****[Poster's Note: This is a long post. It's probably overly long. It's my worked up ramblings over a particular letter and response in an advice column. Check out the previous post to read the letter and response. In any case, I would highly suggest to simply skim over this post to get the gist of my ramblings. I'm not entirely sure why I have gotten so worked up over this but I simply believe it was bad advice, glaringly bad. That might be an overreaction on my part. I dunno. I feel a little silly to have gotten so worked up, but whatever, I thought the advice was bad. However, I just want to make sure that my post doesn't sound like marriage is the ultimate answer for every woman (or man). I actually think it is the arranged marriage that foments this stereotype, that everyone should be married by 35 AND have children. In reality the opposite is quite true. Marriage is not for everyone, and neither is having children. Some marry later in life, and just as (if not more) happily. While some have children first then get married down the road. And still others enjoy a rich, full life without the so-called "institution" of marriage. This is what I believe and I hope the wording of my post doesn't sound in opposition to this. Wow. This post just keeps getting longer and longer.] 4-22-07
I'd like to thank everyone for sharing their thoughts on the Dear Prudence letter I posted. The comments ran the gamut and I must say I was both surprised and intrigued.
The reason I posted was because I (basically) went temporarily insane when I first read the letter and response. I have read Emily Yoffe's articles (mostly Human Guinea Pig) for a couple years now and find her to be a very astute and witty person. Never would I have thought she would respond to Confused in the way she did. As I mentioned earlier I do not read the Dear Prudence column regularly, but I've read enough to concur with my earlier assessment of Yoffe. So I was simply dumbfounded to read Yoffe's response to Confused. I even emailed Yoffe thinking she must be a little naive in her understanding of what an Indian Arranged Marriage is. She was kind enough to email back, but it was a perfunctory "I appreciate your thoughts" along with an example of happily arranged married Indian Male Doctor, though she did add that she wasn't very familiar with an Indian arranged marriage. I, naturally, thought she didn't comprehend the impact of such a tradition from the female (potential bride's) perspective and fired off another email pointing out the problems in her reasoning. She was kind enough again to give me a "I appreciate your thoughts" reply, though this time the reply more than hinted at her conclusion that I must be a crazy person. I must admit that I stupidly used the Shilpa Shetty/Richard Gere incident as support of my argument, but I hadn't seen the video. So I had to reply with an apology for bringing up Richard "Dirty Old Man" Gere, but (clearly) the absurd response by Indian/Hindu Nationalists gives my argument a few points. In any case, more of the Shetty/Gere incident later. Along with my apology reply I added "no need to return a perfunctory reply" and I haven't heard from Prudie since.
I'd like to discuss, in-depth, my problems with the Indian/Traditional Arranged Marriage (especially in today's context) but the more I think (and get worked up) about it, the more my thoughts touch on other matters dealing with the subject of modern relationships. But I must first explain why I find Prudie's response such bad advice.
I must start with this important thought: That whether one thinks Prudie's response is good or bad advice rests, a good deal, in how they define an arranged marriage (especially in this particular case) and in how they characterize Confused. Confused describes herself as "very independent" and living life on her own terms. As she is a (relatively) young immigrant from India, I find this to mean that she does not subscribe to all the traditions (and let's face it, patriarchy) of her native land. She also calls the idea of an arranged marriage "archaic" and "almost mortifying." So the question arises why is she even thinking about an arranged marriage. Well there are two interconnected answers. First, she's a bit panicky. She's from a culture in which being 30 and single is, absurdly, frowned upon and considered socially unfavorable. Even in our (USA) society and culture, things get a bit hectic for women the closer they get to 40. I can understand the childbearing element in this. But to panic at the age of 30, after a couple of relationships didn't work out is almost preposterous to me. Second, Confused comes from a culture in which the parents make a lot of decisions, especially when it comes to women. Her parents are most likely even more panicky than she is and want grandchildren yesterday, so they're applying some parental pressure towards the arranged marriage. I find it funny that she's moved to the US to become independent but now wonders if she should depend on tradition and her parents to find her a husband.
