Mating preferences of men and women among the Indian diaspora in Tanzania

DOI: 10.33876/2311-0546/2020-51-3/120-135

Abstract

The article presents the results of a study conducted among the Indian diaspora in Tanzania. The data obtained confirm the existence of universal gender differences in the mating preferences and are consistent with the predictions of the theory of sexual strategies. Indian men tend to pay more attention to a woman's reproductive abilities, thus evaluating physical indicators of fertility, health and age, as well as the potential to be a caring mother. Women appreciate those male qualities that reflect his ability to provide for a family (and therefore joint children), such as intelligence, good education, social status, diligence, financial security, etc. At the same time, cultural components typical for Indian society influence the mating preferences. Caste and the role of parents’ opinion regarding the future marriage partner remain important criteria. Instead of a one-way movement towards Western marriage practices, as suggested by family change theories and as can be seen in other Asian contexts (such as China), trends in Indian society point to a combination of traditional Indian and Western practices.

References

1. Adur, S.M., and A. Narayan. 2017. Stories of dalit diaspora: migration, life narratives, and caste in the us. Biography 40 (1): 244–264.
2. Allendorf, K., and D.J. Ghimire. 2013. Determinants of marital quality in an arranged marriage society. Social Science Research 42(1): 59–70.
3. Brauner-Otto, S.R., W.G. Axinn, and D.J. Ghimire. 2020. Parents’ Marital Quality and Children’s Transition to Adulthood. Demography 57: 195–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-019-00851-w
4. Buss, D.M. 1989. Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12: 1–49.
5. Buss, D.M. 1999. Evolutionary Psychology. The New Science Of The Mind. Allyn and Bacon. 
6. Buss, D.M., M. Abbott, A. Angleitner, A. Asherian, A. Biaggio, A. Blanco-Villasenor, ... and B. Ekehammar. 1990. International preferences in selecting mates: A study of 37 cultures. Journal of cross-cultural psychology 21 (1): 5–47.
7. Butovskaya, M.L., and O.V. Smirnov. 2003. Vybor postoiannogo polovogo partnera v srede sovremennogo moskovskogo studenchestva: evoliutsionnyi analiz [A Permanent Sexual Partner Choice among Modern Moscow Students: an Evolutionary Analysis]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 1: 141–163.
8. Butovskaya, M.L., D.A. Dronova, and E. Mikhandzho. 2008. Sovremennye tendentsii v vybore brachnykh partnerov u studentov-afrikantsev i otnoshenie k traditsionnym ustanovkam na prodolzhenie roda i mnogodetnost' [Current Trends in the Choice of Marriage Partners among African Students and Attitudes to Traditional Attitudes to Procreation and Multiple Children]. In Mezhrasovye i mezhetnicheskie otnosheniia v sovremennoi Tanzanii: Trudy Rossiiskoi kompleksnoi ekspeditsii v Ob"edinennoi Respublike Tanzaniia (sezon 2005 g.), edited by A.V. Karataev and E.B. Demintseva, 168–195. Moscow: LENAND.
9. Cherlin, A.J., K.E. Kiernan, and P.L. Chase-Lansdale. 1995. Parental divorce in childhood and demographic outcomes in young adulthood. Demography 32: 299–318.
10. Conroy-Beam, D., and D.M. Buss. 2019. Why is age so important in human mating? Evolved age preferences and their influences on multiple mating behaviors. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences 13(2): 127–157. https://doi.org/10.1037/ebs0000127
11. Demir, A., and H. Fisiloglu. 1999. Loneliness and marital adjustment of Turkish couples. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied 133 (2): 230–240. https://doi .org/10.1080/00223989909599736
12. Dronova, D.A. 2014. Indiitsy Dar-es-Salama [Indians of Dar es Salaam]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 5: 175–185.
13. Dronova, D.A. 2018. Soprikosnovenie dvukh kul'tur: predstaviteli indiiskoi diaspory i tanzaniitsy afrikanskogo proiskhozhdeniia (g. Dar-es-Salam, Tanzaniia) [Contact between Two Cultures: Representatives of the Indian Diaspora and Tanzanians of African Descent (Dar es Salaam, Tanzania)]. In Obshchestvo i gosudarstvo v zerkale sotsiologicheskikh izmerenii (VIII Riazanskie sotsiologicheskie chteniia). Materialy Natsional'noi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem, edited by R.E. Markin and A.V. Pronoza, 312–318. Moscow: OOO “Izdatel'stvo Ippolitova”.
14. Dronova, D.A., and M.L. Butovskaya. 2011. Vybor brachnogo partnera v sovremennom indiiskom obshchestve i polovoi otbor [A Marriage Partner Choice in Modern Indian Society and Sexual Selection]. Vostok (Oriens). Afro-aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost' 6: 46–66.
15. Dunbar, R.I.M., and D. Waynforth. 1995. Conditional mate choice strategies in humans: evidence from 'Lonely Hearts' advertisements. Behaviour 132 (9–10): 755–779.
