Should arranged marriages be allowed?

[MartinPurvis]

This should be an interesting debate, post your opinions and vote.

[DeadMansFist849]

I'll say it depends entirely on the situation.

 

Between consenting adults, who can back out at any point in the proceedings without fear of retribution=fine

Any kind of forced marriage (including the sort where guilt is used to coerce someone into marriage)=not fine

Child marriage (which is a type of forced marriage)=definitely not fine

 

It also needs to be done in a way that isn't misogynistic or anti-gay. So, my problem's with people being control freaks more than anything else, really.

[JanusForbeare]

Are we talking globally, in the West, or in cultures like India or the Muslim world? I think it makes a huge difference - it's one thing for a Westerner to say, "We shouldn't have arranged marriages in our country because it clashes with our values/infringes on personal freedoms/whatever," but it's quite different to go around the world imposing a western value system on other nations.

 

In Western countries, I don't think there's a place for it. Regardless of your ethnic or cultural background, when you immigrate to another country, you agree to abide by its laws and code of conduct. Your minority rights should and will be protected (to an extent), but they don't extend to flagrantly breaking the law on the basis of tradition.

 

However, in nations with a longstanding history of arranged marriages, I don't think that it's the place of outsiders to bring about a change in the system - at least not directly. In those countries, arranged marriage is often a fundamental pillar of economic and social systems, and can't simply be removed without threatening the stability of the entire culture. Such instability can range from public discontent, to social ostracism of those involved, to financial ruin, to all-out civil war. If foreigners are responsible for the change, then they will be (rightly) blamed for the consequences, and it will be interpreted as an act of imperialism and/or modern colonialism.

 

However, indirect change can be brought about simply by exposing the citizens of such countries to other social systems and values. This is the case in India, where long-term contact with the West has begun to encourage homegrown resistance to the notion of arranged "pragmatic marriages" (as opposed to romantic marriages). This has triggered a slow evolution of the traditional system, which is infinitely safer, from the point of view of national and social stability.

 

EDIT: I didn't vote, because there is no option for "It depends on the setting". :)

Edited December 3, 2012 by JanusForbeare

[Tidus44]

While I know there is going to be the “ewww’ factor and the horror story’s, my thought is arranged marriages have their place within cultural, social and economic necessities. I see nothing wrong with them.

 

I should point out that arranged marriage is not unknown in western cultures, just that it isn’t as prevalent. Consider that Queen Elizabeth screened several women and assessed the potential of certain females to be married to Prince Charles and the same was done for her grandson. Perhaps not as strict a system as some, but arranged none the less. I suppose one could argue that these were not “arranged” in the same sense as western myths suggest arranged marriages are conducted, but what was so different?

 

Arranged marriages occur in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Japan, India, Bangladesh. They also exist in China and Indonesia and cultures where Buddhism, Hinduism are practiced and some Muslim/Islam countries

Not all marriages in these countries are forced. In many cases, the parents may have chosen a partner for their child, but the child is also included within the decision. If the child is not happy with the choice, the parents generally find another suitable partner. In the majority of cultures the couple meet and even date to a degree so they get to know one another somewhat, but are chaperoned at all times. Some cultures require not only the couple’s agreement, but agreement from others besides the couple and their parents as well.

 

One must consider how many people in the world have a culture where an arranged marriage is common, and it seems to work for them. Again, the few horror stories we hear that are sensationalized by the media are not the norm and are generally not acceptable in the countries where such incidents occur either.

[Maharg67]

I do not consider this to be a 'simple debate'.

 

Generally I agree as long as both partners have an opt out option and that the marriage takes place when both woman, and man, are old enough for reasonable decision making (maybe 20 years or older). I would also like to see both groom and bride given access to alternate ideas to marriage, to other influences other than those pressuring for marriage. Perhaps some kind of advocates to make sure both bride and groom have the freedom to choose. The families could still have their say, of course, along with others.

[Vindekarr]

Not only do I think arranged marriage is unnacceptable, I think we have a moral duty as human beings to hunt down and purge it from existance.

 

Some aspects of evil in society go beyond cultural bounds; some things go beyond east and west, they simply need to burn. Slavery and Eugenics are two prior examples, I think marriage is a modern example. It's not about cultural context, it's about that women are being treated quite literally as slaves, it's about legalised rape and murder. It's about people living their entire lives without liberty or equality. It's about justice. We have the capacity as humans to erradicate this, yet we do nothing about it and claim "it's a cultural fact" and "but they've been doing it for hundreds of years" The Egyptians used slavery for thousands of years yet modern cases of slavery result in international outcry. I don't see how arranged marriage is anything other than the enslavement of women, or why we shouldn't punish the guilty, harshly, for what they've done.

 

This is the 21st century, we are better than this. We should have the moral fibre to destroy slavery of any sort.