Still, I can understand Confused asking her parents to set her up with serious-minded suitors, something that eHarmony can do as well. But, I'm almost certain, that's not what her parents have in mind. They'll be finding potential husbands in India and across the US, I mean what are the chances the family they go to has a son who is in Confused's zip code? I mean she can't just go grab a coffee with these guys. And that brings me to the "dates" or meetings Confused will be having with her suitors. They might be chaperoned (it's not unheard of). And how many of these meetings will she be able to have before having to say "I do"? I'm guessing something like 3. And let's remember the tradition of an arranged marriage wasn't to benefit the brides. I mean what are these potential grooms expecting? Someone from India could be expecting a green card, it's not something that wouldn't matter. What I'm trying to say is that I don't really see how this is any less crazy than using something like eHarmony. But from Prudie's response, it's eHarmony that seems like the crazy choice. As I emailed, why not tell Confused to use both, sign up for eHarmony as well as ask the parents to introduce serious-minded suitors. In fact, the traditional Indian arranged marriage has made the digital revolution, check out a website like Shaadi.com (shaadi = marriage in Hindi).
Once again, whether or not you find Prudie's advice good or bad rests with how you characterize Confused and what type of arranged marriage you believe her parents are setting up for her.
I think Prudie gave Confused bad advice because it seems Confused is just a bit panicked and depressed she hasn't found a husband yet. She, like many of us, most likely feels lonely and her biological clock is ticking. But she's still young, I mean she's only 30. (I wonder if Prudie would give the same advice if Confused was 25? And if not, why is it suitable to a woman only 5 years older? I just don't get it.) I would suggest Confused go ahead and sign up for eHarmony, Match.com, and other more serious-minded dating sites, as well as join as many extracurricular and activity clubs as she can (I understand finding a potential husband isn't as easy as joining a book club, but it wouldn't hurt to join one). At the same time Confused should ask her parents to be on the look out for serious-minded suitors, but they must understand that the potential couple must be able to get to know each other on some personal level before deciding to get married. If this doesn't work or fit in a traditional Indian Arranged Marriage, then she should reject that option.
To those who agree with Prudie, I must ask, what type of arranged marriage do you think Confused's parents have in store for her? Because I'd be okay with the advice, even with my anti-arranged marriage bent, if this was simply major-league, very serious setting up by the parents. But I'm almost certain it is not. Unlike using something like eHarmony, Confused is flying to meet someone and she must make a decision within a handful of "meetings". And while Confused mentions her parents will not force her to marry someone she doesn't like, does anyone think her parents will be okay if she quickly rejects a string of candidates? And there are so many terrible situations that arise from an atmosphere like this. Let's say she kind of likes the guy but isn't completely sure just yet. The guy is "smitten" and wants an answer quickly, will her parents not add some pressure if they like the guy? What if instead of liking the guy, she just doesn't mind him. Now she's facing some parental pressure for a man she's ambiguous about. And, once again I ask, how many rejections will her parents be okay with, until they add more pressure.
But what if things go well? She is set up with a decent fellow and they hit it off? What's wrong with them dating for a couple months? Or moving in together? And that's where my problems with an arranged marriage (especially of the Indian tradition) arise. It stems from a religiosity and conservatism in which pre-marital sex is considered taboo and living together is frowned upon. If it was up to me, I'd suggest each couple start to live together when they get engaged. I haven't had a relationship reach this level of seriousness, but I am almost certain that even if the couple are simpatico on several levels, living together will add a new wrinkle to the relationship, as well as will be great preparation. Anyway, that's just a personal opinion and I understand many (if not most) married couples do well even without living together pre-marriage. I'll stop here before I keep on rambling and people find me even more crazy.
I'd like to re-thank everyone for commenting. And reading through this long post.
PS - I guess I must be a bit honest in admitting this letter hits a little close to home (though not entirely people!?!?!). I'm a couple years away from 30 and I've yet to have a relationship that I would consider to have reached the "serious" level, the pre-pre-marriage level. But an arranged marriage is and will be the farthest thing from my mind. Perhaps this is why the letter and response resonated so much with me. I'd like to think I have a good deal of dating left, even though (of course) I'd like to meet my soul mate sooner than later. But Prudie's response to Confused takes on an anti-dating fatalism that seems absurd to me. Yes, Confused wants to be married but other than that doesn't find the Indian Arranged Marriage process all that inviting. To me it's clear, this means she should date seriously, which means signing up for dating websites which cater to more serious-minded daters (eHarmony, etc) as well as allow her friends and family to set her up with like-minded, serious suitors. But, for me at least, this doesn't mean she must go into a closed-minded process in which she's to select/attract a potential husband based on 90 minutes worth of so-called meetings and the good word of her parents (who don't really know the guy either). I'm sorry but I find that type of process limited and tenuous, or perhaps better described as archaic and almost mortifying.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
You wouldn't buy a car without test driving it first, would you? And if you really liked it, but still weren't sure, you bring it home to meet the mechanics.