16. Flicker, S.M., F. Sancier-Barbosa, F. Afroz, S.N. Saif, and F. Mohsin. 2019. Marital quality in arranged and couple-initiated marriages: The role of perceived influence over partner selection. International Journal of Psychology. DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12622
17. Gupta, U., and P. Singh. 1982. An exploratory study of love and liking and type of marriages. Indian Journal of Applied Psychology 19: 92–97.
18. Hoelter, L.F., W.G. Axinn, and D.J. Ghimire. 2004. Social change, premarital nonfamily experiences, and marital dynamics. Journal of Marriage and the Family 66: 1131–1151.
19. Hortaçsu, N. 1999. The first year of family- and couple-initiated marriages of a Turkish sample: A longitudinal investigation. International Journal of Psychology 34: 29–41.
20. Hortaçsu, N. 2007. Family-versus couple-initiated marriages in Turkey: Similarities and differences over the family life cycle. Asian Journal of Social Psychology 10 (2): 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2007.00217.x
21. Kenrick, D.T., S.L. Neuberg, K.L. Zierk, and J.M. Krones. 1994. Evolution and social cognition: contrast effects as a function of sex, dominance, and physical attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 20: 210–217.
22. Lev-Wiesel, R., and A. Al-Krenawi. 1999. Attitude towards marriage and marital quality: A comparison among Israeli Arabs differentiated by religion. Family Relations 48 (1): 51–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/585682
23. Maira, S. 2012. Desis in the house: Indian American youth culture in NYC. Temple University Press,
24. Malinen, K., U. Kinnunen, A. Tolvanen, A. Ronka, H. Wierda-Boer, and J. Gerris. 2010. Happy spouses, happy parents? Family relationships among Finnish and Dutch dual earners. Journal of Marriage and Family 72: 293–306.
25. Mealey, L. 2000. Sex Differences: Developmental and Evolutionary Strategies. San Diego: Academic Press.
26. Murry, T.R., and L. Pujar. 2018. Gender Based Potential Mate Preferences Among Emerging Adults. IMPACT: International Journal of Research in Applied, Natural and Social Sciences. 6 (2): 27–32.
27. Myers, J.E., J. Madathil, and L.R. Tingle. 2005. Marriage satisfaction and wellness in India and the United States: A preliminary comparison of arranged marriages and marriages of choice. Journal of Counseling and Development 83: 183–190.
28. O'Kelly, C.G., and L.S. Carney. 1986. Women and men in society: Crosscultural perspectives on gender stratification. Wadsworth Publishing
29. Pawlowski, B., and S. Koziel. 2002. The impact of traits offered in personal advertisements on response rates. Evolution and Human Behavior 23 (2): 139–149.
30. Pimentel, E.F. 2000. Just how do I love Thee?: Marital relations in urban China. Journal of Marriage and the Family 62: 32–47.
31. Rajadesingan, A., R. Mahalingam, and D. Jurgens. 2019. Smart, Responsible, and Upper Caste Only: Measuring Caste Attitudes through Large-Scale Analysis of Matrimonial Profiles. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 13 (01): 393–404.
32. Regan, P.C., S. Lakhanpal, and C. Anguiano. 2012. Relationship outcomes in Indian-American love-based and arranged marriages. Psychological Reports 110: 915–924.
33. Roopnarine, L. 2003. East Indian indentured emigration to the Caribbean: Beyond the push and pull model. Caribbean studies 31 (2): 97–134.
34. Roopnarine, L. 2006. Indo-caribbean social identity. Caribbean quarterly 52 (1): 1–11.
35. Sabbe, A., K. El Boujaddayni, M. Temmerman, and E. Leye. 2019. Marriage and Migration: Moroccan Women’s Views on Partner Choice, Arranged and Forced Marriage in Belgium. Journal of International Migration and Integration 20: 1097–1120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-018-00646-9
36. Schwartz, S.A. 2007. The relationship between love and marital quality in arranged and romantic Jewish couples. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The sciences and engineering. 68 (4-b), 2716.
37. Sedlovskaia, A.N. 1999. Zhenshchina v traditsionnom santal'skom obshchestve (Indiia) [Women in Traditional Santhali Society (India)]. In Muzhchina i zhenshchina v sovremennom mire: meniaiushchiesia roli i obrazy, edited by I.M. Semashko and A.N. Sedlovskaia, 320–328. Moscow.
38. Severtseva, T.F. 1999. Zhiznennyi put' zhenshchina na Vostoke [Life Path of a Woman in the East]. In Muzhchina i zhenshchina v sovremennom mire: meniaiushchiesia roli i obrazy, edited by I.M. Semashko and A.N. Sedlovskaia, 313–319. Moscow.
39. Shachar, R. 1991. His and her marital satisfaction: The double standard. Sex Roles 25: 451–467.
40. Symons, D. 1979. The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41. Thornton, A., W.G. Axinn, and Y. Xie. 2007. Marriage and cohabitation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
42. