# Dio, you are just wrong. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 27, 2010, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521 "2010-10-27T14:42:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/121 "2010-10-27T20:08:26Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Dating is not the issue, fixing up people is. Providing a list of candidates (even if it is of length one) is necessary for an arranged marriage, do you agree? What Dio is saying, and everyone seems to be missing, is it is not sufficient for an arranged marriage. That requires some level of coercion to prevent or very strongly discourage the person from picking a partner not on the list. I have to agree with this. In my understanding of arranged marriages, the parents make the arrangements between each other, with little or no input from the kids, and the kids are then under an obligation to follow through with it. The social pressure comes from the adults being shamed in front of the other family and their larger community. That’s a far, far cry from someone’s grandma trying to fix someone up with her neighbor’s nephew. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/122 "2010-10-27T20:12:51Z")
I’m saying that an “arranged marriage” has to at least meet the base definitions of those two words. It has to be “arranged” by somebody else, and the thing being arranged has to be a marriage, not a date. People also seem to be ignoring my point about arranged marriage cultures placing parameters on candidates and prohibiting them from going outside the accepted pool. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/123 "2010-10-27T20:13:08Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Dating is not the issue, fixing up people is. Providing a list of candidates (even if it is of length one) is necessary for an arranged marriage, do you agree? What Dio is saying, and everyone seems to be missing, is it is not sufficient for an arranged marriage. That requires some level of coercion to prevent or very strongly discourage the person from picking a partner not on the list. You are assuming that the person in question would otherwise have the motive and chance to get married to someone not on the approved list, and are simply prevented from doing so - by coercion of some sort. The “Fiddler on the Roof” scenario. In some cases at least, folks look more at an arrangement as an opportunity they would not otherwise have, rather than as a restriction or imposition. After all, people pay good money these days for restrictive ‘matchmaking’ services. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/124 "2010-10-27T20:14:43Z")
That’s not arranged marriage, that’s just seeking dating help. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/125 "2010-10-27T20:20:11Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s not arranged marriage, that’s just seeking dating help. See, that’s just the issue - how do you draw a convincing bright line between the two? So far, it seems that the only way is through some sort of circular reasoning - an arranged marriage is coercive, because without coercion, it isn’t an arranged marriage. To my mind, an “arranged marriage” is any situation in which the relations in effect “arrange” for the couple to get married, and vary from situations in which they are clearly being _forced_ or _shamed_ into doing it, to ones in which the impetus to get married comes from the individuals themselves and the arrangers merely _facilitate_ that desire - finding a suitable partner for them, who likewise wishes to marry. ---
**Author:** ![outlierrn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/outlierrn/32/3005_2.png) [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/126 "2010-10-27T20:21:43Z")
Let’s try these definitions on for size > [@](#): > > Arranged Marriage > > An arranged marriage is one set up by some party other than the couple getting married. This could be a parent or relative, a community leader, a website, or a professional matchmaker. Arranged marriages were the norm until the last couple hundred years, and they are still practiced in some cultures. Proponents of arranged marriage claim it reduces divorce rates, prevents promiscuity, and creates a strong social order. They key factor present in an arranged marriage is the consent of both people getting married to be matched and married through a third party arrangement. > > Forced Marriage > > Forced marriages are arranged, but without the consent of both parties --specifically, usually without the woman’s consent. In a forced marriage, a woman can be matched by the means described above, or she can be sold or traded to her new husband for something of value. Forced marriage sometimes takes place between a child or young girl and an adult man. Victims of forced marriage may experience domestic violence, rape, abuse, neglect, and forced domestic servitude. Many countries consider forced marriage in which something of value is exchanged for the woman ( a dowry, fee, gift, etc.) a form of human trafficking. > **[Change starts here](https://www.change.org)** > > Join over 500,000,000 people creating real change in their communities. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/127 "2010-10-27T20:24:24Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I’m saying that an “arranged marriage” has to at least meet the base definitions of those two words. It has to be “arranged” by somebody else, and the thing being arranged has to be a marriage, not a date. > > People also seem to be ignoring my point about arranged marriage cultures placing parameters on candidates and prohibiting them from going outside the accepted pool. So then, an actual marriage can be arranged by someone else from a pool of candidates restricted by race/ethinicity and still yet not be coercive if the parties for whom the marriage is being arranged consent to both the arranging and the restricitons on the pool of candidates. ETA: this comports with both the criteria you’ve supplied and the definition provided by **outliern**. It also makes about half of eveything else you’ve argued wrong ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/128 "2010-10-27T20:28:03Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > See, that’s just the issue - how do you draw a convincing bright line between the two? Melllvar: He found a way! ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/129 "2010-10-27T20:32:18Z")
