I have friends who are Afghan who have had arranged marriages so this led me to be curious to ask, why does this practice still persist into the 21st century?

  • odium@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Except that “arranged marriage” is a matchmaking service in many cultures where both people need to agree to get married. And in many cultures, “arranged marriage” means both the man and the woman are forced to marry regardless of whether the man doesn’t want it or the woman doesn’t want it.

    There are indeed cultures where “arranged marriages” only happen if the man consents and the woman’s consent isn’t considered.

    I believe the downvotes are because of how many different meanings there are to “arranged marriage” and your comment implies that the only type of arranged marriage is the only man’s consent and no woman consent version.

    • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      If both parties have a choice in the matter then that’s not really an “arranged marriage” though is it? That’s just dating and getting married.

      • odium@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        The dating phase is often mostly skipped. Maybe a few months. It’s straight from meet a handful of times to marry. That’s what makes it “arranged”.

        I think you might be mixing up “forced marriages” with “arranged marriages”.

      • odium@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        As another comment on this post explains, in urban middle class India, “arranged marriages” are when your parents are a dating app and set up meetings with people and both people getting married need to consent.

        Indians themselves, being a former British colony and thus speaking some degree of English, use those exact words. This isn’t a translation of an Indian phrase or someone else labeling Indian marriages “arranged marriages”. Middle class Indians split marriages into two categories. “Arranged marriages” and “love marriages”.

        “Love marriages” are when the partners themselves hit it off, date, and marry.

        “Arranged marriages” for middle class indians are when the parents set up meetings, and if both partners agree, they get married. Not much dating with that one, just a couple of meetings, then get engaged for a year (can vary), then marry. Either partner can stop this process at any point. After marriage, legally, either party can file a divorce. This is less common and more frowned upon in older generations but legally quite possible.

        For poor Indians in really rural areas, “arranged marriage” means something different. For them, both partners are forced to marry regardless of their wishes if their parents feel strongly enough about it. Legally, they have the same rights, but the societal pressure makes it effectively forced for them.

        The above is true for all religions in India except Islam. Muslims have some weird special laws and seperate civil courts and law. The Quran states some laws about divorce and other stuff and there would have been more riots and protests during the government’s formation if they weren’t allowed to follow the Quran’s laws. Some of these special laws have recently been banned, it’s very complicated and I don’t know much about the situation as I don’t live in India.

        I also have some Chinese friends whose idea of what an arranged marriage is is very similar to the Indian middle class.

        And if both India and China have similar views on arranged marriage, I’m guessing that some parts of South East Asia also have similar ideas. That’s easily over a quarter of the earth’s idea of “arranged marriage”.