The Funasaurus believes in "seeing someone in all seasons" before considering marriage... and I think there's something to that. Whether or not it's a whirlwind Hollywood-esque romance, or an arranged marriage, I think that it's benificial to see that person not just at their best, but when they're sick, scared, down, excited, etc. Personalities can change a lot, depending on circumstance. And seeing those phases only comes with time.
V - I don't know if you noticed or not, but I didn't really give my opinion of arranged marriages in the original post.
The fact is, to me the idea is untenable in the extreme. I suppose if I had been raised with the notion that a marriage might be brokered for me by my parents, it might be more acceptable. But I wasn't, and it isn't.
In reality, because the option of an arranged marriage was never part of my upbringing, my reaction to it is much less thought-out than yours and more of a visceral response. But in reading your opinion, I more or less agree with your every word. (Although I think you'd be surprised how many never-married women in their 40s are perfectly content to be single.)
Curious... is it an issue in your family? How many generations (if any) are you removed from India? Are modern Indian-American parents more inclined to arrange their daughters' marriages than their sons'?
Thanks for commenting folks! It's funny that when I read Prudie's response I thought it was a little crazy. Then I thought my (perhaps over) reaction to it was crazy. I'm not sure if it's either, perhaps it's someplace in between. But I really think it all depends on what characterization one gives to Confused, as well as what type of arranged marriage one feels the parents have in store.
Getflix - An apt auto metaphor. I wonder if the women get it
Prin-G - I like the Funman's "all seasons" quote. In my opinion it's wonderful advice.
LA - I did notice. And I do understand your visceral response, and that is one reason I was so alarmed and shocked at reading Prudie's advice. I really thought she would get a flood of emails like mine.
I was wondering how my talk of a single woman at 30 "panicking" would sound. I just want to re-stress that I find it absurd. And that I also understand marriage isn't for everyone. I've added a note mentioning this as well, if any of my words in particular belie this view, please (anyone) let me know.
It slightly is an issue in my extended family. I am of the second generation (first to be born here in the US) so the tradition isn't that far removed. My parents and most (probably all) of my aunts and uncles were arranged married. And while I understand many couples thrive from such a tradition and process, my view of it isn't so rosy and I would conclude it really isn't all that helpful. It's kind of funny that the 3 or 4 of my cousins who are married or in a serious relationship have all basically shunned the arranged marriage tradition. And they were all born in India. It is actually rather interesting and I think I might post about it as a way to close these posts, lol.
And while I am no expert on modern Indian arranged marriages in the US, anyone who says this tradition/process isn't favored towards daughters is lying. How favored is something I do not know.
Wow, V. You weren't kidding that this is a long post! Looking back, my comment on your first post about this issue was pretty non-committal. I think I'm still figuring out how I feel about all types of marriage and whether or not it's for me.
Personally, I would not be ok with the idea of an arranged marriage. As I said before, I am way too arguementative and stubborn to be ok with my parents picking the person I spend the rest of my life with and not have a say.
However, as someone who hasn't grown up in a family where marriage is expected (although my mother would be pleased as punch if I start churning out the grandkids...) let alone have it expected that my parents choose my husband for me, I suppose it's hard for me to imagine all the potential outcomes of an arranged marriage.
You make a lot of really good points. I'd be pissed if I hit 30 and was expected that I needed to settle down. My 30's is when I plan on getting wild and crazy! haha...
This is of course not to say that there are people out there in arranged marriages that are not happy, natch.
Did any of my comment make sense? I find my writing becomes pretty lackluster when I'm not in school.
v - I don't think anyone really came out in favor of arranged marriages, but rather discussed if what the columnist said made sense. I thought that the way she responded did. I'm not married and not looking to be married, but there are some people - both men and women who get to the point in their life where they want to wed. Period. And this isn't just a cultural thing. Those folks are looking for the way to find a spouse, either by blind date, internet site, or what was offered here - a set up with a person her parents thought was suitable for her as a mate. I don't think that it was implied they would marry within a fortnight, or that she wouldn't try to get to know him better first.
I think based on your background, you may have read between the lines of the inquiry to see things the rest of us are not. But trust me, if you lived in so cal, I'd be trying to set you up with nice young ladies I know - that is just the way of the world!
V - You're not off base with the age of 30 being a trigger for many people. One friend of mine in particular came thisclose to a nervous breakdown on her 30th birthday because she was single. To say she was extremely depressed about it would be a gross under-statement.
