I'm beginning to think that hair is the #1 physical attribute that women care about

[Saurabhaj]

Here we have a saying on facebook that says..

If you do love marriage,you will marry u r own girlfriend..
If you do arrange marriage,you will marry some one else girlfriend.

 

[frenchy]

Here we have a saying on facebook that says..

If you do love marriage,you will marry u r own girlfriend..
If you do arrange marriage,you will marry some one else girlfriend.

you allow them to have bf before mariage?

 

[Saurabhaj]

Many middle class and rich class girls have boyfriends..
Lol..
Sometimes even a average looking girl have handsome boyfriend..
Because as the no. Of boys are more and only 50/70 perc are good looking,in that 50/70 perc.boys..
Almost half are not interested in girls before marriage or so novice or down to earth or shy...

To get girl is so tough that boys go for even average looking girl..

Watch the above video and see how girls here have become..

My friend got a proposal from girl family who on further info..
We found out she have 4 boyfriends..

That's insane..

 

[pjhair]

He's Indian. They have very traditional beliefs, who the hell are you to say their tradition is BS? Don't talk until you educate yourself, arranged marriages are proven to work out better. There is a reason why the divorce rate is so high in America.

Aah, this plain old argument "it's their culture. Who are you to criticize? " comes again. The same people will probably claim "It's OK in some cultures to treat women as second class citizens and beat them. Who are you to criticize?". What if some cultures perform human sacrifice as ritual. Will you justify that on the same ground? We either have an objective basis for morality or we don't. If you believe in an objective standard for morality, then you can logically criticize practices that you find immoral. Having said all that, I am from Indian origin as well. But that is completely irrelevant to the argument I am making.

 

[Sweeping]

Aah, this plain old argument "it's their culture. Who are you to criticize? " comes again. The same people will probably claim "It's OK in some cultures to treat women as second class citizens and beat them. Who are you to criticize?". What if some cultures perform human sacrifice as ritual. Will you justify that on the same ground? We either have an objective basis for morality or we don't. If you believe in an objective standard for morality, then you can logically criticize practices that you find immoral. Having said all that, I am from Indian origin as well. But that is completely irrelevant to the argument I am making.

Good going, making a comparison of arranged marriages to beating up women.. Wow, you got me with that one!
You didn't even address the argument I made. Everything you said was completely irrelevant. "If you believe in an objective standard for morality, then you can logically criticize practices that you find immoral" is just another way of saying that you've formed an opinion, and your opinion is that you think arranged marriages are immoral. Please explain to me why, and then maybe we can actually have an educational conversation.

 

[pjhair]

Good going, making a comparison of arranged marriages to beating up women.. Wow, you got me with that one!
You didn't even address the argument I made. Everything you said was completely irrelevant. "If you believe in an objective standard for morality, then you can logically criticize practices that you find immoral" is just another way of saying that you've formed an opinion, and your opinion is that you think arranged marriages are immoral. Please explain to me why, and then maybe we can actually have an educational conversation.

Read my response carefully again and see what I am really saying. Don't do a shallow reading of my arguments. Did I make a comparison between beating wives and arranged marriages? Or I am merely responding to your own statement. You said, "They have very traditional beliefs, who the hell are you to say their tradition is BS". I am simply arguing that you can logically criticize behavior that you find inappropriate or immoral if you believe in an objective moral framework. For example, in some cultures women are treated as a second class citizens and are subjected to all kinds of discrimination. Do we have right to criticize those cultural practices ONLY if we belong to those cultures? I am arguing that we all have right to criticize those practices as I believe in objective moral values. Now whether arranged marriage itself is immoral or inappropriate is a separate issue altogether. I am willing to discuss that but only if you understand what I am really saying and quit doing shallow reading. Do you have any counter argument against what I just said? If you don't then we can move on and talk about the issue of arranged marriage.

 

[Sweeping]

Read my response carefully again and see what I am really saying. Don't do a shallow reading of my arguments. Did I make a comparison between beating wives and arranged marriages? Or I am merely responding to your own statement. You said, "They have very traditional beliefs, who the hell are you to say their tradition is BS". I am simply arguing that you can logically criticize behavior that you find inappropriate or immoral if you believe in an objective moral framework. For example, in some cultures women are treated as a second class citizens and are subjected to all kinds of discrimination. Do we have right to criticize those cultural practices ONLY if we belong to those cultures? I am arguing that we all have right to criticize those practices as I believe in objective moral values. Now whether arranged marriage itself is immoral or inappropriate is a separate issue altogether. I am willing to discuss that but only if you understand what I am really saying and quit doing shallow reading. Do you have any counter argument against what I just said? If you don't then we can move on and talk about the issue of arranged marriage.

