i'm curious to know if anybody on the board has been in, almost was, knows somebody who was, in an arranged marriage.

my best friend's boyfriend is from pakistan and they were dating behind his parents back. his parents found out and they went through this whole ordeal where he said he was gonna stay with my best friend and his mom at one point threatened to kill herself if she did. basically, their relationship is over. it just bothers me somewhat that they brought their child to america to live with freedom, yet they are making him marry (of all people) his cousin and give him no choice in the matter.

I don't know anyone that has.. unless you call getting someone knocked up then getting married to them, arranged

Stupid tradition, stinks of eugenics. Never encountered it.

Originally posted by Stage Monster
Stupid tradition, stinks of eugenics. Never encountered it.

Wow, shows how little you know about it then...

In India, even today, arranged marriages are common, though not nearly as much as 50 years ago. My parents, grandparents, most of my aunts uncles and most of my cousins who live in India have had arranged marriages.

Almost all of my parents Indian friends (our close family friends) have had arranged marriages.

You know how many divorces there have been amongst them? Zero.

Marriage, to people from a background like that, is less about love (in the begining) and more about duty to culture/society and family. marriage is an institution and it works because of respect for the institution.

Thats way, in more modern times, there is less arranged marriage, in those times, because of less 'respect' for that part of their culture.

I have no doubt my parents love one another. I have no doubt they love their children. I have no doubt some people end up in loveless arranged marriages.

Contrary to your belief that it 'stinks' of eugenics, arranged marriage, for MOST people especially in the Indian culture, the last 100 years, isn't about 'eugenics' but its about finding a good mate for your child. Someone who will help them have a good family. Somoene who will be a good life partner.

Its not like the boy/girl have no say. Its not like they get auctioned off at 14. Those are teh exceptions, not the rule.

This one girl I know got married and it was arranged. Khaditia was her name she's saudi-arabian. her and her sister both have arrangements.

I am one generation away from it.

Let me also say, I don't want one, don't plan on getting one, nor had no one ever tell me I 'needed one.'

My parents realize it is a cultural thing above all else, if i wanted one, great, if not, my 'culture' is just different.

very good points manu and they needed to be said because our society does not understand them well. and when you touched on how there hs been no divorce that can tie into the post i made about the theory of where there is so much divorce in our society without arrange marraiges.

Manu - You're right, I didn't/don't know a damn thing about the culture of arranged marriages. I was going purely off my first gut reaction.

Yeah, Political G, the issue though isn't arranged marriage, it is looking at marriage, less from a duty/have to point of view but to a 'this is how we will show our love' to one another point of view.

Im sure there are some peolpe, in arranged marriages, who here would get a divorce, but there do not, because of duty. For better or worse, thats how it is.

Originally posted by Manu
Let me also say, I don't want one, don't plan on getting one, nor had no one ever tell me I 'needed one.'

And you call yourself "Manu?" ;) I'm slogging my way through Durant's multi-volume history of the world, and just hit upon the section pertaining to the Code of Manu yesterday. Almost fell out of my chair the first time I read the name. Had no clue that that was where your name came from. Anyway...


No code of laws applied to all India. In the ordinary affairs of life the place of law was taken by the dharma-shastras metrical textbooks of caste regulations and duties, composed by the Brahmans from a strictly Brahman point of view. The oldest of these is the so-called "Code of Manu." Manu was the mythical ancestor of the Manava tribe (or school) of Brahmans near Delhi; he was represented as the son of a god, and as receiving his laws from Brahma himself. This code of 2685 verses, once assigned to 1200 BC, is now referred vaguely to the first centuries of our era. Originally intended as a handbook or guide to proper caste behavior for the Manava Brahmans, it was gradulally accepted as a code of conduct for the entire Hindu community; and though it was never recognized by the Moslem kings it acquired, within the caste system, all the force of law.

p. 483-4


Typed all that for context. Now, onto what Durant said Manu said about marriage:


