Ad Lib Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 See the bit where I said: Really, I agree with you regarding most of your opinions, thats why I said what I said above. However, like it or not, that is the way that the term "arranged marriage" is used these days. But it brings us back to the original point that your attempt to introduce "balance" to the debate is a bunch of stuff you yourself now say you think is a steaming pile of shite! None of these reasons make arranged marriage "not as bad as it's made out to be". What a depressing view :- "Many Indians look at marrying a person they don't know, gives one "a lifetime to learn to love them", as opposed to the American ideal of learning a person inside and out before entering into marriage. It can be said that an arranged marriage in India is not based on feelings, but rather on commitment." "Here, we get married without having feelings for the person" http://www.indiamark...es-in-India/961 Yes, let's turn marriage into a chore. What could be better than being shacked up with someone you don't know, don't love and have no feelings for at all. Sounds terrific!! Depressing as f**k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yes, let's turn marriage into a chore. What could be better than being shacked up with someone you don't know, don't love and have no feelings for at all. Sounds terrific!! Because that doesn't happen here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Because that doesn't happen here? Yeah, cause he definitely implied that. Oh wait. NAAT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Because that doesn't happen here? No. I don't think anyone enters into a marriage with someone they don't know and have no feelings for. They may find out afterwards that the person they thought they were marrying weren't what they thought, but to actually enter into a marriage with someone you don't actually know and haven't any feelings for at all is baffling. The first night in bed has to be extremely awkward.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 No. I don't think anyone enters into a marriage with someone they don't know and have no feelings for. I wouldn't count on that. At least not necessarily "know well" or "have any kind of substantial feelings for". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I wouldn't count on that. At least not necessarily "know well" or "have any kind of substantial feelings for". Well, I suppose there are always the Anna Nicole Smith money grabbing types. And it depends what you mean by feelings. I know someone who got engaed the week after he met his partner - they were married 3 months later. You'd have to dispute how well they knew each other, but it wasn't in doubt that they were in love, or at least lust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwififer Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yes. Yes I am. wimp. You know canvassing would give a lot of folk peace and quite on here for a few nights as well. We tried Ad-Lib, we tried..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 No. I don't think anyone enters into a marriage with someone they don't know and have no feelings for. Mmm. But thats not what I was talking about. A marriage with someone you don't know, don't love, and have no feelings for? It sounds like so many "love" marriages! The first night in bed has to be extremely awkward.... Do one night stands not happen in your world? Or even one night stands that lead into something more? But it brings us back to the original point that your attempt to introduce "balance" to the debate is a bunch of stuff you yourself now say you think is a steaming pile of shite! None of these reasons make arranged marriage "not as bad as it's made out to be". If you want to be picky, the original point was an attempted smear because I dared to point out that actually, a lot of people are in favour of arranged marriages, and that these arranged marriages were often different from the common perception. And the resulting few pages show that I was right to defend myself, that actually, people agree with my opinions, and that people did have a misleading opinion about what an arranged marriage was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Mmm. But thats not what I was talking about. A marriage with someone you don't know, don't love, and have no feelings for? It sounds like so many "love" marriages! I think you have different experiences of marriage to me. You are confusing what can happen during the marriage with the actual beginning of the marriage Do one night stands not happen in your world? Or even one night stands that lead into something more? I've never had a one night stand with a wife my parents have selected for me, no. and that these arranged marriages were often different from the common perception. No, you told us "how it works". Which isn't at all "how it works". It's "how it worked in the small sample of cases you are aware of". "How it works" for other people is very different. and that people did have a misleading opinion about what an arranged marriage was. There are a huge number of different elements of coercion involved in arranged marriages, from the very lax to the very strict. We have established this. However, all, from lax to strict, are abhorrent, to different degrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink Freud Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 No. What you did was point at a cringingly apologetic set of so called definitions on wiki. You have yet to present one iota of evidence that arranged marriage should be held as anything other than anathema by those who believe in freedom of choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Well, I suppose there are always the Anna Nicole Smith money grabbing types. And it depends what you mean by feelings. I know someone who got engaed the week after he met his partner - they were married 3 months later. You'd have to dispute how well they knew each other, but it wasn't in doubt that they were in love, or at least lust. My own thoughts were about arranged marriages in Britain which were borderline "forced". Now obviously they straddle the line of legality but there's little space to argue they don't happen on UK