But on point, I think the age of 30 becomes a "panic" time for many women because of their biological deadline to bear children.
I'm in my early (okay, pushing mid) 40s and never married. My sister is nearly 39 and never married. My brother is my only married sibling, and he didn't walk down the aisle until he was close to 35. I'm sure in other parts of the country, this is shocking (it's shocking to my mother, trust me), but here in Southern California, it's not that uncommon. At least I don't think it is.
Great topic!
BTW, if you were the first generation to be born in the US, I'm curious if English is your first language? My dad was born here, but his parents weren't, and he learned to speak Italian before English because that's what they spoke at home. Of course, his entire education was in English.
v - btw - I loved her Slate article on training her Beagle using the dog whisperer methods
(my personal view is that men are ready to get married around 35)
For a society that has been deeply damaged by colonialism can one think of a more offensive image of a white guy grabbing a daughter of India and forcing himself upon her? It is so symbolic. It is right in line with the image of the white colonist forcing himself upon a country and just taking whatever he wants.
Richard Gere should pay the ultimate price for this.
What bothers me however is those who would blame Shilpa Shetty for this.
Too often women victims of rape in India are blamed for what happened like they wanted the rape to happen or it was their fault the rape happened even when the truth might be that the rapists brutalized them and they couldn't stop the rape from happening.
While of course Richard Gere didn't actually rape Shilpa Shetty, I still see this whole "Blame the Woman Victim" dynamic in place. From what I saw from the video Shilpa Shetty did nothing to cause Richard Gere to act the way he did, and was in fact as shocked as everyone else was that he would act in such a disgraceful manner.
We need to defend this daughter of India, not blame her for this white man's assault upon her.
Thank you, everyone, for commenting and not calling me crazy, even though this post might be a bit much in its anti-arranged marriage bent. I think Diane hits the bullseye when she said, "I think based on your background, you may have read between the lines of the inquiry to see things the rest of us are not."
And I would say that is a very fair characterization. As my rambling posts mentions, the letter and advice do not give enough information on Confused's situation and temperament, as well as on what type of arranged marriage the parents have in mind. Because of my background, I think the parents have a rather conservative type in mind, but this is just a guess on my part. And if the parents instead have a very liberal type in mind, then even with my anti-AM bent, I would say it couldn't hurt.
Mish - Your comment made plenty of sense, as usual. I must say I agree with your take on marriage, but if I ever found someone special (and I do hope to) I would like some type of commitment ceremony or a celebration of couplehood thingamajig or something marriage-like, lol. I guess a marriage ceremony that wasn't overtly religious since I myself believe in pantheism and spirituality rather than any single religion. I guess I'm talking about a civil ceremony. Though if a religious ceremony was important to her, I would be cool with one as well. Wow, look at me talking about future marriage (or marriage-like) ceremonies. I'm such a girl.
Diane - You are one very smart lady. I think I did jump to a conclusion. In my defense, it's just that whenever I hear Indian and Arranged Marriage together, I think the worst case scenario.
LA - I do see the childbearing element in all of this for women (and even men to a degree though it certainly isn't comparable). But I would hope people at 30 would still consider themselves to be young. And there are alternatives.
As for my first language, it is a bit interesting. In fact, it is pretty similar to your father. Both my parents learned English in school as a second language. While English is the first language I learned to read and write, as a baby I learned to speak my parents' mother tongue (Gujarati for those of you scoring at home) and a good bit of English from them as well. But yeah, my first words must have been in Gujarati. Today I don't think I have an accent when I speak English, and in fact I have a thick accent when I speak my broken Gujarati to relatives.
Anonymous - Thank you for proving that some people in India or Indians abroad still think in insanely dangerous black and white terms. I do not agree with much of your comment. But I'll leave it up because I'm not going to "censor" it or whatever. Yes, Gere acted like a dirty old man, but to characterize the incident in racial and colonial terms is wrong and beyond absurd. And it is funny you use the term "daughter of India" when it is the Indian "nationalists" who are or were calling for her to apologize for being the victim of Sir Grabsalot. Though in no way should Grabby McGerbil pay the "ultimate price" whatever that is.
I went back & read the original post again, & caught the 'my parents still live in India' line (I missed it previously).
I am Indian, & know many that live here & in India. Having caught that line, I know that the parents would've pressured her once she met some of the men. I know even the most traditional Indians here would not pressure their daughters to marry the men they tried to set her up w/.
Sidenote: Once my grandfather had to fly to India to keep my uncle from pressuring my cousin to marry a suitor.
Post a Comment