people, then puppetizing two persons (prosecutor, & governor), was sufficient to outlaw. (Surely, the people who were voting in both cases (court, & congress), might have been victims of lobbying (to support the case), too). ))
SamBot (Sam Shamoun) and Mr/s. Obscenity (Ali Sina), both try to accuse Muhammed (s.a.s.) with "pedophilia." Lots of people oppose such bigotry, by listing biology or history facts.
If any Islamic source were upholding pre-pubertal sex, I could trivially uphold that.
Lots of people report babies enjoying sexual stimulation. For example, Çetin Altan, a leftist mason journalist, was writing his babyhood, and how there was a talk in a French radio, about that girl baby-sitting him, fondling. Patai's anti-arab book "Arab Mind" is known to list that stimulation-joy, too. But Islam is known not to uphold sex before puberty. The prophet (s.a.s.) postponing Aisha (r.a.), is good evidence.
There, no muslim would take the "ijtihads" of anti-Islamic simpletons, such as SamBot or Mr/s.Obscenity. That is why I keep the point that, there is no pre-pubescent sex license, in Islam.
From a developmental-psychology textbook,
"
Not to list that as suggestion that all children think or act so. For example, I recall Jack Lemmon's biography. Until adolescent, after his mother asking him (something like) "you do not do such things, right?" he had not thouht masturbating. But, the point is, Allah is thinking all things, well. Not allowing marriage then, in 3 or 4. The need to abstain, is there, necessary. But after puberty (if mentally able, too), that is understood as adult. That is how Islam is offering. You might think you have your "extra good" (extra-pious or extra-free) style, but probably, even in your culture, your alternative is not better than any aspect of what Islam is allowing. That is what I witness, by looking at the statistic from USA, as well as from various lives, around the world. Traps of out-of-wedlock sex,
The world of today, and most likely, the Hijaz of pre-Islamic (jahiliyya) times, had left little or no surprises about sex. People would see sexy-women on the street, know what goes around in jahiliyya parties, etc. Allocating the girl, was understandably, good.
Next, I summarize this document, to face the hypocrisies of SamBot, and Mr/s. Obscenity.
mocking the mockery of Mr/s.Obscenity
The hypocrtical system allows all sort of perversions, if you are (what?) "adult." That is oxymoronic, hypocritical garbage. If they fall to all sorts of perversions, something is wrong there. In contrast, although the youngsters are physically able, furthermore religiously (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) have nothing to forbid marrying, the bigotry is trying to make faces about it, as if forbidding the youngsters from marrying, would make the system "pious." Religiously, it does not contribute piety, at all -- unless you would think asceticism. In summary, the piety is in keeping chaste, not in postponing marriage. The good thing about postponing, would be if that would save youngsters (that is, if they would opt or marrying rather than out-of-wedlock sex, after their 21, as opposed to thouhtlessnes before 21), but what is happening, is the vice versa. Sex is available right away, while marrying is forbidden until a lot later. That would not even pass as any sort of honest bigotry. Absurdly hypocritical.
Texas leads nation in abstinence education dollars (July 13, 2008), Dallas Morning News
Low-income kids report first sexual intercourse at 12 years old (Aug. 13, 2009)
A critique of [young] marriages, might try to see that as something against [young] marriages. But, again, a family is the right thing, for reflecting well. Out-of-wedlock people, might fall into the pregnancy situation, although with no intention, at all.
The out-of-wedlock "solutions" against unwantable-pregnancies (contraceptives, or abortions) are not for or against marriages. They just think having-sex. Then baby happens. Marriage is probably good for healthPregnancy, iespecially the labor phase, might strain especially the young girls (10-15)
Keep in mind that, pregnancy is a major burden to the woman. For example, if underweight, get some weight (feed yourself). Especially "child marriages" are thought to have trouble, following labor. (Not big trouble. But, surgery might be necessary, if the baby, when getting out, hurts the tissues.
Islamically, there might be some rule that prohibits the girl from marrying, if she is not able to conceive (without a high-risk of dieing, or major harm). Inferring this, from the famous principle that, you should not harm youself. A big risk to the mother, is not appropriate. Therefore, either marriage (sex and pregnancy), or only pregnancy, might be forbidden, by Islam -- if the consequences are critical to health. (Sex is probably extremely rarely risky in marriages, but with the concern that the woman might have pregnancy, the marriage might be forbidden, too.)
I dutifully tell you that information, but I actually would think that, there miht be medical malpractice there, if there is no need for surgery. The problem of incontinence in normal cases, is workable by Kegel exercises. If he baby is not cracking some bone, if no tissue is torn, then surgery might be not necessary. (Naturally, women, especially if they would like to keep their ablution, would probably instinctively guess, how to work out the muscles, there.