> [@outlierrn](#): > > Let’s try these definitions on for size > > [Change starts here · Change.org](http://humantrafficking.change.org/blog/view/arranged_marriage_vs_forced_marriage) Seems pretty similar to what I’ve been arguing … ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/130 "2010-10-27T20:33:10Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > You are assuming that the person in question would otherwise have the motive and chance to get married to someone not on the approved list, and are simply prevented from doing so - by coercion of some sort. The “Fiddler on the Roof” scenario. > > In some cases at least, folks look more at an arrangement as an opportunity they would not otherwise have, rather than as a restriction or imposition. After all, people pay good money these days for restrictive ‘matchmaking’ services. No, as I said in some cultures going outside is made very difficult to do, and not by force. In any case, a marriage where the candidate is just perfect (hot, smart and horny) is just as arranged as when you are stuck with just okay choices. Nobody is saying that the marriage has to be an unhappy one, or that the partners have to be dissatisfied with it. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/131 "2010-10-27T20:35:50Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I’m saying that an “arranged marriage” has to at least meet the base definitions of those two words. It has to be “arranged” by somebody else, and the thing being arranged has to be a marriage, not a date. > > People also seem to be ignoring my point about arranged marriage cultures placing parameters on candidates and prohibiting them from going outside the accepted pool. But cultures strongly discouraging going outside the pool don’t necessarily have arranged marriages (like my Mormon example) and it is possible to have a list of candidates not restricted to a given ethnic or cultural group. That’s the way it plays out, usually, but is not necessary. ---
**Author:** ![Michael\_Ellis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/977dab/32.png) [@Michael\_Ellis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Michael_Ellis)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/132 "2010-10-27T20:39:01Z")
This thread should be permanently stickied at the top of the Pit because there’s a new thread about how Diogenes is an assmunching moron every six weeks or so. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/133 "2010-10-27T20:43:16Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > No, as I said in some cultures going outside is made very difficult to do, and not by force. In any case, a marriage where the candidate is just perfect (hot, smart and horny) is just as arranged as when you are stuck with just okay choices. Nobody is saying that the marriage has to be an unhappy one, or that the partners have to be dissatisfied with it. I am unsure as to what we are disagreeing about. My point, insofar as i have one, is that some sort of coersion to prevent folks from marrying outside the “list” provided by one’s relations is not always necessary - because these are people who for whatever reason do not desire to marry someone outside the “list”. Put another way, can someone have an actual free choice between having an “arranged marriage” or not? To my mind, they can. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/134 "2010-10-27T20:49:52Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s still not arranging a marriage. Arranging a martriage is arranging an actual marriage. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Do you believe that setting people up on a date is arranging a marriage? > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s not arranged marriage. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No. > > Is setting somebody up on a date arranging a marriage. Okay, I’ll bite. Yes. Yes, it is. A majority of my Indian relatives would say that they entered into “arranged marriages,” and in every single one of those cases, the parents’ only role was to arrange meetings with potential mates, in essence, what you would call setting them up on dates. Whether to agree to marry was completely within the discretion of the two individuals who were being introduced. In all the cases, if the individuals had come up with “love matches” of their own, even ones outside of their ethnic groups or castes, they would have been free to do so. Words mean what 1 billion people use them to mean, not just what you decide they mean in your own head. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/135 "2010-10-27T21:20:55Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > But cultures strongly discouraging going outside the pool don’t necessarily have arranged marriages (like my Mormon example) and it is possible to have a list of candidates not restricted to a given ethnic or cultural group. That’s the way it plays out, usually, but is not necessary. That just means that arranged marriage has a Venn intersection with some other forms of cultural marriage restriction. It doesn’t mitigate arranged marriage. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/136 "2010-10-27T21:29:37Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That just means that arranged marriage has a Venn intersection with some other forms of cultural marriage restriction. It doesn’t mitigate arranged marriage. Concede that coercion is not a necessary component of arranged marriage ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/137 "2010-10-27T21:49:19Z")
I keep seeing “arraigned” marriage and it’s cracking me right up. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/138 "2010-10-27T22:01:56Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > Concede that coercion is not a necessary component of arranged marriage In theory, maybe, but not in practice. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/139 "2010-10-27T22:10:12Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > I am unsure as to what we are disagreeing about. My point, insofar as i have one, is that some sort of coersion to prevent folks from marrying outside the “list” provided by one’s relations is not always necessary - because these are people who for whatever reason do not desire to marry someone outside the “list”. > > Put another way, can someone have an actual free choice between having an “arranged marriage” or not? To my mind, they can. Sure they can, but in a culture of arranged marriages many will act as if they do not have a choice. Even in Fiddler, remember, one daughter runs off with the revolutionary. The real question is the reaction of the culture to not marrying someone in the list. It’s been a long time since I read the Tevye stories, but my recollection is that that Tevye was a lot less liberal about this than the one in the play, since they were written a lot closer to the culture of the shtetl. The Berlin Wall was still the Berlin Wall even though a few people managed to get over it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2010, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521/140 "2010-10-27T22:13:40Z")
Well, actually, Hodel marrying Perchik the revolutionary wasn’t so bad. It was Chava marrying (oy!) Fyedka the Christian that was a big deal. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dio-you-are-just-wrong/558521.md?page=8)