Arranged Marriage

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I have a friend, someone I share a bit of conversation and a few drinks with several times a week, on a casual basis. As it happens, he is a Hindu (though not religious).

Here's the issue: after his mother died (in India), his father moved to Canada to live with him, and has now decided that it is time that my friend was married so that there can be a woman in the house. (My friend cooks for his father every single day, and keeps house for him, too, while holding down a full-time job in Information Technology.)

In fact, his father has decided who it is that he is going to marry, and when. An Indian woman my friend met only long ago as a child. This has been agreed to between my friend's father and the girl's father.

The issue? My friend doesn't want to get married! (I think that he may even be gay, though I've never sifted him on that point, as he has never offered up any real reason for me to think so.) But he most definitely does not want to marry this person. But culturally, he feels trapped. He is really either afraid or very loathe to say "no" to his father on this point.

I went a little further than I usually would in such a situation. Normally I would hold my peace and not offer advice, because who am I to advise anyone? But this time, I told him -- "You're a Canadian! You are a man, your own man. There is nobody on this side of the ocean who can force you to marry against your will."

He is still really, really torn -- and I think in the end he is simply going to give and obey his father, and that culturally-driven arranged marriage nonsense.

 

[epronovost]

We just can't seem to be able to kill the patriarchy fast enough.

 

[Rival]

I hope whatever he does he is happy.

 

[Twilight Hue]

What a crazy dilemma. You would think by now, arranged marriages would have been outdated. You'd think the guy was an aristocrat or something.

 

[Jainarayan]

I’m not Indian... hell, I don’t even understand Italians, and I am one so I can’t pretend to fully understand Indian culture. But something I do know is he might be able to turn that cultural aspect of arranged marriages to his advantage.

If he can find a pandit (priest) or other person who is well versed in Jyotiṣa (Vedic astrology), hopefully the astrologer will find that the birth charts are not compatible. The marriage would probably be called off. I’m serious... this is taken very seriously, at least by the older generation.

Unfortunately the one fly in the kheer (rice pudding) is if the fathers already did that when the two children were young and the birth charts are compatible. Then I am out of ideas. Old world customs die hard.

 

[Iymus]

I have a friend, someone I share a bit of conversation and a few drinks with several times a week, on a casual basis. As it happens, he is a Hindu (though not religious).

Here's the issue: after his mother died (in India), his father moved to Canada to live with him, and has now decided that it is time that my friend was married so that there can be a woman in the house. (My friend cooks for his father every single day, and keeps house for him, too, while holding down a full-time job in Information Technology.)

In fact, his father has decided who it is that he is going to marry, and when. An Indian woman my friend met only long ago as a child. This has been agreed to between my friend's father and the girl's father.

The issue? My friend doesn't want to get married! (I think that he may even be gay, though I've never sifted him on that point, as he has never offered up any real reason for me to think so.) But he most definitely does not want to marry this person. But culturally, he feels trapped. He is really either afraid or very loathe to say "no" to his father on this point.

I went a little further than I usually would in such a situation. Normally I would hold my peace and not offer advice, because who am I to advise anyone? But this time, I told him -- "You're a Canadian! You are a man, your own man. There is nobody on this side of the ocean who can force you to marry against your will."

He is still really, really torn -- and I think in the end he is simply going to give and obey his father, and that culturally-driven arranged marriage nonsense.

Does he have uncles on the father side of the family that he can talk to?
Perhaps his uncles can talk to their brother.

 

[Jainarayan]

We just can't seem to be able to kill the patriarchy fast enough.

It’s not necessarily patriarchy per se. There are reasons that these sorts of customs exist... not necessarily reasons that make sense today... but they’re so ingrained in a culture people don’t even know why. Historically these customs kept property or wealth in a clan, or strengthened inter-family relations, among other practical (at the time) reasons.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It’s not necessarily patriarchy per se. There are reasons that these sorts of customs exist... not necessarily reasons that make sense today... but they’re so ingrained in a culture people don’t even know why. Historically these customs kept property or wealth in a clan, or strengthened inter-family relations, among other practical (at the time) reasons.

So property is everything, the children are just chattels -- property themselves -- being used. And when couples in such marriages find they don't really like each other, it's alright for the husband to beat the wife, or to screw around anywhere else he'd rather be. But by gum, the farm is still in the family!

Abhorrent, in my view.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Well, my friend just came into the pub again, and said he's just going to go ahead and do it, even though he doesn't want to.

I hate to admit this, but my respect for him just took a big tumble.

 

[epronovost]

It’s not necessarily patriarchy per se. There are reasons that these sorts of customs exist... not necessarily reasons that make sense today... but they’re so ingrained in a culture people don’t even know why. Historically these customs kept property or wealth in a clan, or strengthened inter-family relations, among other practical (at the time) reasons.

You just described what a patriarchy is: a political and social system in which the patriarch (a father) administrate his family and has power and authority over his wife(s) and unmarried children (and potentially widowed or unmarried sisters and elderly mother). This system of course, extands unto the rest of society where mature men hold the key position of power, respect and authority while younger men and women are subordinated. It was a "practical" social order for poor agrarian societies that allowed for riches concentration amongst a few, atocracies and often very militarised societies, but while functionnal and even very efficient and competitive, these societies are, to me, disgusting.

 

[Jainarayan]

So property is everything, the children are just chattels -- property themselves -- being used. And when couples in such marriages find they don't really like each other, it's alright for the husband to beat the wife, or to screw around anywhere else he'd rather be. But by gum, the farm is still in the family!

Abhorrent, in my view.

I think that’s more than a little melodramatic. Not to mention a straw man. It doesn’t necessarily follow that arranged marriages are loveless, violent and or adulterous.