Sure, let's move on. Curious as to why you are so against arranged marriages.

 

[shookwun]

Getting a girl is only hard for average looking men who don't havr much on their plate looks wise, career and overall size wise.

The average man will struggle, that's a given. Even worse for those who make medium wages and don't have emposing features such as a large build and favourable stature.

What you do with your ambitions towards the calibre of your looks ultimately shapes how successfull you become with women, and socially.

An average and lazy balding man is doomed. Start working on maximizing your appeal or its going to be a depressing road to no where.

 

[frenchy]

at least they probably don't have this kind of degenerate wh*** in their contry

http://www.myvidster.com/video/5953...er_Gets_A_Blowjob_As_A_Tip_-_World_Star_Uncut

srsl **** western culture

 

[pjhair]

Sure, let's move on. Curious as to why you are so against arranged marriages.

The term "arranged marriage" often paints the picture of two happy families agreeing to marry their son or daughter after carefully considering various factors such as education of respective bride/groom, cultural upbringing, looks etc. In this scenario bride/groom have a choice of whether they want to proceed with the marriage or not. However, that is not the only kind of arranged marriage that exists. Arranged marriage also means parents often forcing their sons/daughters to marry someone because of things such as money, religion and caste. Arranged marriage can also mean poor Muslim families in India or Bangladesh marrying their young daughters to rich 70 year old Sheikh's from the Middle East. You might have a very rosy definition of arranged marriage in which prospective brides/grooms are asked for consent. But even in many of those cases, do caste and religion not play a role? How many times do you see a Muslim and a Hindu family willingly agreeing to marry their sons/daughters in each others family? So tell me, what do you precisely mean by arranged marriages? It is important for me to know the exact definition before I proceed with comparing with what you mean by an arranged marriage and love marriage.

 

[Sweeping]

The term "arranged marriage" often paints the picture of two happy families agreeing to marry their son or daughter after carefully considering various factors such as education of respective bride/groom, cultural upbringing, looks etc. In this scenario bride/groom have a choice of whether they want to proceed with the marriage or not. However, that is not the only kind of arranged marriage that exists. Arranged marriage also means parents often forcing their sons/daughters to marry someone because of things such as money, religion and caste. Arranged marriage can also mean poor Muslim families in India or Bangladesh marrying their young daughters to rich 70 year old Sheikh's from the Middle East. You might have a very rosy definition of arranged marriage in which prospective brides/grooms are asked for consent. But even in many of those cases, do caste and religion not play a role? How many times do you see a Muslim and a Hindu family willingly agreeing to marry their sons/daughters in each others family? So tell me, what do you precisely mean by arranged marriages? It is important for me to know the exact definition before I proceed with comparing with what you mean by an arranged marriage and love marriage.

For the most part, arranged marriages follow your first definition. And if you didn't know, Muslim men require their woman to convert to Islam if they aren't Muslim yet, and then a marriage is possible. For Muslim women, they can only marry a man who is Muslim from birth. In fact, I encourage marrying those of your own kind (not incels lol). But people should stay in their own race instead of diversifying. You may think otherwise, this is a whole other discussion. But yes, I think religion, culture, upbringing, money, education, etc should play a role, and elders are great in deciding what's best for their child. Obviously the caste system is very outdated, as are many traditions in India. It's why they are a sh*thole at the moment. But at the same time, they've preserved values that are no where to be found in western culture. It's why many Indians who come to America often succeed, and raise great children. Because they work hard, and only think about security for their family, and giving the best opportunity for their children.
What does all this have to do with arranged marriages? The previous generations, meaning your parents and grandparents, most likely got an arranged marriage. If not, you still get my point. Most did. And obviously there are extreme cases, not all marriages are successful. But all in all, arranged marriages have been proven to be more successful than love. Divorce rate is a HUGE thing. Just look up the psychological impact a divorce can have on children. It's important to have both a mother and father figure in your life. I got nothing against love, that's even better if you have great family values. But western societies for the most part dont. I just don't know how you can be against arranged marriages.

- - - Updated - - -

Rosy definition? No, seems like you've been brainwashed or something. You think all arranged marriages are evil or somethin. I can assure you, a lot more arranged marriages have been done with good intentions from elders.

 

[MadScientist]

I think women look at the difference between guys with hair vs bald guys the same way they look at a squirrels bushy tail vs a rats hairless tail.

