From the American perspective, arranged marriages are a leftover from medieval thinking and a travesty in the Western world where marriage for love prevails. The idea of being forced to marry someone that one does not love-or possibly has not even met-simply at the behest of one's parents is appalling to most of us, especially given the way most people's parents seem incapable of even giving them a Christmas gift they like. It may be one thing to receive a canister of chemical mace or a pair of sensible shoes for Christmas instead of that sleek iPod Touch, but it is quite another to be chained to someone for life when one has had not the slightest input as to the choice of mate. Despite these admittedly potent arguments, it has been pointed out that the choice between arranged marriage and marriage for love is not as straightforward as one might think. Research suggests that both of these alternatives have both pros and cons that demand a second look at their real consequences.
Arranged marriage has been a tradition in the Middle and Far East for centuries, and Batabyal (2001, p. 273) reports, "Not only has this form of marriage stood the test of time, even today in large parts of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, a significant proportion of all marriages are arranged." Arguments in favor of arranged marriage include the facts that these matches are more stable, have been specifically chosen to maximize the future prospects of both families, and tend to build more slowly and naturally to a real, committed love rather than burn out quickly due to a flare of passion followed by indifference. The prevailing sentiment is that "love matches start out hot and grow cold, while arranged marriages start out cold and grow hot" and that arranged marriages tend to be marriages for life (Xiaohe & Whyte, 1990, p. 710). This is due not only to the inflation of passion that can wane dramatically but also due to what Constant...