Arranged Marriage

Arranged marriage is a marriage between two compliant individuals who were matched by an outside party such as their parental guardians or a matchmaker. There have been a lot of negative beliefs on arrange marriage, generally confusing this custom with forced marriage. Forced marriage is a marriage between a couple without their consent or against their will. In either case, both arranged and forced marriage have been prevalent in traditional values in countries such as Asia, Middle-East, Africa, Europe and especially countries with families of royalty or high status. This is to ensure a sense of security for the future generations of both parties. This can be established in the form of a higher rank, gain a worthy successor, or social acceptance. The practice of arranged marriage is both regarded as either widely revered or widely distasteful. This practice has been widely revered because of “shotgun” wedding, where the father of the bride figuratively (or literally) holds a gun to the man’s head in order to coax him to marry his pregnant daughter (Wikipedia). This is believed to be the most appropriate response for an arranged marriage to continue because an unwed mother is unfit to become a parent without a stable father figure for the child. Arranged marriages can also sustain the bloodline of royalty, therefore even babies or toddlers are already paired off with their perspective spouses until they come of appropriate age of marriage. There is also the aspect of earning a higher status in either title or honor within a social group. The parties that are involved in this issue are the couples that are currently awaiting marriage and the wishes of the parental groups. In the parental perspective, it can be argued that the parents know their children best and have the “wisdom to select the best candidate” (Professor House) in which the partnership through marriage “will benefit from the support and encouragement of elders” (Professor House) therefore assuring stability and permanence. Not all arranged marriages have to be in a form where both individuals do not infuse courtships in order to get better acquainted with their prospective partners. Some courtships are allowed by certain cultures such as modern day India. It is also highly encouraged for Muslim religions to have the couple “see each other” before marriage but there are still restrictions were the couple “must never be left alone, unsupervised”. Most cultures that practice this tradition do not allow courtship such as areas in China and Indonesia, in which the predominant religions are Buddhism, Islam and Hinduism, where the couple would only meet for fifteen minutes and then be wed in months. It is also important to note that parents, especially in Cambodia, are expected to have the “sacred duty to marry off their children to good families”(Professor House).

The concept of arranged marriage has survived due to the “pervasive influence of religion and tradition”. As Cambodian parents are expected to marry their children off, the children are expected to repay their gratitude by “fulfilling one’s marital obligation” (Savage). Due to the popularity of arranged marriages in rural parts of China, the Chinese government has introduced a Marriage Law in 1980 allowing women to be 20 years old and men to be 22 years of age for legal marriage. In Japan, when a woman has reached 25 years of age, she and her family compile a” packet of information regarding her family background, hobbies, education and a photograph of the bride in a kimono to “properly inquire among friends and acquaintances for a suitable spouse”(Savage). In the case of suitability does not regard the bond between the couple. The most important goal, rather, is the bond between two families where the sealing of the marriage agreement would be the aim of acquiring property and social status. Obviously there are still some doubts about this practice such as the longevity as well the actual bond between the couple. In such cases, the effects of arranged marriage usually tends to be affected most by the bride, where she would “often give up her career and family in order to take care of her husband’s family and children” (Shaadi). Therefore, arranged marriages tend to favor in the issue regarding paternalism, dominant group exercises almost absolute control over the subordinate group and can direct virtually unlimited coercion to maintain societal order. Women in the earlier ages would even burn themselves at their husband’s funeral in order to show solidarity and devotion to their husband. It is also evident in Japan, in which the female creates a packet in order to have suitable potential families looking for qualities in accordance of the son’s family’s interests. Some interests include occupational mobility, the ability of individuals to improve their job position. For example, a large business company has a CEO with a daughter who is engaged to be wed to a prominent medical institution’s chief doctor’s son. Both parties gain occupational mobility because the business company can work together with the medical institution to further the interest of their clients as well as broaden their consumer population. A New York Times journalist had undergone an arranged marriage where he met his wife through endogamy, marry within their group either because it is their own choice or social isolation or necessity. His mother established their arranged marriage, where his wife regards the truth on how their sons have to learn how to clean up after themselves in order to find suitable wives while the writer had his mother pick a wife for him so he does not have to cook and clean. This is a form of cultural diffusion, cultures inevitably affected by other cultures. The writer now lives in London with his family and he hopes that the boys “have many girlfriends through their teenage years and play the field through their 20s before they each settle down with a wonderful woman”. Clearly, the values, socially shared conceptions of what is good, desirable, and proper or bad, undesirable and proper, in India 20 years ago differs from modern day London. I’m sure that the parents would advocate the interests of their sons in order to find suitable wives through an arranged marriage, but those boys will grow to learn that there is an option other than their native customs. If they were to submit into arranged marriage, it would be considered a persistent subculture, unassimilated subculture that adhere as much as possible to their own way of life and resist absorption into the dominant culture. There are some arranged marriages occurring in the Western part of the world as well. This can be particular with families that believe in Social identity theory, in-group members think of their group better than out-groups because enhances their own social status or social identity and raises self-image. Therefore, those who are part of the elite group of people such as those of upper-class rank would want to sustain or improve their finances rather than decreasing it.

