Love marriage

About: Love marriage is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 190 publications have been published within this topic receiving 2465 citations.

Intergenerational Differences in the Concept of Marriage Among Dogra Brahmin Females (Mothers and Daughters)

Abstract: The present research investigates the intergenerational differences in the concept of marriage among Dogra Brahmin mothers and daughters. The sample of the study consists of 20 mothers and their 20 daughters. Random sampling technique was employed to select the sample from various localities of Jammu (Jammu and Kashmir State). Interview guidelines were used to get in-depth information from mothers and daughters. Results reveal that the concept of marriage among two generation varies. Though the concept differs still the daughters are not ready to change or rebel. They will follow their parents wishes and they know that their parents are not going to accept inter-caste marriage or love marriage though they are aware that many of the problems of Indian Social system like casteism dowry bride burning will be over come. (authors)

The Secret: Love, Marriage, and HIV

Abstract: Michel Agier’s Managing the Undesirables is one of several texts that addresses the complex and proliferating humanitarian infrastructure that is increasingly prevalent in regions of the world besieged by violence and displacement, but his work stands out as particularly important and innovative. Agier addresses some of the central questions facing our world today: belonging, personhood, and the ability of those most cut off from political power to speak for themselves and shape their own lives, and he does so in a way that combines passion and keen observation. In doing so, his work should be of interest to a broad range of sociologists who study social inequality and the structures (even those built from the best of intentions) that perpetuate it. In this volume, Agier explores the concept of humanitarian government, the political apparatus set up during emergency situations that takes responsibility for the life and death of individuals no longer protected adequately by a state. For as Agier shows, a refugee camp is far more than a place of shelters and emergency food aid. They are places in which someone decides who gets plastic sheeting and who does not, who receives food rations and for how long, what social programs should be put into place and who should be in charge of them, and what barriers need to be constructed (barbed wired, armed guards, cinderblock walls) to ostensibly protect those inside but also to protect the local population from incursions of these displaced ‘‘undesirables.’’ Further, these ‘‘camps’’ are hardly temporary shelters; many have existed for decades, taking on the appearance of towns and cities with entrepreneurs setting up small businesses and political elites emerging from the post-flight chaos. And yet, the camp is a hybrid social form, taking the shape of something entirely new from what existed before in the lives of its inhabitants, and as Agier convincingly argues, it exists in a state of exception, outside the bounds of the political and social life that humanitarian law and human rights ostensibly guarantee. Agier uses his ethnologist’s eye for culture to analyze observations he made during fieldwork in refugee camps in Kenya, Zambia, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea between 2000-2007, accessing the camps through Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF; in English, Doctors Without Borders). His affiliation with MSF gave him a level of flexibility and independence (particularly from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees) that allowed him sufficient time in the camps to not only observe humanitarian government at work but also the response of the refugees under its purview. He combines his observations with detailed histories of different migrations, explaining the historical and geographic paths that led different groups of refugees to the camps that he studied. Agier demonstrates the discursive power that humanitarian organizations have over defining and categorizing the displaced individuals in the camps; defining a person’s status as a refugee leads to acceptance into the camp and the security that brings, but the denial of such status leads to rejection and often deportation back to life-threatening circumstances. Once determined as a refugee, a person’s suffering and vulnerability come to define their place in the camp and the world, with moral hierarchies created around different definitions of vulnerability with different access to resources provided by the humanitarian organization. This process, Agier argues, de-socializes refugees; they lose their individual personhood and either become ahistorical, pitiable masses that the charitable-at-heart seek to keep alive, or potential threats to order and the safety of the non-displaced that must be managed or

Globalization, Sharia Law, and Cultural Hybridity: A Case of Marriage Preferences of Young Bangladeshis

Abstract: This contribution is one of the few psychological studies analyzing the marriage preferences of Bangladeshi urban youths Our goal was to demonstrate that the line between traditional and “modern” marriage is no longer clear-cut and document the importance of social status and religion in shaping the life priorities of young, educated Bangladeshis The sample (N = 205) consisted of unmarried university undergraduates aged 19-26 Participants were presented with three marriage scenarios: a traditional marriage arrangement, a hybrid model based on mutual attraction and family support, and finally, a Western-style love marriage Generally, the Western marriage arrangements were rated more positively than the other models Surprisingly, there were no significant differences between preferences for a hybrid and a traditional model Additionally, participants from a higher social milieu with lower levels of religiosity accepted love marriages more eagerly than middle-class students