 

[kmm179]

I know an Indian women in her 40s and had an arranged marriage. Shes divorced now. Said alot of them are artificial more then genuine happiness. She said the values you are toting force people to try and make it work. Almost makes them force themselves to think they are happy in the situation. They dont want to disappoint family and culture so they feel like they have to make it work/be happy even though deep down they arent. She was born in India and moved to the US. She still loves the culture but feels that aspect is out dated.

You are also wrong on the impact of divorce for the most part. The fighting in a horrible marriage is much worse then the separation or divorce. It can actually be a relief to end the situation.

I know not every middle eastern/muslim country does it but I always thought that marrying your first cousin/uncles was bad biologically. I mean 1,000 of years of that cant be good.

 

[pjhair]

For the most part, arranged marriages follow your first definition.

I am not sure if that is true. Do you have any data that suggests' that “most” arranged marriages are consensual? If you have the data, can you affirm that the sampling that was done was truly randomized and conservatives, liberals and moderate sections of population all had even representation? However, even if that is true, it is safe to say that in many instances women especially are pressured into marriages for things such as caste, religion, etc. So you can’t make a general statement that “arranged marriage is better than love marriage.” You will have to be very specific about how you are defining arranged marriages.

“In fact, I encourage marrying those of your own kind (not incels lol). But people should stay in their own race instead of diversifying.”

I fundamentally disagree with that statement. However, like you said, thats’ a different discussion altogether.

“But yes, I think religion, culture, upbringing, money, education, etc should play a role, and elders are great in deciding what's best for their child.”

Yes, being from the same culture does make things easier when it comes to dating. But it doesn’t mean that being from different cultures is an insurmountable problem. I am not merely saying that. I am a man of Indian origin and I have dated quite a few American and East European women without issues. Also, your statement that “elders are great in deciding whats’ best for their child” doesn’t apply to everyone. I know whats’ best for me. I know what I truly want and desire. In fact my father completely disagrees with my vision of life. However, that’s just me. Not everyone is like me. People are different. So your statement may be applicable to others. But it is not some general truth.

“Obviously the caste system is very outdated, as are many traditions in India. It's why they are a sh*thole at the moment. But at the same time, they've preserved values that are no where to be found in western culture.”

What are those values? Honestly, every society has some good values and some bad ones. So yes, Indian society may have some good values, but that doesn’t make it better than the west.

“But all in all, arranged marriages have been proven to be more successful than love. Divorce rate is a HUGE thing. Just look up the psychological impact a divorce can have on children.”

To say that arranged marriages have been proven to be more successful than love, you will have to run experiments in similar conditions. It appears that arranged marriages are more of a norm in societies that are extremely traditional or religious. In many such societies divorce is seen as an anathema for religious and other reasons. It is also thought to bring immense dishonor to the family. In such societies, many will never consider divorce no matter how miserable they are in the marriage. When love marriage do happen, it is often done by more liberal people who are more likely to divorce in the first place as they don’t have many constraints such as religion. So the game is rigged in favor of arranged marriages to begin with. So how do we accurately compare love and arranged marriages? One way to do that will be to look at the divorce rate of love marriages in the extremely traditional families. Is it similar to arranged marriages? Or you can look at the divorce rate of arranged marriages in comparatively liberal societies such as the US.

“. I got nothing against love, that's even better if you have great family values. But western societies for the most part dont. I just don't know how you can be against arranged marriages.”

What family values do you speak of? Do you think people in the west don’t care about their spouses or children? I can assure you that they most certainly do. A big difference between west and societies such as India is that women here are a lot more independent. They don’t have to rely on their husband or parents for their livelihood. They can divorce their husbands and still raise their children just fine. That is not an option for a significant section of Indian women. They are pretty much enslaved by the circumstances. Also, the societal consequences of divorce is nowhere near as serious for women in the west as it is in India. One very important factor behind the high divorce rate in the west is that women are more independent and free. Do you agree with that statement? You asked me why do I seem so much against arranged marriages? I am not against every arranged marriage. However, far too many times I have seen men and women forced into a marriage because of religious or caste reasons. Also, I personally believe that widespread arranged marriages are actually result of societies being extremely traditional/religious and women not being independent and viewed as chattels.

 

[Sweeping]

Okay, this is turning into the "Do you have proof to back up your claim?... you will have to run experiments in similar conditions." Weird how you ask me that, yet most of your statements are purely subjective and one-sided (just like mine, but then why ask me to run experiments on them lol). And I can go refute your claims with the same argument. "I dont think you can say that, we would have to run trials on this and that." I stated only one thing that can be used as proof, and that is divorce rates.
It's more about ideology, I tend to be more conservative, thus why I hold more of these beliefs. You seem to endorse a more liberal lifestyle. Completely understandable. I'd rather just agree to disagree instead of going around in circles, trying to prove something that cant be proven.