I think that arranged marriage is included in interactionist theory, which examines the microsocial worls of personal interaction patterns in everyday life rather than the macrosocial aspects of social institutions and their harmony or conflict. Interactionist theory is helpful in understanding some of the false perceptions that occur in dominant majority relations. With that in mind, people should perhaps consider the customs of the cultures that practice arranged marriage. Western influence might be against this, considering the interests of ‘love before marriage’ but there can also be ‘marriage before love’. I’ve seen numerous ‘reality shows’ where people would switch places with another and experience a different perspective and treatment from others. If people are more knowledgeable about arranged marriage, it would not be perceived as negative where their partnership is not primarily based on love but on convenience. It might be interesting to note that in other countries, they believe the general custom of constantly dating before finally settling down with “the one” is absurd and that one is wasting time during their courtships and less time providing the family with children. I’ve considered arranged marriage to be a positive practice. Not only does it sustain the interests of both individuals’ parents, but I know that perhaps someday I will be able to choose a suitable wife or son for my children. It goes with the aspect of ‘respect for elders’. Not too long ago, children were beaten up by their parents in order to sustain respect in which the children would start the cycle again with their children etc. Although arranged marriage, to me, seems like an adventure (despite its safety) some people consider it too traditional in such a modern age. But I think that it would halt some of the problems in society such as domestic violence, crime, illiteracy, poverty, and drug and alcohol addictions, since the parents have approved of each other’s children in that they complement each other and should start a life of happiness without these negative distractions.

Sources

Ayushveda, Health Style < http://www.ayushveda.com/magazine/arranged-marriages-past-and-present/>

Associated Content < http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/787875/the_history_of_arranged_marriages_in_pg2.html?cat=9>

Professor House < http://www.professorshouse.com/family/relationships/arranged-marriage-facts.aspx>

Savage, Lacey. Ezine articles. The reality of arranged marriages. < http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Reality-of-Arranged-Marriages&id=606>

Shaadi < http://www.bhavakuta.com/india/indian-arranged-marriages/index.html>

Stritof, www.about.com, < http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/787875/the_history_of_arranged_marriages_in_pg2.html?cat=9>

Wikipedia . Arrranged Marriage. 5 June 2009< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage>

Zama, Farahad. The New York Times. First Comes Marriage <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/fashion/07love.html?_r=1>

Movie/TVShow Review - Tarzan of the Apes

Tarzan is a film adaptation of Edgar Rice Burroughs novel Tarzan of the Apes. It is a story of a boy living with gorillas in Africa. His parents escaped from an enflamed ship and landed on the shore of Africa. They were able to build a home in the forest but were unable to survive an attack by a leopard, Sabor, which left the baby Tarzan alone. The story also focuses on a mother gorilla, Kala, and a father gorilla and group leader, Kerchak who lose their baby because of Sabor, as well. Kala, is full of grief because of her loss. As the gorilla clan moves to a new location for safety, she hears a baby cry and follows it towards a treehouse. She brings the hairless baby back to her gorilla clan after barely surviving Sabor’s attack. Kerchak does not approve of the new addition because “it is not our kind” and “will endanger the family”. Nonetheless, Tarzan is allowed to stay because he “was all alone” but is not accepted to be Kerchak’s son.

