Xara
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif
Love is as fickle as the flames of candle lit dinner it started with
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/rolleyes.gif
Tribal marriages
In the traditional marriage market, laws of primitive tribalism obtain. These tribalistic laws are given a thin veneer of religion by almost all peoples. Brahminism promulgated such religious laws, Catholics and Protestants did, Jews did.
Hence, common attitudes toward inter-community marriage(of which inter-religion marriages are a special case) can best be understood by the logic of tribalism.
The logic of tribalism has three salient features: (1) Marriage is seen as an EXCHANGE between two families or groups, not a UNION of two souls. (2) Women are considered as chattel, belonging to men. (3) Daily life is pathologically bound up with constant status gaming.
So when two members of a tribalistic universe marry, one group/family “gives” a possession (a daughter) to another group/family. The giving party earns status when the gift is given to a HIGHER status group. The giving party loses status when the gift is “wasted” on a lower status group. The receiving party earns status when the gift is received from a higher status group. It loses status when it accepts a gift from a lower-status group.
Some implications quickly follow -
-
Irrespective of religion or nationality, people will be far more willing to accept a man from a ‘higher-status’ other group, or a man who himself enjoys high social status.
-
Outgroup women will be far more welcome than outgroup men. However, women from higher-status outgroup are likely to be treated differently than women from lower status groups. Marriage to women from higher status other-group are likely to be relatively “public” affairs. When property is received from a ‘lower status’ group, the exchange is less likely to be equally public. In positive situtations, the dominant attitude is likely to be of magnanimity (we are good people; we don’t discriminate). In negative situations, the attitude is likely to be one of condescension (we did you a favor - humare ladke to tau kaisee kaisee ladkiyan mil saktee theen).
-
People with naturally secured status that can not be easily challenged are more likely to accept an outgroup man for their daughters.
-
Even historically, lower status people gave their daughters to higher status people in return for the latter’s protection, friendship, or simply, mercy. Whoever heard of a woman from a higher status group marrying a man from a lower status group?
Old brahminism had a curious dictum. Brahmin women could NEVER EVER marry a non-brahmin man. However, brahmin men could (although it was not advisable) marry non-brahmin women. Brahminism, went the argument, was a great ocean into which women as tributaries could flow, so long as they were willing to lose their prior identitiy, take up the life of brahmins, raising their children as brahmins.
The silliness of such arrogance and bigotry is, ofcourse, astonishing. But in a tribalistic framework it makes perfect sense. For many people - people with weak individual identities - it is the only way.
Cheers.
“Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards.” – Unknown