... in response to My response re: arranged marriages, posted by MarkInTx on Jun 28, 2002
Mark:
I responded to this below... (although you changed it slightly here... I am too tired to change mine, so I will repost it...)
I really don't see how the FSU marriage is like an arranged marriage.
You say that you agree in the arranged marriage, the participants don't have a choice... but say you still think that the analogy applies...
To me, that's like saying "Yes, but other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?"
Greg: I did not go back and read my response but I doubt I said that at all. You are implying that I made a black and white statement, whereas I was saying in these shades of grey the FSU MOB scene is more like, not equal to -- the Arranged Marriage versus being more like the Typical Courting followed by Marriage in the Western World.
Mark: The fact that the FSU marriage participants have a free choice is exactly what makes it not at all like the pre-arranged marriage.
The only thing that seems similar, according to what you have said, is that the people don't know each other very well.
Greg: No, it is more than that. It is like an arranged marriage in that it is planned and arranged that two people meet for the sole purpose of marriage. They check each other out and make a decision in usually what is a very quick time frame almost with the expediency of how I purchased my last car. I saw a picture and few stats on the car, I walked into the dealership, fell in love and wrote a check.
Yes each gets to choose, but there is something very different about this choosing process. It takes very little to get many of these ladies to choose you - ladies that here in the USA that look like these ladies, you might have some difficulty getting the same "I do". Guys first choose to acquire a wife from the FSU and make arrangements to make that possible. The sole purpose of these arrangements is for marriage and marriage only. Only after this do people accept each other and, it is really more the male choosing and the woman accepting the way I see it. It seems to me that these women are not nearly as choosey as AW otherwise guys who can not find a woman they want in the USA, could not be so easily successful in the FSU. Now there are exceptions. KenC's wife ignored many men before Ken showed up. I am just talking about what I see as what is not uncommon. The agenda is more what has been chosen and now it just more about finalizing it all by finding one.
Mark: (in referring to the study) The fact that these people knew each other better than someone who had only dated can be reasonably inferred by the fact that they actually lived together. You're not really questioning the veracity of that, are you?
Greg: You bet I am. I do not think that one necessarily leads to the other. It very well might be true. But, we might agree on something in all this. I do not think that knowing each other is as important as that magical thing called "falling head over heels in Love". I suspect that people who jointly experience this might be more prone to getting married right away. People who did not really fall in love but just became accustom to each other might be more likely to drifting into marriage because it seems the thing to do after living together for some time. Obviously this is mere speculation and merely a suspicion that I have.
Mark: It does not hold true that if knowing someone well does not guarantee success, that not knowing someone at all will increase your chances. Don't be silly. If I make the statement that a fish cannot live out of water, you cannot say: "then anything living in water must be a fish!"
Greg: You stated that the people who knew each other less had the lower divorce rate when you stated that those that knew each other better had a higher divorce rate. Your analogy about fish does not compute - more reasonable is fish who live in deeper water live longer then the corollary that fish who live in more shallow water do not live as long has to be correct.
Mark: I simply said that in indicators of success in a marriage, I have never seen any evidence that proved that as the "intimate knowledge" of the parties increased, so did likelihood of success in the marriage.
Greg: However you stated that you have empirical proof that the reverse is true - that people who know each other better have less of a chance of remaining married. I doubt that there was any study about the people who lived together over one year before marrying. If such a study was done perhaps light could be shed as to why they had a higher divorce rate. The reason lies in there and not the assumption that those who knew each other better did not increase odds of success but did the inverse. One can not be true without the other. So you have come to the conclusion that I do not have to be concerned about the fact that I do not really know this person that I am marrying. You are creating a meaningless circle of coming to conclusions to justify your choice to marry someone you do not know. PERIOD.
Now, if two people in this process both fell head over heels in love - then I personally would agree but, that is no guarantee just some insurance and of course, I can not back that with any study. That is just my personal take. But, I would never say that I have empirical proof that what I choose to believe is true.
Mark: I still think that the evidence of couples who lived together's high incidence of divorce does indeed indicate that spending a long time getting to know someone does not increase your chances of success. I am not saying that blind dates should be instantly married. Don't twist my words.
Greg: I am not twisting your words, it is just that your logic is twisted on this one. So now you are not recommending someone who has had a blind should instantly get married.
However, if they meet for a week, that is enough time. You are making everything convenient for you argument to fit you particular situation with the FSU MOB issue.
Mark: Again: My whole point was that you seem to place an inordinate amount of stock in this whole "You must get to know the person first" and all I am saying is that I have never seen any body of evidence that said that is true.
