[lbo-talk] Re: arranged marriages (was surveys prove men dumb, women smart)

Wojtek Sokolowski sokol at jhu.edu
Wed Dec 10 07:06:53 PST 2003


Joanna:
>
> Actually, given a society in which women had real rights -- rights to
> control reproductive choice, rights to property, rights to work,
rights
> to health-care, rights to an education -- arranged marriages (which
> would require the woman's free consent) would not be such a bad idea.
> They would define a marriage as that stable, responsive environment
> needed to raise children and would define the parents' obligation
toward
> those children. If both partners in such a marriage also had the right
> to have lovers, you could hardly improve on it. I'm not being bitter
or
> cynical here -- just realistic.

There are two analytically separate things here. First is the idea that not everything in society has the sole purpose of providing instant gratification to "me." - as the me-centric US culture wants us to believe. Thus, the main purpose of marriage is not to provide instant gratification, happiness etc. to the "me's" involved in it, but serves goals that exceed the "me" - such as providing stable environment for reproduction of the species. Second, as your posting clearly states, is securing equal rights for women.

I can see that pre-arranged marriage can limit the latter, but I do not see how it can secure the former. Pre-arranged marriage logically presupposes the abrogation of individual rights - not necessarily of women (men entering such a marriage can also do so against their own will), but usually more of women than of men. Therefore, it is antithetical to the concept of equal rights of women you are talking about.

At the same time, however, pre-arranged marriage does not necessarily provides institutional stability for child rearing. In fact it often creates the opposite - a very oppressive an unhealthy environment.

The proper way of addressing the issue, imho, is not let individualistic and hedonistic impulses to be a defining factor of a social institution, such as marriage. Pre-arranged marriage will not accomplish that. A better, more effective way is to create an institutional framework to that end, similar to that found in business, such as replacing the vague "vows" with a contract that outlines specific rights and obligations of each, party, means of enforcement, penalties for non-compliance, and escrow account set aside to compensate the injured party for the other party's noncompliance, the institution of public advocate who can petition the annulment or dissolution of marriages that do not meet certain legally established standards (even against the involved parties' will).

The idea is that individuals can informally have any relationship they want, but there should be legally protected institutions of civil union with clearly outlined rights and obligations of the involved parties.

Wojtek



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list