In the past, and in cultures that still practice arranged marriages it seems as a general rule(from what I have read so I could be wrong!) that infidelity and side “real” relationships are just taken as a given. An inevitability if you will, but hey if the arranged couple happens through sheer chance to be a perfect match and fall in real love well hey great and lucky for them!
So if everyone realizes that arranged marriages are mostly not based on real emotion, and human beings tend to want some idiosyncratic level of self determination in who they love and want to boff, then why even carry on the charade of the AMs?
I mean if it is just a given that there will be actual lovers on the side, maybe this whole deal is pointless?
There are cultures where marriage is about forming an economic unit and/or legal parentage of offspring and not about love and romance. For such cultures, arranged marriages would make sense within the context of that culture even if infidelity (usually only for the male, women are almost always required to remain faithful) commonly occurs alongside the marriage.
Arranged marriages don’t have a notably different success rate than marriages of romance because the latter is largely a fallacy. Almost all marriages are primarily about economic and social status compatibility in the long term rather than romantic love because the latter is inevitably fleeting. If you look closely at long-term marriages in the U.S., the percentage of them that are truly happy in the long term is astonishingly small (I have only had had good evidence of two in my entire life). The rest become marriages of convience because the alternatives are too hard to act upon due to entrenched circumstances.
Still, the infidelity rate is probably even higher than statistics lead you to believe. All of my male friends, most of my coworkers that I have traveled with and male family members have cheated even if their wives don’t know it. It is ubiquitous.
I decided to cut the bullshit game short and get a divorce. Now I can see or do anything I want with whoever I want any time I please and still have my kids every weekend (the true purpose of marriage). The whole world is Disney Land now with no sarcasm intended. I have no idea why the vast majority of men would ever volunteer for the oppressive servitude that the typical American marriage has become.
An arranged marriage with very clear roles would likely be an improvement for most people.
Why do you presume that most cultures with arranged marriages are ok with cheating? Cite that is the case. Also arranged can encompass a huge variety of circumstances.
Personally, I am on the side of the OP that arranged marriages are a relic of the old ways (it curtails people’s freedoms and oppresses women), and should be shown the door. Or at least people should be given a realistic choice between love and arranged marriages.
That said, it seems to me, the OP is projecting their ideals, goals, and ambitions on arranged marriage.
Are there any numbers about the fidelity rates and/or success rates for love vs arranged marriages?
Quoting the OP:
No, everyone doesn’t think that way at all. There are societies where the success of the marriage is defined by whether it can last a lifetime, not by how loving the couple is. Going by that measure, a marriage ending in divorce would be a failure, whereas a lasting loveless marriage where the man seeks out an escort every week is, in a twisted sense, successful. (And, no, I don’t subscribe to any of this.)
The original post, which seems utterly obvious to generic-you, wouldn’t make all that sense to anyone that subscribes to this notion.
The OP seems to take for granted that monogamy is the ideal to judge a marriage. I don’t see why this is the case either.
As long as questions like this are actually asked in an intelligent setting, I weep for Humanity.
How about this: Hey, these ancient cultures use prearrangement to select spouses, I wonder how they came to that practice and what do they value in marriage that may be different than what we (or at least people like me) value in marriage?
I think what we’d find is that most such cultures (like most other cultures) were just fine with the man cheating. But not so hot about the woman doing it. There’d be exceptions, of course - 18th C Italy comes to mind. But those were not the norm - purdah was.
On the other hand, a married woman can cheat fairly easily if she is discreet, as opposed to a married man. As long as she takes care to occasionally sleep with her husband, then any child is always going to be passed on as his. For a man, a pregnancy of an extra marital partner, will require much more delicate handling.
AIUI, marriage in cultures with arranged marriage isn’t supposed to be about emotions or being with someone you want to boff. In at least some cases, it’s more about alliances between families. Think about marriages between European royals before the 20th century for an example. It might not have mattered terribly much who the king was having sex with, but the marriage could shore up an alliance between two countries. The same might be true on a smaller scale between two families in some of these cultures.
That’s not really true of modern South Asian arranged marriages. Finding someone from a “good family” for your kid is important, but they may very well be perfect strangers. Indian newspapers (and especially NRI newspapers) carry matrimonials in their classified ad sections (though these seem to have been swallowed by the Internet for the most part.)
Through most of human history, marriage was not primarily about the couple.
It was about making sure that the couple’s parents would be cared for in their old age.
It was about making sure that the couple’s children would be cared for in their minority.
The couple’ personal happiness was a distant third, at best. Nice, but not essential.
The true purpose of marriage is having your kids on weekends?
Also disagree the purpose of marriage is sexual fidelity. I understand that’s the norm here and now, but as others have said, there are reasons for marriage besides making sure your spouse isn’t doing someone else.
Marrying for “twue wuv” hasn’t always been the norm.
Two hundred years ago, devout Jewish peasants in Russia and devout Catholic peasants and Ireland often had marriages arranged by parents or by a matchmaker. I assure you that adultery was NOT winked at in their communities.
One difference, though, is that divorce was easier for the Jews than the Catholics if things became really intolerable. I doubt it was common even for the Jews, just more possible.