The child was hardly born when the parents began to think of its marriage. For marriage, in the Hindu system, was compulsory; an unmarried man was an outcast, without social status or consideration, and prolonged virginity was a disgrace. Nor was marriage to be left to the whim of individual choice or romantic love; it was a vital concern of society and the race, and it could not safely be entrusted to the myopia of passion or the accidents of proximity; it must be arranged by the parents before the fever of sex should have time to precipitate a union doomed, in the Hindu view, to dissillusionment and bitterness. Manu gave the name of Gandharva marriage unions by mutual choice, and stigmatized them as born of desire; they were permissible, but hardly respectable.

p. 489


Such whimsical passions were seldom permited to determine marriage in India. Manu allowed eight different forms of marriage, in which marriage by capture and marriage "from affection" were ranked lowest in the moral scale, and marriage by purchase was accepted as the sensible way of arranging a union; in the long run the Hindu legislator thought, those marriages are most soundly based upon that rest upon an economic foundation.

p 491-2


The Story of Civilization: Part I - Our Oriental Heritage By Will Durant. My copy, courtesy of my local library, is the 19th printing done in 1954. (The book was originally published in 1935.)

Sorry. Just thought your response was funny, having read what I had the day before about the historical Manu. I have no idea if Durant is even remotely close to the truth of the matter. Elsewhere in his book he has a chart showing Piltdown Man as a "human type" of primitive man, so doubtless there are some other errors in the text.

Originally posted by Manu


Wow, shows how little you know about it then...

In India, even today, arranged marriages are common, though not nearly as much as 50 years ago. My parents, grandparents, most of my aunts uncles and most of my cousins who live in India have had arranged marriages.

Almost all of my parents Indian friends (our close family friends) have had arranged marriages.

You know how many divorces there have been amongst them? Zero.

Marriage, to people from a background like that, is less about love (in the begining) and more about duty to culture/society and family. marriage is an institution and it works because of respect for the institution.

Thats way, in more modern times, there is less arranged marriage, in those times, because of less 'respect' for that part of their culture.

I have no doubt my parents love one another. I have no doubt they love their children. I have no doubt some people end up in loveless arranged marriages.

Contrary to your belief that it 'stinks' of eugenics, arranged marriage, for MOST people especially in the Indian culture, the last 100 years, isn't about 'eugenics' but its about finding a good mate for your child. Someone who will help them have a good family. Somoene who will be a good life partner.

Its not like the boy/girl have no say. Its not like they get auctioned off at 14. Those are teh exceptions, not the rule.

I have to say this whole "duty" thing is a load of bull****. Let me ask you something: do these younger people ever realize that this is their life and they have every right to be selfish? Has there ever been a rebellion? PLZ say yes; I can't stand crap like this.

No, you don't know better than be, you doof.

Originally posted by Horse_weed


I have to say this whole "duty" thing is a load of bull****. Let me ask you something: do these younger people ever realize that this is their life and they have every right to be selfish? Has there ever been a rebellion? PLZ say yes; I can't stand crap like this.

No, you don't know better than be, you doof.

And this is pretty typical of someone who doesn't, at least respect other cultures. Its just different. We can't understand it. I accept it, but I don't get it. My parents sure got it and have had a wonderful life by it.

Like I said, these 'young people' have a choice. Its almost like matching making. Imagine if you got setup by your parents, introduced to someone, met them, and then if you liked them, you got married. Yeah, it sounds completely foreign to us, but, at the same time, it has worked in that culture for over 5000 years. There is extreme devotion to one another (not just the wife for her husband, but the other way around) and it stems from the idea of marriage as a responsability, duty, and religious connection.

The idea of 'selfishiness' would be thought to them as something that was odd. They just wouldn't get how you can sit there and say they don't have a duty or responsability to their parents, their family, and the grouping of marriage.

Well, on the whole at first, I kinda want to shy away from thinking about arranged marriages just because today's society makes things like this seem almost evil.

On the other hand, I think that more people should take thier marriages more seriously, people need to realize that this is a huge responsiblity and a duty, not just to thier betrothed, but to their mutual families and the children that they may potentially have...

This is something I'll have to think a bit about....