Dio, you are just wrong.

Regarding this hijack about arranged marriages.

What fuck is your problem? You are wrong. Nobody is “changing the definition of the word.” Everyone is using it as it is commonly used.

Now there may was a time that arranged marriages were forced. Indeed, in the most remote parts of some countries that is still true. But you know what? 99% of people referring to a modern arranged marriage are talking about what we are talking about. That’s just how it is. You’re just fucking wrong. Suck it up.

I don’t see any personal insults in this OP, so why not just put this in the linked thread?

Oh, wait, because it would be just as utterly futile. Silly me.

If a marriage is not arranged, then it’s not an arranged marriage. That’s simple enough.

The trouble is that it’s an argument about the meaning of “arranged marriage”. Each side is going to be able to find evidence that their definition is right, and you’re never going to be able to debate anything substantial there.

Are you referring to this
post?

Fun game!

If a fry is not French, it is not a French fry. That’s simple enough.

If a fish is not a cat, it is not a catfish. That’s simple enough.

If you can’t drive in it, it’s not a driveway. That’s simple enough.

Arranged marriages used to include more coercive elements. Today, some aspects of the old arranged marriages continue to be relavent (short marriage-aimed courtships, parents taking an active role, matching by similar background assuming similar values) and other aspects (forcing people to marry each other) do not and have fallen out of favor.

The institution the word “arranged marriage” describes has changed quite a bit, but for whatever reason the word has stuck.

Why can’t you just accept that? WTF is your allegiance to something you are quite simply mistaken about?

I’m not mistaken. I just have a working familiarity with the English language.
Even in your rosy little paradigm, however, the practice is still provincial and restricted. The subjects are not allowed to marry outside their ethnic groups and don’t have the option of not getting married at all.

Wikipedia, which is by no means the be all and end all of definitions, has one of arranged marriage, and immediately makes a distintion between it and forced marriage. In addition, various types of arranged marriages are discussed which include “introduction only” arranged marriages.

You know what I hate about Caffè Americano? - The steamed milk. People tell me that an Americano is just hot water and espresso, but fuck 'em, what do they know.

On Edit: Ok, maybe there is espresso and water, but it is still restrictive and provincial

You’re new here, right?

If a marriage is not arranged, it is not arranged.

A lot of arranged marriages are definitely forced, by the way. We’ve had a problem with that up here in the large Hmong community we have.

I was also saying in the other thread that saying that arranged marriages aren’t forced is disingenuous in that there is still a lot of indirect pressure and coersion. Those kids are not made to feel that they have the option of going outside their enclosed communities, staying single or pursuing same-sex relationships.

And this is different from your hick town in West Texas how?

Not necesarily, and I am speaking as someone whose culture actively practices arranged marriage. Not getting married at all can be an option, but you will have to live with roughly the same amount of bitching from your family that occurs in the rest of American middle and working class culture for not getting married and having kids. Marrying outside your ethnic group happens and results in estrangement. However whether or not your spouse is worth it is a decision anyone in the larger society whose family doesn’t like their chosen mate has to face also.

Online arranged marriages are the number one, bar none, factor in leading to more mixed caste/region/religion marriages in India. For the first time in history Indians are becoming open to marriage outside of their community as things like money become more important. This is both driving and reflecting social change.

In fact, you can and do find the occasional non-Indian finding a mate through Indian arranged marriages. Probably the main thing that keeps that from happening more often is that non-Indians are still pretty attached to the “kiss and hope” method of finding a life partner, and are less likely to enter a marriage based on a sober assessment of shared goals. Among Indians, they know what the expectations for marriage will be.

Pressure to marry within your group is in no way endemic to arranged marriages. Indeed, I bet MOST people anywhere would get some degree of greif from at least one relative if they came home with someone from a different ethnic group. Nor is pressure to marry unique to it- that exists in every culture where mothers want grandchildren.

Sometimes in no way at all. Certainly there are homegrown communities who are just as capable of being provincial and coercing their children into selecting from a narrow pool of partners. Essentially arranged marriages are not unheard of in the fundy, isolationist, home school type of communities. I once had a casual acquaintance with a girl (friend of a friend) who was raised in those circumstances and whose parents tried to select a husband from her church community to marry as soon as she turned 18 (this group thought girls had to be married off and start having babies the second they became legal adults). She ran away from home with some other guy instead, and her parents disowned her. So sure, homegrown hicks aren’t necessarily any better.

You have an amazing tendency to stick adamantly to positions on subjects about which you know next to nothing.

I work in IT among lots of folks from India. Most are US citizens, some are still working with green cards. Most of them were single when they arrived in the US. Of the single ones who have married in the time I have known them, two have married people that they met in the US, and about thirty have married people who were selected for them by their parents in India. They were not forced or coerced to marry these people, they had the option to say no, but their prospective spouses were chosen by their parents from suitable families, their correspondence was initiated formally by their parents, their first meeting was arranged by their parents, and they themselves call these “arranged marriages”.

Like I said in the other thread, they have the option to veto specific candidates, but not to go outside the “suitable” pool of racially/ethnically acceptable candidates. They can often be disowned if they do. That’s coersion.

Allegedly.

Cite?

Regards,
Shodan

I happen to think non-arranged marriages are immoral.

For evidence I cite a friend of a friend’s cousin’s son who knocked up a Dairy Queen server behind the dumpsters after prom. Now there’s no way their marriage was arranged in any sense of the word, but the shotguns came out ablazin’ nonetheless.

And thus, I feel it’s my duty as an expert to say that marriage itself is almost always a forced event and corrosive upon all relationships.

I didn’t say anything was immoral, so what are you supposed to be parodying?

I said arranged marriages were arranged. Hugely controversial, I know.