Find Love WITHOUT Dating!!!

[curiousjane]

It was a toss-up which category to put this post in. I mean, it could be in General Sociology, because it has to do with marriage. It could be in Arts & Entertainment, because it has to do with HBO.

But I chose Politics, History, and Current Events, because it is current, it is an event, it will change history (sort of), and ... okay ... it COULD involve politics. If the people cast have an interest in it.

Here's the deal: for all of you who are tired of the dating game, but are also tired of being alone, let your friends, family, and HBO match you up. All you have to do is let them document your life.

I found this news on Trendhunter.com (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.), but you can read up about it via this press release (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.), or on the official site:Arranged Marriage (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

What do you think?

(I seem to recall a British movie about something like this? Something about a show called For Love or For Money, maybe?)

[Marcus]

The main idea seems to be the following: "Loved ones will match selected participants based on shared goals, values, experiences, and commitment to the relationship."

It does not sound too surprising or new.

[anul]

As someone who is getting divorced that sounds horrifying. I would never trust family or friends to pick out a my shoes, let alone a mate.

As someone who enjoys trainwreck reality television, I'm intrigued.

[Vathir]

I think that would be a horrifying experience for an INTJ.

[ElstonGunn]

In light of recent a few discussions here, for some of us, that sounds like better chances than we'd have if left to our own devices.

[fonmaneal]

In light of recent a few discussions here, for some of us, that sounds like better chances than we'd have if left to our own devices.
Dude, whats going on?
Im old and ugly, but I can still pull the honeys.
Hit me up, I can work with you.:)

[mkay]

About the statistics quoted in that press release: People in arranged marriages are going to stay together because they're committed to the idea of marriage as an institution, as a societal necessity, so it's less "selfish," or individual-driven. So it stands to reason that people in arranged marriages stay together more than those in other marriages. ... My grandparents had an arranged marriage and stayed together. I doubt they ever saw an alternative to staying together. ... As a societal function, it's probably more effective. But I sure wouldn't want to be in an arranged marriage. I wouldn't even want someone else picking my clothes. I sure wouldn't let them pick my spouse, lol.

[Bioplasmoid]

Interesting idea,but my friends and family would be arguing until the cows came home, about who was right for me, in the very unlikely scenario of them all communicating openly in the first place. As others have said, I would find the prospect of having something as personal as my love life, aired on television, absolutely awefull. I doubt that such a reaction would be only an INTJ one either. As for arranged marriage through other means, such as some sort of detailed web based voting system, where 'friends' and 'strangers' alike, work towards a consensus...It might work somewhat better.

I think some network should do a 'reality' tv show on groups of bored television executives brainstorming in the boardroom, their ideas for the 'next big thing'. Now that would be far more interesting.

Regarding mkays observation: Should longterm commitment be the result of social pressure? I really dont think so, that is terribly quaint. Marriage should be about the couple first and foremost, not pleasing other people. The commitment to commitment itself, should be a mutually agreed and discussed ideal, with goals and anticipation of problems discussed in the early stages of the relationship, and contingency plans agreed on in advance, for when someone stuffs up. Throw in some mercy and compassion and who knows, it might just last a lifetime. (Though in my case I would have to reroute my possesive streak considerably) Call me crazy, but thats my 10 cents.

*turns off reactionary mode*

[wolf]

I always thought arranged marriage was a brilliant solution to a bunch of stupid problems, and that it would be highly effective for people like me. Yet another thing INTJs I've been close friends with seem to agree with me on.

Lacking it, marriage is pushed out a while, too much is placed on the decision making facilities of those that are ill-prepared, emphasis is placed on nebulous emotional "love" (almost invariably eros, or lust), and you seem to end up with dramatically less suitable couples/families that are likely to split. Basing a long-term relationship on romantic love is illogical, and lust is even less logical, since they're both fleeting temporary conditions (particularly lust). Rather, look at the partnership potential.
- What purpose does each serve in the partnership, and would it be advantageous to both?
- Do they have the same values and belief systems?
- Do they share common goals and opinions on important issues (or at least have different ones that are not in conflict)?
- Is their upbringing similar (economic, familial, educational)?

A number of these are almost invariably correct in arranged marriages, which seriously simplifies the remainder. The love that then grows between the pair is agape and/or philia, which are both stable non-self-serving forms of love that are uncommon in our culture. Long-lasting relationships either start with these or quickly convert from eros to these with the acceptance of those involved, otherwise the parties will look for more eros outside the relationship. In arranged marriages, eros is often there at various points, but it's not the basis of the pairing, so it isn't expected. In cultures where such marriages are common, eros is not a driving factor in relationships, and is seen much less often.

[Bioplasmoid]

Thanks for that Wolf. That is a remarkably refreshing perspective, full of much insight.

[Noehelia]

I always thought arranged marriage was a brilliant solution to a bunch of stupid problems, and that it would be highly effective for people like me. Yet another thing INTJs I've been close friends with seem to agree with me on.

Lacking it, marriage is pushed out a while, too much is placed on the decision making facilities of those that are ill-prepared, emphasis is placed on nebulous emotional "love" (almost invariably eros, or lust), and you seem to end up with dramatically less suitable couples/families that are likely to split. Basing a long-term relationship on romantic love is illogical, and lust is even less logical, since they're both fleeting temporary conditions (particularly lust). Rather, look at the partnership potential.
- What purpose does each serve in the partnership, and would it be advantageous to both?
- Do they have the same values and belief systems?
- Do they share common goals and opinions on important issues (or at least have different ones that are not in conflict)?
- Is their upbringing similar (economic, familial, educational)?

A number of these are almost invariably correct in arranged marriages, which seriously simplifies the remainder. The love that then grows between the pair is agape and/or philia, which are both stable non-self-serving forms of love that are uncommon in our culture. Long-lasting relationships either start with these or quickly convert from eros to these with the acceptance of those involved, otherwise the parties will look for more eros outside the relationship. In arranged marriages, eros is often there at various points, but it's not the basis of the pairing, so it isn't expected. In cultures where such marriages are common, eros is not a driving factor in relationships, and is seen much less often.

These characteristics are the ones that I seek in marriage but I wouldn't let my family decide on that because they do not know exactly in details what I seek. I know myself better than the others know me.

[Ramiel]

In light of recent a few discussions here, for some of us, that sounds like better chances than we'd have if left to our own devices.

I second

Although the idea of having someone match me up sounds rather weird and, all in all, not that brilliant, I suppose it could never get worse than if it was left to me alone.

[Homini Lupus]

The problem of these agencies is the same than that selling second hand cars: adverse selection. Most of the people who has to refer to those agencies is not the best at making a stable relationship. There are some who are just bad at dating obviously, but would most refer to an agency like that? And most important, how do you recognize them? You probably would have to go through a lot of meetings.

[wolf]

The problem of these agencies is the same than that selling second hand cars: adverse selection. Most of the people who has to refer to those agencies is not the best at making a stable relationship. There are some who are just bad at dating obviously, but would most refer to an agency like that? And most important, how do you recognize them? You probably would have to go through a lot of meetings.
The same is true in dating. The good choices generally go off the market quickly, so you're left with this same pool, only they're still expected to find each-other. There are exceptions, but they're progressively more difficult to find as time goes by.

Eventually all that's left are divorced people (failed at marriage), people that are totally unsuitable for committed relationships, and people that are so unusual that they've never found someone sufficiently-similar.