soil. If you want to be picky, the original point was an attempted smear because I dared to point out that actually, a lot of people are in favour of arranged marriages, and that these arranged marriages were often different from the common perception. No, there was no "smear". You said "My friends generally think of arranged marriages as a good thing. In fact, one girl I know wants one for herself! Its not nearly like how it is often presented" and then "I don't have a problem with that". You have falsely defined the common perception. Your point would have been valid if you said "a lot of people are in favour of what they call arranged marriages and those apparent arranged marriages often deviate from the common perception and technically correct definition of an arranged marriage". And the resulting few pages show that I was right to defend myself, that actually, people agree with my opinions, and that people did have a misleading opinion about what an arranged marriage was. Not a single person who has responded to you has had a misleading opinion about what an arranged marriage IS. It's a question of fact and what lots of people call arranged marriages does not equal what are arranged marriages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I didn't read the Wikipedia definition (I will do so now), but this seems a pretty accurate summary :- http://www.matrimoni...d_marriages.htm An arranged marriage is a marriage where the marital partners are chosen by others based on considerations other than the pre-existing mutual attraction of the partners. In Indian culture, parents, uncles, aunts or other relatives are involved in choosing the partner for the would-be bride or groom. Arranged marriage takes the approach that if two individuals' families are of equal status ( economic stability), caste, religion, eating habits etc., then the mutual adjustment is easy and the compatibility is high. Marriage is considered a union of two families and not just the two individuals marrying each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 I think you have different experiences of marriage to me. When I visit my family, I have to do a tour that includes visiting my dad, my ex stepmum, my mum, and my ex stepdad. I'm not going to pretend that my experience of marriage is positive. I've never had a one night stand with a wife my parents have selected for me, no. That would be wilful misunderstanding of what I said. Its perfectly common for people to have a one night stand with people they've never met before. No, you told us "how it works". Which isn't at all "how it works". It's "how it worked in the small sample of cases you are aware of". "How it works" for other people is very different. There are a huge number of different elements of coercion involved in arranged marriages, from the very lax to the very strict. We have established this. However, all, from lax to strict, are abhorrent, to different degrees. As I said, I am against them personally. I don't know if I mentioned this before? However, there are many people who like them, both male and female. You don't want them banned, but you dislike them. What I don't get is where this differs from my views? As I said a few posts ago, I don't understand why this "discussion" is still ongoing given that everyone agrees. Your attempt at character assassination has failed, your smear has dribbled to nothing, and you've been left with trying to have a furious argument with someone who holds much the same view as you. Responding to the poster rather than the post, just like your fellow Unionist cohorts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 I didn't read the Wikipedia definition (I will do so now), Well of course, I posted it. And you have already demonstrated that you don't read my posts properly, preferring instead to respond to the poster rather than the post. I love conclusive evidence. Btw Ad Lib, if you're not a Tory, why does your blog have the Tory emblem in pride of place at the top? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Its perfectly common for people to have a one night stand with people they've never met before. Uh huh. But in that case, you have the much used walk of shame in the morning, with vague promises about a follow up phone call, which will never happen. You aren't stuck with them in a marriage for the foreseeable future:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Uh huh. But in that case, you have the much used walk of shame in the morning, with vague promises about a follow up phone call, which will never happen. So a one night stand has (and I quote you) never led to anything longer term? Are you sure about that? Maybe you'd like to rethink? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 So a one night stand has (and I quote you) never led to anything longer term? Please do quote me - where did I say that? This is a fundamentally stupid point, even by your dreadful standards. You are aware of the difference between a one night stand, which both parties choose afterwards to turn into a relationship, and a marriage which already exists? Here's the problem - these poor suckers are already married. If one of them decides "actually nah, you were shite in bed" - oops, too bad matey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink Freud Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Responding to the poster rather than the post, just like your fellow Unionist cohorts. Dear God I love the smell of irony in the morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Please do quote me - where did I say that? Here. But in that case, you have the much used walk of shame in the morning, with vague promises about a follow up phone call, which will never happen. Edited to add, or was this for "comedic value" as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink Freud Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 So a one night stand has (and I quote you) never led to anything longer term? Are you sure about that? Maybe you'd like to rethink? You are being utterly ridiculous now. Please. I'm embarrassed for you. Think about what a "one night stand" fucking means. One night. You are really making an utter c**t of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.