Film Analysis: A Monsoon Wedding Essays

The film shows that the marriages are monogamous. When Rajinder was getting married, Dadi and the two daughters-in-law (Darshini and Sita) stayed at home singing, dancing and preparing sweets. They will meet the new daughter-in-law the next day when she arrives in the village. Usually, the marriages would be arranged

When looking for a partner to settle down with, one usually seeks someone who is similar to them. They might look for individuals with similar hobbies, beliefs or even age. The reason behind this is due to a theory known as Social Homogamy. Social Homogamy is when individuals are attracted to a person of a similar ethnicity, race, age, or maybe even beliefs. (Gonzalez, n.d). Due to this, there is ultimately a correlation between sameness and compatibility as when people are more alike they might relate and get along better. When people see others who are like them, they subconsciously become attracted to them along with having feelings of trust and comfort (Patel, 2017). This eventually leads to a closer bond and possibly a more successful relationship (Patel, 2017). The purpose of this research is to examine why marrying within a specific social group is more advantageous than marrying an individual of a different social group. Firstly, individuals of different social classes tend to have different norms, and this leads to key differences. Secondly, the distinctions in age groups between the couple can negatively affect a couple’s marriage due to dissimilarity, thus leading to dispute. Lastly, when a partner of an individual is from the same or similar social group, they will fit in and better adapt to their partner’s lifestyle. Therefore, marrying within the same social group is more advantageous than being with a partner opposite to them. This can be proven through the

Modern, contemporary society’s mindset on marriage has shifted considerably over the years. Some research has noted the increase in early sexual experiences, greater acceptance of cohabitation and the increase in narcissistic tendencies, are complicating and muddying the ideals of what marriage means to people today. Research done on this subject resulted in several studies that found that spouses who did not believe that marriage would last forever, were less likely to commit to the relationship financially and were more likely to have extramarital affairs.

As stated in our text, various factors can bind married couples together, such as economic interdependencies, legal, social and moral constraints, relationship, and amongst other things. In the recent years some of these factors have diminished their strengths. The modern generation sees marriage in a different perspective altogether. Individuals today feel they are stable independently, they do not need to rely on their spouse for emotional or financial support. Many are career driven and soar to conquer their dreams over settling down with a family. Such untraditional views have increased divorce rates.

In “For better, for worse: Marriage means something different now,” Stephanie Coontz reveals the worldwide changes in people’s attitudes and behaviors towards marriage. According to Coontz, education and the social norms are the reasons why marriage has become nonessential. Being single and going through a divorce are more acceptable now. The motivations of marriage have turned from economic dependence into personal willingness. In fact, Coontz’s words make me wonder the true meaning of marriage. Even though the meaning has changed over times, I believed that I still hope to get married.

We notice that both the bride and groom did not make any arrangement. They did not have any choice but to follow their parents’ will. Once married, women had to serve their husband and their family. They often became a sort of servant to their mother-in-law, to whom they had the obligation to obey. Families were omnipresent in the marriage; it was a very strict marriage where women had no other choice but to listen to men of her family.

Marriage has been a heated controversy for the past few years because people often marry for the wrong reasons. Anyone who thinks of an ideal marriage would think of two people loving each other and sharing a personal bond or goals together. Marriage is regularly defined as the legally or formally recognized union of two lovers as partners in a personal relationship. This definition remarks there is an actual connection between two people in marriage, but do people actually consider this when committing to “love” and “support” their partners forever? As research and studies have shown, people ultimately get married for many reasons, except love. This philosophy can be easily applied to the short poem, “Marriage” by Gregory Corso. In this emotional poem, the author argues marriage is more effectively understood or known for culture and convenience rather than through the abstract considerations of love. Here, we can identify people generally decide to marry for the incorrect reasons, for instance the story of the author himself. Corso finds himself confused multiple times, wondering if he should marry to not be lonely, for tradition and for his physical and mental health. He disregards love, a relationship or a connection with his future wife. General ways of convenience like loneliness, health and economic status between cultural stereotypes and religion are usually the true reasons of why people chose to have the commitment of marriage with another person.

Marriage a long-standing fundamental to functional society. Marriage is a perspective of what used to be socially the beginning of a nuclear family. A nuclear family consisting of a father, mother, and children. In the twentieth century it was considered proper in society to be married before having children. However, this is no longer the case in modern United States. What aspects are there that make our generation susceptible to cohabitation instead of marriage?

    In the time frame that this story is set, many major life decisions things are made taking into account one’s duty to family - including the selection of a husband or wife.  It is possible that each of these couples may not have been in love,  when their vows were stated.  They have a duty to society; they must not marry outside of their social class.  They have a duty to their family;

In the film (Arranged, 2007), it tells a story of two women who are going through an arranged marriage. Arranged marriage is something that is seen in traditional cultures, not really seen in modern western culture. Modern western culture and traditional cultures are very different. Patriarchy is followed in the home of these families, where the father sets the rules. Dating is also done differently. In traditional cultures, women have arranged dates with men, whereas in modern western culture people can decide who to go on a date with. Touching is also different, women from traditional cultures are not

Marriage gradient does exist in the U.S. society to a certain extent. From my what I’ve seen and my experience I find that it is based on the individual status, class, and culture. Marriage gradient strong exists in the upper class in my opinion. Normally you see in the media the typical wealthy white collar man working and making a great amount of money while they normally have a housewife sitting at home attending to the children and home. You can find this scenario showed throughout plenty of reality TV shows. In todays world those families are able to afford a chef, nanny, and cleaning lady taking on the duties of the housewife. This leaves the wife living a stress free life with access to just about anything she wants object wise. On the other hand, you see that most of the middle class marries for love and other various reasons. I can’t quite speak for all due to that most middle class lives are private. From a culture standpoint, I hear women repeating what their mother told them as a child that they needed to marry a nice wealthy man. Of course, there are some other requirement, but that’s often found to be the top priority if not religion.

The simplest and most basic foundation of a sociological civilization or group begins at the core center of sociology; which is marriage and the inner-fabric creation of a family. It is said that matches are made in heaven, however finding and defining your “soul mate” differs from one social group to the next. The social institution of marriage changes and adapts consistently through time, religious practice, and national beliefs. Many people believe they lead happy and satisfying lives without a marital partner, as others highly value and desire a life-long marital partner as the pinnacle achievement of their life.

Marriage is a ritual that marks a change in status for a man and a woman and the acceptance by society of the new family that is formed (Rosman & Rubel, 1981). Marriage, like other customs, is governed by rules (Rosman & Rubel, 1981). Anthropology has represented marriage as the definitive ritual and universally translatable regulative ideal of human societies (BORNEMAN, 1996). Marriage also the act of joining two persons of opposite sex together to become as husband and wife. Many people in the society have different opinions or outright misconception of the meaning of marriage. While some people see it as a union between a man and woman, others take it to mean an agreement made between a man

Marriage is the socially recognized union of two or more people. Selecting a marriage partner is very much a culturally defined process. The rules governing selection vary widely from society to society and are more often complex. How would you go about selecting a mate? Where would you begin? What criteria would you use? When we look around the world to see how other societies deal with these questions, it is clear that the ways of selecting a mate or a marriage partner has been changed from generation to generation.