Greg: I am saying that there is not evidence that it is not true. If you took a poll, I think that most people would be like your mother and not agree with you. If so, could the masses be wrong and the minority be correct. Of course, but I would go with mass opinion on this. But then again, we have added into the equal, the magic of falling head over heels in love. I know some do not believe that this improves odds either. Most people it seems on this issue come up with their own perception of this based upon their limited experience. - Yours as you stated was because of what happened in your divorce and now are using that experience to lower your concerns about doing the opposite and marrying someone you do not know. Go ahead and do this, it is probably best so that you have the best attitude going into this but that is what you are doing. You just need to justify what you are doing. I just do not buy your logics on this.
Mark: Now, you ask: "Why do I feel that the FSU process somehow has a greater likelihood of success?"
That is a fair question.
Again, I think it comes down to internal values. I am not talking about bringing a woman over who is young, naive, and can barely speak English, and thus limiting her choices, and "forcing" her to stay by keeping her some sort of cultural prisoner.
My fiance is not too young (I dated younger AWs) she is not naive (she has lived a life that is far too harsh to have her be naive) and she is diligently studying the language so that she can be fluent as soon as possible.
So none of those reasons are why I have a high expectation.
Instead it is the fact that what she wants out of life is to be a wife and mother, and have happy family. Those are personal goals that bode well for developing a family that will stand the test of time.
I compare that with most AWs I dated who wanted: A career, to be self-sufficient, and for a man who "made them happy..." and it doesn't come close to being conducive (in my opinion) to making a good marriage.
And, unfortunately, I know something about unhappy marriages...
I will say this again, I think Victoria is a babe.... but she is not the most beautiful or youngest woman I have dated in the past two years. I could have married young and pretty if that is all I was after. It wasn't, and I didn't.
It is the whole package that I am in love with. That is what I was seeking, and that is what I believe I found.
Do I have a guarantee? No. Certainly no guarantee better than someone who had stock in Worldcom, or Enron... My point is: what in life is guaranteed?
You want to say that the guys involved in this are in "La-la" land... but how do you account for the fact that so many guys on the board are happily married? Yes, we have had some guys on here who have posted sad tales of woe, but only speaking anecdotally, there are a lot more happily married men on here, than bitterly disappointed ones.
And you can't really say that those who failed wouldn't post it because they don't want to admit it, because most of the men who have been married do post from time to time.
How many of them report that their wife left them? (Not the guys who come on, make one post: "I was scammed" and you never hear from them again.. I don't give those any credence...)
I am talking about the guys who have been on here, we followed their search, and they got married... Of these, how many ended up in divorce that you know of?
I can only think of one. I know, that is purely anecdotal evidence... but come on.. what evidence do you have that all of the guys here are in la-la land?
I've rambled on long enough... let me just end with a quote I heard recently:
"To those who cannot hear the music.. the dancers are insane..."
Greg: First of all the fact that there are mainly men who are happy at PL forum means nothing just as the fact that men at RW never again are not happy. That is only a way of appeasing yourself.
Secondly, I never said that everyone here is in LaLa Land. I said that LaLa Land is something that can afflict men in this process and that I have seen several who have been. I have felt the tug myself. I have never said that being in that state and rushing into marriage condemns them to failure. What I have said is that guys who get into LaLa Land (a term I believe that I coined) are more prone to not seeing red flags that are right in front of them. When in LaLa Land, keeping your eyes open as you move forward is good advice because the nature of LaLa Land is not uncommonly to hamper one's vision of reality.
Me, I am a risk taker. If I met a woman that I fell head over in heels in love with, and all indicators were that the same was true for her and it was just impossible for me get to know her better due to the distance restrictions of the FSU MOB scene, I would proceed and make the leap.
However, I will simply accept the fact that not knowing someone that well brings into the equation more risk and I simply am willing to accept that versus rationalize it away as not being a factor. By doing this you are manifesting a LaLa Land trait IMHO. Again, this does not condemn you to failure. Others are in the process of proving this, but still the hands of time and truth are ticking.
I agree with your Mom Mark, but do not feel that this is a reason for you not to do what you are doing. I simply feel it is more healthy for me at least to acknowledge the increased risks, and accept that versus using a circle of arguments to convince myself that it is not so.
I win, I had the most words. 
Mark, I wish you two the very best. If your intuitions are correct with this lady such best wishes are not needed. No mater what happens that fact that you choose it means that it is the correct thing for you to do regardless of the outcome - so you can not lose. Go for it.