Kala is willing “to protect (Tarzan) from all around him…and will be here”. During this time of the movie, the nurturing side of Kala is in perspective where she cares for Tarzan despite being apart from the group. Tarzan is shown as a young boy full of vigor and mischief, where he and his gorilla friends, including the female gorilla Terk, play with elephants and continue their adventures around their area. Terk’s gorilla friends call Tarzan a “hairless wonder”. Terk tells Tarzan he is able to play with the group if he can pick a hair from an elephant’s tail, where he later befriends a young male elephant named Tantor. He pursues the task despite the danger so that he can be accepted. Tarzan startles the elephant clan and destroys the feeding grounds of the gorilla group, which gets him into trouble with Kerchak. Kala defends Tarzan, even against her mate and her species, stating that “Tarzan is only a child” and that he “will learn our ways, if (Kerchak) gives him a chance” but Kerchak states that “he will never be one of us”.

Tarzan is upset that he is differentiated by the group, and goes to the water to put mud on his face so that he will be physically similar to them. Kala goes to Tarzan and persuades him that he is no different from the others, that he has two eyes, two ears, a nose, two hands, and a heartbeat. Tarzan is rejuvenated by this internal similarity and is willing to “make Kerchak see it” as well.

Tarzan improves his abilities by doing rigorous and acrobatic activities that will make him become equivalent to the other gorillas. As a young man he fights and kills Sabor and offers the lifeless body to Kerchak. As he awaits Kerchak’s reply, a gunshot is heard from afar. Kerchak tells the group to follow him to a path away from the sound, but Tarzan is curious to see where it came from. He follows the sound and discovers people that look just like him. He meets a young woman named Jane, a scientist named Professor Porter, and a hunter named Clayton. Tarzan is taught the human world, including reading and writing, as well the culture in London. However, Clayton seeks gorillas to capture but is unable to do so because of Tarzan’s reluctance. Kerchak tells the clan to “avoid the strangers” but Tarzan defends them and states that they “are harmless” and that Kerchak is “threatened by anyone different from (him)”. Tarzan hesitantly allows the three outsiders to meet his gorilla family, but Kerchak ia angered by Tarzan’s decisions because it will endanger the family. They offer Tarzan the choice of going to London with them and while Tarzan decides, Kala brings him to where she found him and shares a tearful goodbye. The next day, Tarzan sets off to the ship. During this time, Clayton captures and endangers the gorillas, where Kerchak is the only innocent casualty, but Tarzan heroically saves the clan. As Jane and Professor Porter sail off to London, she realizes she loves Tarzan and stays in Africa with him. Her father does the same.

The loss of Kala and Kerchak’s son to Sabor allowed Kerchak to think in categoric knowing, technique for evaluating how perceptions of similarity attract closer interaction pattern. Kerchak knew that the leopard was in the area and the family needed to abandon it because Sabor will have the intention of attacking them again.

Before Tarzan was included, there was an ingroup in which individuals belong and feel loyal. Therefore, these were gorillas that reside with other gorillas, or their “own kind.

When Tarzan was introduced to the family, he was immediately part of an outgroup, which consists of all people who are not members of one’s ingroup, because of his physical appearance.

When Tarzan was a young boy, he was undergoing social identity theory, where ingroup members think of their group as better than outgroups because enhances their own social status or social identity and raises self-image. This is because Terk and her friends do not allow Tarzan to play because he can’t “keep up” to their games and movement

In order to feel part of the ingroup, Tarzan needed to have a reference group, which serve as an exemplary model. He was able to act and move as a monkey because he improved his abilities and movements equipped for monkey-like activities.

Since the culture from London is moved to Africa, cultural diffusion, cultures inevitably affected by other cultures was evident in the movie. Tarzan was able to understand the human culture that he was unaware and excited to understand.