 

Could it be made acceptable? I'm sure it could. But in the real word there is no consent, there is no "out" Girls are forced into this as children, they have no rights, they live their lives as slaves to their husbands and should they have the temerity to demand rights as human beings, they are often literally beheaded, the murderers going unpunished. I will accept almost anything as cultural difference, but not this. It's the 21st century, this barbarism belongs in the middle ages.

Edited December 5, 2012 by Vindekarr

[ginnyfizz]

Consider that Queen Elizabeth screened several women and assessed the potential of certain females to be married to Prince Charles

 

Certainly true, but...ummm...look how well that turned out. Not. That is a perfect example of what can go wrong with an arranged marriage, very narrow criteria being used - ie virginal (supposedly) and of childbearing age, and totally ignoring compatibility issues and the stability of the bride.

 

It is also true, in theory, and sometimes also in practice, that among the British Asian communities, the prospective bride and groom are given a choice in the matter and are not forced into anything. However, there is a problem in some areas with girls (and sometimes boys) from the age of about fourteen upwards going "on holiday" to the Indian subcontinent and being married whilst over there. Even if the child is agreeable they cannot give valid consent at that age, and the lack of valid consent can be used to annul the marriage if they change their mind later, or if they were forced in the first place. This is all why the British Foreign Office has a forced marriages unit. Forced marriage is now regarded as a crime, the problem being there is a fine line between arranged and forced and sometimes a reluctance to complain.

[JimboUK]

I have to agree with Vindekarr on this, in a civilised world this should be seen as something that needs stamping out, even with an "opt out" there could still be intolerable pressure put on both parties by family.

[bben46]

I do know an American, born and raised here. From a traditional Hindu Pakistani family. He had never even met his wife before the wedding. He has been married for over 30 years and they are very happy together. He says he loves his wife very much and believes his family made a far better choice than he would have if it had been left up to him.

 

Various members of his family met with both the girl and members of her family over several months before deciding that she was the one for him. He said he later learned that they had rejected one girl as too fat, another as too vain. And that another family had rejected him as too poor for their daughter ( he is an electrical engineer, they wanted a doctor. - probably a good thing that he was rejected on that one)

 

There are both pros and cons in arranged marriages. And I believe there is a place for them in our society. Most traditional arranged marriages actually work out well as that is their culture where the marriage is expected to be arranged by both husband and wife. And the parents can be very picky. And, both sets of parents actually want the marriage to be a success. If it fails, they get the blame.

 

However NOT for forced marriages. Many people confuse the two, and there is a big difference. Both parties must agree to the marriage beforehand. Both families must understand that it may not work out in places like the US where either party can get a divorce.

[Tidus44]

@ginnyfizz - I don't recall saying the system was perfect, just that it does exist in some form in western culture and society. I also consider that Elizabeth and Philip were an "arranged" marriage and likely with a lot more and closer scrutiny than Charles and Diana and their union doesn't seem to have worked out too badly. I'm pretty sure we could continue the exchange of bad arrangement verse good arrangement examples, but I doubt we will accomplish much in the effort. Suffice to say, given the extremely high number of people each year who do practice arranged marriage within their culture, the horror stories we hear are not the norm, but the exception.

 

 

To me, the debate is quite clearly defined by the use of the term "arranged marriage". However, there are those who have chosen, either deliberately or through their ignorance of the English language, or even perhaps due to their hysterical belief in the myths popularized by the media in western culture, to include what is commonly referred to as a "forced marriage" within the debate parameters.

I am not suitably gullible (a word no longer in the dictionary because if said softly enough it sounds like "oranges") to believe that there are not those who abuse their cultural system and cross the line between arranging a marriage and forcing a marriage. But, I would counter again that the majority of arranged marriages do not fall within the "forced" definition and not every or even the majority of arranged marriages is a means of slavery for an unwilling female.

 

I am somewhat amazed though, at the myopic and frankly intolerant aspect of some opinions. Really, we advocate hunting down and killing everyone who practices arranged marriage in the name of rights and freedom?

I have read some fairly nonsensical things, but how does one defend the rights and freedom of one by denying the rights and freedom of another?

I am also somewhat taken aback by the incomprehensible concept that while it is sufficiently horrible to contemplate that some arranged marriages are not very nice, the mass slaughter and genocide of a culture is not specifically horrific and is actually felt to be justified as a means to force people to comply with a different cultural practice. I will be looking up the word "contradictory" again just to see if I do understand its meaning.

 

While I am completely incapable of responding to that concept, I do however understand it because so many in the world advocate exactly the same idea. Let's kill everyone who doesn't do exactly as I say or do in the name of peace and justice. No wonder the world is as screwed up as it is.

Edited December 6, 2012 by Tidus44