 

[Rudiger]

Okay, this is turning into the "Do you have proof to back up your claim?... you will have to run experiments in similar conditions." Weird how you ask me that, yet most of your statements are purely subjective and one-sided (just like mine, but then why ask me to run experiments on them lol). And I can go refute your claims with the same argument. "I dont think you can say that, we would have to run trials on this and that." I stated only one thing that can be used as proof, and that is divorce rates.

Yep, spot on. The most annoying thing about debating, we're not scholars here and don't need to cite our anecdotal experiences from simply knowing what we've seen or read, that's impossible, but when the one fact we actually bring up is disputed and all the other anecdotal experiences we can't possibly prove are called into question, that's frustrating.

 

[Sweeping]

I know not every middle eastern/muslim country does it but I always thought that marrying your first cousin/uncles was bad biologically. I mean 1,000 of years of that cant be good.

Well yes, marrying your cousins can cause physical mutations and mental retardation. Pakistan mainly does this. Yes, its disgusting.

 

[pjhair]

Okay, this is turning into the "Do you have proof to back up your claim?... you will have to run experiments in similar conditions." Weird how you ask me that, yet most of your statements are purely subjective and one-sided (just like mine, but then why ask me to run experiments on them lol). And I can go refute your claims with the same argument. "I dont think you can say that, we would have to run trials on this and that." I stated only one thing that can be used as proof, and that is divorce rates.
It's more about ideology, I tend to be more conservative, thus why I hold more of these beliefs. You seem to endorse a more liberal lifestyle. Completely understandable. I'd rather just agree to disagree instead of going around in circles, trying to prove something that cant be proven.

When you are trying to arrive at some truth, it is very important to look at data and experiments. Without concrete data/evidence you are merely discussing by making assertions. I don't find these kind of discussions very useful and have no interest in them. You are complaining that I ask you to present evidence. Is that really something to complain about? You ask me to accept raw divorce rate as proof to indicate that arrange marriages are better. But that paints an incomplete picture. We are not discussing what leads to lower divorce rate. We are trying to discuss whether arranged marriage is better than love marriage. What if you find that divorce rate under Taliban regime in Afghanistan was lower than India. Will you start claiming that we should follow Taliban pattern of marriage? What if someone told you that rate of theft in Saudi Arabia is lower than India? Will you use that as an argument in favor of Saudi Legal system over Indian? Your argument will work if you are determined to keep the divorce rate lower and not worry about other things in the lives of people. That is precisely why I asked questions such as where did that data come from and was the sampling truly randomized. Data has a role to play but it is extremely important to look at the underlying conditions and put them in the right context. You complain that I don't present any data/evidence myself. But I never claimed that love marriages have higher/lower divorce rate.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep, spot on. The most annoying thing about debating, we're not scholars here and don't need to cite our anecdotal experiences from simply knowing what we've seen or read, that's impossible, but when the one fact we actually bring up is disputed and all the other anecdotal experiences we can't possibly prove are called into question, that's frustrating.

When someone cites a data, you can't possibly expect me to not analyze it. Data can be very misleading. I will give you an example. What if a person goes to Saudi Arabia and does a survey about Mohammad and asks people if he was truly a messenger of God. The person finds that 99% of people in Saudi Arabia believe Mohammad to be messenger of God. If that person comes and tells you that "99% of people believe that Mohammad was a messenger of God", without telling you that the data comes from Saudi Arabia, are you just going to believe him? It is very important to know the context of data.

- - - Updated - - -

It appears that people grossly underestimate how widespread the misuse of data is. I will give you a simple example. Just do a google search of "Jaguars bite force". You will see that there are various articles ranging from national geographic to unknown blogs, claiming that Jaguar has the highest bite force among big cats. That is simply not true. Jaguars have the highest "bite force quotient" which is bite force relative to their body mass. Not the overall bite force. Tigers actually have the highest overall bite force in cat family. But the people who wrote those articles didn't take their time to analyze the data. As a result the erroneous belief that Jaguars have the highest bite force is extremely widespread.

 

[Saurabhaj]

In Hinduism,marriages with same maternal UNCLE are banned,boy and girls maternal uncle should not be same at all.
Here,there is also a vernacular class named "gothra" which should not be same of boy and girl,this was written in our oldest literature.