Jane and Professor Porter are clearly interested in the gorillas in their native state. This shows that the explorers are undergoing abstract typification, strangers take on the native’s perspective and become more concrete with social interaction, especially when they crouch down and create paralinguistic signals, sounds but not words, to enable the gorilla clan to come out from the bushes.

When Jane and Tarzan first meet, they incorporate symbolic interaction, shared symbols and definitions people use when communicating with one another, in order to be better acquainted. The use of hands to promote their name allows for mutual understanding and “proper” introduction.

When Jane tries to escape baboons and was rescued by Tarzan, she experienced culture shock, when people’s assumptions are jolted through contact with an unfamiliar culture that supports different expectations. She expected the man to save her to understand English and be “human” but he talked to the baboon and used vines to move around the jungle, in which she asks if they could walk instead. You can tell she is shocked when she goes back to camp and explains to her father and Clayton about her day in the jungle.

Paternalism, dominant group exercises almost absolute control over the subordinate group and can direct virtually unlimited coercion to maintain societal order, is evident in the movie in that Kerchak is the supreme leader of the pack. He maintains order in order to keep his family alive, whether he has to be against Kala, his mate, or his “son” Tarzan. Paternalism can also be shown on the outsider’s camp, where both Jane and Clayton persuade the Professor to convince Tarzan to see the gorillas. When Jane refuses this, Clayton asks Professor that Jane “is undergoing some girlish fantasy” and they need to take a stand in order to finally see the gorillas.

Kerchak uses a lot of avoidance, minority groups have attempted to solve their problems by leaving them behind, in order to keep his family safe. Despite having Sabor continually attacking them, he moves on to another location. He also does this with Clayton’s gun, where he tells the family to keep moving away from it. If Kerchak had fought against Sabor and fought against the humans, it would be easier for these animals to live in peace rather than “walking on eggshells”. This could also be a form of xenophobia, fear of or contempt for strangers or foreigners. Kerchak does not accept Tarzan because he is not their kind, and will endanger their family. He does not want anyone to interact with the humans nor be part of their camp but the mischievous monkeys pursue it. He does not want Tarzan to bring the humans to the family site because he might hurt them.

The outsiders had manifest functions, obvious and intended results, when they went to Africa. These expected to scientifically studying gorillas. For Clayton, his intention was to betray the others in order to capture these wild animals.

There were also instances of latent functions, hidden and unexpected results, such as Tarzan’s understanding of the world he was supposed to be part of and the possibility that stray animals from London were able to make its way to Africa.

Linguistic relativity, pertains to language that connote both intended and unintended prejudicial meanings (example: black=bad, white=good)is also shown in this movie. Since the outsiders has “proper” attire they were instinctively thought of as “saviors” for Tarzan’s livelihood, since Tarzan could not possibly be living a “correct” life because he “wears a loin cloth” and was unable to read and speak. However, Tarzan becomes the savior because he saves both the innocent outsiders and his gorilla family from harm.

I chose Tarzan because it is an innocent movie meant for children and to teach them the ways of right and wrong but it also shows the results of pioneering into the “new world” in order to collect data – which led to slavery, war, exploitations of natural resources, endangered species, deforestation etc. Instances that happen in Tarzan may not be completely correct, but it has some truth (just like in Avatar) that audiences always expect the “good guys” to win. However, in the real world, the dominant and money-hungry countries or corporations are the winners while the indigenous population always suffers. For example, Nike sweatshops in Thailand pay their employees an equivalent of $1.00-2.00 while the product they sell each cost $80.00.

Sociological Images - Boys vs Girls

Blog entry title #1: Gender, Technology, and Toys R Us

This particular blog entry talks about how the Toys ‘R’ Us online shopping site generates gendered gift giving guides. There are pictures that show options based on personality and interests, which are similar. Both genders have options on the basis of their personality which includes being: adventurous, creative, sporty, techie, smarty pants, outdoorsy, and glamour girl (an option for girls only). The interest options for both genders are exactly the same, which includes: animals and nature, cars/trucks/trains/planes, music, building, and gaming. The author experimented on the differences in what the site would offer when the box for “techie” and “building” for both girls and boys were checked. For the top 24 suggestions for boys, there were 13 building/engineering games and the rest were ipod accessories, DVD players, and mp3 players. The girls only had one suggestion regarding a building/engineering game, and the rest were ipod accessories, DVD players, mp3 plays, cameras, and laptop computers. The author goes on to say that, according to this experiment, boys/men generally BUILD or are the PRODUCERS of technology while girls/women BENEFIT as CONSUMERS for the products being made, therefore are benefactors of shopping.

