Arranged Marriage in the 21st Century: A Cultural Paradox

I just experienced something in my department that really brought me back to reality—it wasn't good or bad, just incredibly thought-provoking. One of our female employees suddenly had to leave her job because her family arranged her marriage, and the wedding is happening in less than 20 days! The most fascinating (and honestly, surprising) part? She hasn't met her fiancé, and, under strict instructions from the grandfather-in-law, she won't be allowed to see him until they are married. It's truly startling to see such a deep-rooted, traditional practice still dominating life decisions in our modern world. I felt compelled to write about it and explore the complex cultural paradox of these highly traditional arranged marriages in 21st-century India.

⚖️ Arguments in Favour of Highly Traditional Arranged Marriages

The defence of these highly traditional arrangements often centers on family stability, trust, and cultural continuity.

1. Focus on Family and Stability

The primary argument is that marriage is not merely the union of two individuals but the merging of two families.

• Reduced Personal Risk: The families, who have vast life experience, act as objective gatekeepers. They base their choice on practical factors like family background, social status, financial stability, and shared values, which they believe are better predictors of long-term stability than fleeting romantic attraction.

• In-Built Support System: When families select the partners, the in-laws and immediate relatives already have a vested interest in the success of the marriage, providing a stronger social and emotional safety net for the couple from day one.

2. Trust in Experience and Elders

In this model, the elders (like the grandfather-in-law) are believed to possess superior wisdom and judgment, making the decision on behalf of the individual.

• Emphasis on Duty over Desire: The marriage is viewed as a duty to the family and tradition. By restricting the couple from meeting, the focus is kept squarely on the commitment and acceptance of the family's decision, rather than on personal or emotional entanglement that might be deemed "distracting" or risky.

3. Cultural Continuity and Identity

For many families, upholding such strict protocols is a crucial way to maintain their cultural and religious identity in a rapidly globalizing world.

• Preserving Tradition: These customs reinforce the structure and hierarchy of the extended family unit, where respect for elders and adherence to ancestral practices are paramount. The very existence of this practice acts as a touchstone for their specific lineage and values.

---

🚫 Arguments Against Highly Traditional Arranged Marriages

The arguments against this practice are rooted in individual rights, psychological well-being, and the changing definition of a modern partnership.

1. Violation of Individual Agency and Consent

The most compelling argument is the complete denial of the individual's right to choose a life partner and to provide informed consent.

• The Right to Meet: Restricting the couple from seeing or talking to each other before marriage strips them of the fundamental right to assess compatibility, personality, and shared future goals. Marriage is a lifetime commitment, and being forced into it blindfolded can lead to significant emotional distress and resentment.

• Ignoring the Law: In most modern societies, including India, the law grants adults the right to choose their partners. This practice, while legally sanctioned if both families agree, fundamentally undermines the spirit of individual autonomy.

2. Focus on Compatibility vs. Practicality

While family background is important, a successful modern marriage requires personal, emotional, and intellectual compatibility, which cannot be assessed by a third party.

• Emotional Void: Starting a marriage without any prior emotional connection or communication can make the initial period extremely challenging, often leading to a lack of intimacy, understanding, and emotional support between the couple.

• Risk of Misalignment: Practical factors like money and social status do not guarantee that two people will communicate well, share parenting styles, or enjoy each other's company—all crucial elements for a lasting partnership.

3. Incompatibility with the Modern Workplace and Lifestyles

The suddenness and secrecy surrounding the arrangement often conflict with the demands of modern professional life, as you witnessed with your colleague.

• Professional Disruption: A 20-day notice period is incompatible with professional commitments, forcing individuals (often the woman) to make sudden, career-altering decisions.

• Erosion of Trust: Practices that impose strict gender-based restrictions (like forbidding the couple from meeting) can feel archaic and may perpetuate outdated power dynamics within the family, putting undue pressure on the woman to conform to restrictive rules enforced by the in-laws.

🤔 Conclusion: A Space for Coexistence

The story of your colleague illustrates the ongoing tension between tradition and modernity in India. For the families involved, the practice offers a sense of control, stability, and cultural preservation. For the individuals, particularly the woman who must uproot her life and enter a relationship based purely on the faith of her elders, it represents a significant challenge to her personal freedom and professional stability.

Ultimately, while the trend is moving towards 'semi-arranged marriages' (where families introduce the couple, but the couple has ample time to meet and decide), scenarios like the one you experienced will continue to happen as long as certain families prioritize the authority of tradition over the agency of the individual.