@Parson Jim

Yeowch. Not untrue, but the conclusion smarts. -About there being no marriage-material woman, I mean.- I wonder, though, do only these two types of women seem to exist within the United States because that's the only kind people will notice? After all, squeaky wheel gets the grease, and being either a Girls Gone Wild type -Oh, look at her, she's such a free spirit, and obviously sexually adventerous!- or a bile spewing feminist -Oh, she has values and a mind of her own! I love em feisty!- will get you noticed. Maybe not loved, or appreciated... but noticed.

@Lilyrose

The more I read of your posts, the more I understand where you're coming from. You might be interested to read 'Save the Males' -it was harpooned by our lovely Broadsheet ladies not so long ago- a very good book that discusses how and why American culture has been neglecting the wonderful institution of fatherhood and manhood. Quite an interesting read, and it does make you wonder if all these problems aren't somehow inter related...

"Moreover, why do we have to be "perfectly sound" before we can meet someone? Why can't we be desperately alone and unhappy and become much more balanced or healthy after getting involved with someone?"

Because we should be whole people looking for other whole people, not halves looking for a co-dependent relationship. Men aren't knights in shining armor who come around just in time to save women from their loneliness. They tend to be living, breathing, thinking men with much of the same baggage you're carrying - who might not want to be your emotional pack-mule on the long trip of a relationship.

You might want to ask yourself what is it about a relationship that you think will fill any void within yourself. What is it that you like about yourself? Figure out who you are and put that forward with confidence. If there's something you like doing, or something you feel passionate about, go out and do that. That way, when you meet someone, you'll know he feels the same way about certain things you do. The important thing to remember is to quit the bars and Internet dating scene and to go out and live life.

Thanks for the response.

In regards to my comment about "happy/successful" marriage, I meant personally happy, that fulfillment that we get from being with another person who cares for us, "gets" us. How different a concept is that from what you referred to as a successful marriage in Asian culture?

I'll just add that I was VERY bothered by the comment that we've all known of cases where a partner reformed or stopped drinking once they met the right person....

who knows these people who have magically changed? I sure don't. I've known people who hide their addictions and deal breaking flaws, sometimes very cleverly, for a while but none who reformed.

It's a terrible idea to marry a drinker with the idea that he'll stop drinking for the right woman. But this is very typical of the female desi mindset--he'll change for the most loving, tolerant woman, just like in the movies. It's like they haven't heard that alcoholism is a disease.

Desi women are still in the Patient Griselda mentality. One woman who was being beaten by her husband was advised by a Mumbai marriage counselor to work harder at being a good wife for her husband and the beatings would stop; it was the wife's fault because she wasn't yet demonstrating enough "transformational love". Both the victim and the joke of a counselor were college educated, upper crust women who had spent time abroad. This is just the value system in India. In Pakistan--even more so.

As for the veracity of arranged marriage generally, I second the person who pointed out that arranged marriage is popular with difficult, emotionally shut down people who don't want to have to work to attract a partner.

I've personally met many "desperately lonely and unhappy" Pakistani and Indian men who sincerely wanted to spend time with me just to have somebody to talk to--and guess what--they were all married and had been for many years. They had no connection with their wives who were wholly taken up with dishing out biryani and gossiping about the relatives and fussing over the kids. These men had wanted traditional housewives; most of them had broken up with college girlfriends to marry their parents' choice, but once they got them--there was nothing there. It was very sad, and these men had many regrets.

Often, the man and wife of an arranged match die under the same roof--that's all :(

If that's your definition of success in marriage, then go for an arranged marriage by all means.

Some of the more naive comments in this article lead me to believe that the author has absorbed only the objectionable lessons of the Western dating scene and none of the positive messages--namely that yes, you should be sane, self sufficient, and not terribly broken if you want to be a good wife/husband for somebody. And NO, they will not change for you and you in turn should not try to change them. Good grief, that's rule number one!

...for giving me such a good laugh this afternoon out of that little romantic scenario you spun.

On another note... despite all the cliched advice out there, I have found that the more needy, clingy, manipulative, codependent, and generally "unwhole" people tend to be the ones in relationships. I know it flies in the face of common wisdom, but from my observation, independent, sane people who don't NEED to be in relationships (but may want to be) unfortunately often aren't in them. This is probably due to a lack of sane, suitable singles for them to pair up with as well as the refusal to stick with unsatisfying unions.

Good job. We all know men are supposed to take responsibility for their marriages, as their wives are passive blobs.

The traditional feminist absence of women's agency lives on.