Blog entry title #2: Guest Post: Fun with the 2009 Target Catalog

The author of this blog entry focuses on the front cover of a Target holiday catalog, which features two children innocently playing with their toys. However, when this ad is further analyzed, there are assumptions in this image that suggests gender socialization propaganda, as well as other things such as homophobia and commitment issues.

Blog entry title #3: Hair, Gender, and School Dress Codes

This entry focuses on a 4 year old boy named Taylor, who was temporarily suspended from school because he did not adhere to the dress code regarding the length of his hair. According to the school administration, this policy is to prevent distraction. However, Taylor likes his long hair and his parents support his interests and will not force their child to have a haircut.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHZip9N76Bw&feature=player_embedded

All three blog entries include children being analyzed on the basis of gender, an ascribed status. Ascribed status is a status that one is born into, such as one’s gender, race, and sometimes ethnicity. A baby shower for a boy will have clothing that are mostly blue or green, as well as toys that mark their inevitable strength and wisdom as men. Such toys include racecars, construction trucks, airplanes, and toy guns. Boys usually have short hair, since it suits their future profession whether being a construction worker or doctor. In contrast, a girl’s baby shower will include pink or purple clothing, as well as dolls, dresses, jewelry, and cooking toys. These types of generalization are tools to determine a reference group, which serves as an exemplary model that past generations have set up for all of us. Even as newborn babies, the medical facility would wrap the children either pink or blue which specifies their gender. It is the norm, a culture’s rules of conduct, that women wear pink clothing, tiaras, dresses, and play with dolls. They are also supposed to be interested in love, marriage, and babies as well as shopping and physical appearances.

Boys on the other hand, are expected to be strong and productive with their bodies. This can be in terms of creating a model plane, constructing a building, or being oversexed. These are naturally acceptable in our society.

Now, there are other societies that do not agree with oversexed men (although my family strongly encourages my brother to have plenty of girlfriends but I, as a woman, am unable to even go out on a date “until after I am married”). Cultural diffusion, cultures inevitably affected by other cultures, can occur when a family moves from one country to another, where the country of origin does not allow early relationships to occur but the new country allows men to be promiscuous. Therefore, such beliefs are highly adaptive based on the norms of the dominant society.

There can also be those who take part in persistent subcultures, who are looked down upon by the majority. Persistent subcultures are unassimilated subcultures that adhere as much as possible to their own way of life and resist absorption into the dominant culture. Such people include the LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans-sexual, queer) community who try to survive from being attacked by other’s selective perception, or the absorbing of information that accords with their own beliefs and rationalize away information that does not. Some are negative, which can result into conflict or negative self-image, also known as self-hatred due to the consistent of prejudice and discrimination.

It is reasonable that people shy away from those who do not adhere to the norms, such in the case of Taylor. However, such opinions do not support people who are “abnormal” and can further result in cases of hate groups because they “do not adhere to policy” of the dominant group, minority group’s relationship with the rest of society.

Global/Foreign Issue

Irish atheists use Bjork, Mark Twain to challenge Blasphemy law

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/01/02/ireland.blasphemy.law/index.html