 

[SomeRandom]

I think that’s more than a little melodramatic. Not to mention a straw man. It doesn’t necessarily follow that arranged marriages are loveless, violent and or adulterous.

They don’t have to be. But it’s a patriarchal custom all the same.

 

[SomeRandom]

I’m thinking that even though my mother has continuously stressed that she would never force me to marry someone. There are hints that something similar will happen to me, an arranged date though.
But I have inherited both my parents’ stubborn tendencies. So I ain’t marrying anyone unless I want to.
But I can empathise with the pressure of conforming to one’s familial duties. It’s a very ingrained cultural ideal and they die hard.

 

[Jainarayan]

You just described what a patriarchy is: a political and social system in which the patriarch (a father) administrate his family and has power and authority over his wife(s) and unmarried children (and potentially widowed or unmarried sisters and elderly mother). This system of course, extands unto the rest of society where mature men hold the key position of power, respect and authority while younger men and women are subordinated.

If you want to call it a patriarchy that’s fine. Patriarchy isn’t a four letter word. But keep in mind a lot of times these systems were thought to be for the good of the society, not any “Josef Stalin-type” grab for power by an old boy network.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think that’s more than a little melodramatic. Not to mention a straw man. It doesn’t necessarily follow that arranged marriages are loveless, violent and or adulterous.

You might want to look at Henry VIII and his marriage to Anne of Cleves. He couldn't stand her. Or Edward VII and his marriage to Alexandra, Princess of Denmark. I've dined in places where Eddie boffed his mistresses, and Alexandra pretended not to know. It was actually to her benefit that she went pretty much deaf and couldn't hear what was going on around her (though she knew, anyways). These women included Lillie Langtry, the actress; Daisy Greville, Countess of Warwick; Agnes Keyser, humanitarian; American Jennie Jerome, the future mother of Winston Churchill; and society matron Alice Keppel.

 

[Jainarayan]

They don’t have to be. But it’s a patriarchal custom all the same.

Right, but my point is that it’s not necessarily the stereotypical tyrannical despot. When it comes right down to it even 21st century America is a patriarchy. Except for the Amazons of Greek myth I can’t think of any human society that’s not patriarchal to some degree. But I don’t think social anthropology is the thrust of this thread.

 

[Jainarayan]

You might want to look at Henry VIII and his marriage to Anne of Cleves. He couldn't stand her. Or Edward VII and his marriage to Alexandra, Princess of Denmark. I've dined in places where Eddie boffed his mistresses, and Alexandra pretended not to know. It was actually to her benefit that she went pretty much deaf and couldn't hear what was going on around her (though she knew, anyways). These women included Lillie Langtry, the actress; Daisy Greville, Countess of Warwick; Agnes Keyser, humanitarian; American Jennie Jerome, the future mother of Winston Churchill; and society matron Alice Keppel.

English history is not what this thread was about, now was it. It was about a friend in a cultural dilemma you now see fit to lose respect for because he is bowing to that cultural pressure. Unless you’re part of an “old world” culture you can’t possibly understand the angst. I would question what kind of friend would be so quick to turn when I’m agonizing over a life decision.

 

[epronovost]

If you want to call it a patriarchy that’s fine. Patriarchy isn’t a four letter word. But keep in mind a lot of times these systems were thought to be for the good of the society, not any “Josef Stalin-type” grab for power by an old boy network.

If you define "the good of society" by what's good for older men than patriarchy is a fantastic system; for women and young men it has been terrible. It's in no way different than a "Joseph Stalin-type" power grab for it too was made "for the good of society" as defined by the bolshevik. "It's for the best" has been the motto behind ever single hierarchical structure.

 

[SomeRandom]

Right, but my point is that it’s not necessarily the stereotypical tyrannical despot. When it comes right down to it even 21st century America is a patriarchy. Except for the Amazons of Greek myth I can’t think of any human society that’s not patriarchal to some degree. But I don’t think social anthropology is the thrust of this thread.

I would argue it kind of is. It is a form of social violence designed to put women (and even men) in their proper place. It merely hides behind a veneer of “cultural standards.” We are taught from a young age that this is all part of our duty, our dharma. And thus very few people have any sort of recourse to counter this. Marriage is something sacred and holy in our community. And yet it is often used as a form of control and to keep the status quo.
We prattle on and on about diversity and acceptance. Yet turn around and demand young men and women obey their parents, even if they don’t want to. I do not blame the parents, they are only doing what they believe is the best for their children. And I do in fact know many happily married couples in my own family, where it was arranged.

But this system is not a good one. It might have made sense in the past, to secure ones future in a rather barbaric class system it must be said. It doesn’t anymore. It’s just tradition for the sake of tradition.

 

[Jedster]

I’m not Indian... hell, I don’t even understand Italians, and I am one so I can’t pretend to fully understand Indian culture. But something I do know is he might be able to turn that cultural aspect of arranged marriages to his advantage.

If he can find a pandit (priest) or other person who is well versed in Jyotiṣa (Vedic astrology), hopefully the astrologer will find that the birth charts are not compatible. The marriage would probably be called off. I’m serious... this is taken very seriously, at least by the older generation.

Unfortunately the one fly in the kheer (rice pudding) is if the fathers already did that when the two children were young and the birth charts are compatible. Then I am out of ideas. Old world customs die hard.

Not sure if this might help.

I lived in Malaysia for a short period and stayed with several Hindu families.
One of the fathers wanted to marry off his daughter to someone she wasn't interested in.
One of the more enlightened holy men helped her out by telling the father that the man was a drug dealer. Dad immediately called off the match.