There is a new blasphemy law in Ireland that challenges the Irish atheist citizens. This law was passed in July but went into effect on January 1, 2010. Some of the blasphemous quotations on religion being published by an Irish atheist group include Jesus, Bjork, and Mohammed. Atheist Ireland has challenged the law, which punishes blasphemy with a $35,800 fine. The group has mentioned on their site that they support any religion adopted by an Irish citizen, however are not intended to insult religious sect and their sacred matters.
The law is broken when a person insults or abuses sacred religious matters which will cause outrage within religious members of society, however, those who are guilty of breaking the blasphemy law can counterattack their actions by way of proving value in their words such as academic, political, artistic, and scientific.
Atheist groups in Ireland have commented that this blasphemy law is dangerous and silly because of the consequence of religious outrage. Some atheists have gone on to say that all people “have the right to be treated justly, and be responsible to treated others the same….Blasphemy laws silence people to protect ideas because people have the right to express and hear ideas about religion even if some find them outrageous”. The atheist group has urged their government to repeal this blasphemy law as well as removing references of God from the country’s constitution.
According to www.state.gov, Ireland is more than 92% religious (Roman Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Muslim, and Jewish) making them the dominant group, which refers to a minority group’s relationship to the rest of society, in the country.
Based on the article, it is evident that the government has proposed a law that agrees with functional theory, a stable or cooperative social system in which everything has a function and provides the basis of a harmonious society, even though the law initially creates conflict theory, society is continually engaged in a series of disagreements, tensions and classes, for the atheist minority population.
This type of conflict within two groups can create a result in ethnoviolence, hostile behavior against people solely because of their race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Not only is this on the basis of favoritism, but it also negatively compares people based on their social class, one categorization sociologists use to designate people’s place in the stratification hierarchy, where people in a particular social class have a similar level of income, individual’s membership in particular racial, religious, and status groups.
This Blasphemy law denies free speech and promotes the debate on cultural determinism, transmission of cultural inadequacies, continues. There are various people in Ireland, whether they are atheist or not, that should understand the problems that arise due to this law. It is dangerous because people can establish hate groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan. Crimes may increase due to this “silly but dangerous” law. People should be able to accept the diverse culture within their country, whether one person thinks their lifestyle is wrong or not.

Domestic Issue

According to the article, there is an investigation regarding the possibility of gender discrimination when it comes to entering college. This could be due to the fact that women are the dominant group in most colleges, verifying that a 3 to 2 ratio of women to men are present nationally in higher education. This type of judgment is on the basis of ascribed status.
The schools being experimented represent different types such as public or private, religious and secular, moderately to highly selective, and historically black.
Investigated schools that favor women to men include Georgetown University, and University of Delaware. An investigated school that has somewhat of an even split with the gender ratio is Gettysburg College. It seems like Gettysburg College is trying to maintain value neutrality in the case of keeping the gender ratio consistent. There is evidence that admission officials may participate in women discrimination because of their overcrowding and large percentage compared to that of the opposite sex.
I think that this type of discrimination is due to the fact that some schools want their percentages, whether on the basis of race or gender, to be consistent. You can account that this type of discrimination related to race, which deals with “visible physical characteristics” (Parrillo). Since there are 60% of women to 40% of men who are taking nationally higher education, their statistics will not be consistent (Even though the article states that more men than women are accepted in Georgetown University when it comes to the graduate programs such as law, business, and medicine.
The in-group in this case would be the perspective schools that have admissions officials deliberately favoring the acceptance of men over women, despite even higher credentials. The out-group would be the women who are being compared to men that may previously not have been able to be accepted to the school because of academic issues.
I think that this type of discrimination is harmful, because these officials are creating men as a reference group to allow the consistency of statistical gender ratio. This could instill in a sense of ethnoviolence. Such ethnoviolence behavior would include a woman attacking or harassing a man who has less academic potential and requirements but was granted matriculation into the school based solely on his ascribed status as a male. Another example would be a man harassing a woman because he believes he has jurisdiction and a higher status since he was able to be accepted for his grades that are not superior to the woman.
Given the inevitability of these types of conflicting behaviors, a result could be marginality, where one is living under in two cultures (in this case, male and female) simultaneously. Perhaps the fact that admissions counselors will be able to associate their work on increasing their admittance of males than females, the unintended result could be reputational method, where people are asking others how others are compared to them (given the sense of insecurity as not establishing the goal of being admitted to their “dream” school with all the necessary requirements for admission or benefits


Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091217/ap_on_re_us/us_colleges_discrimination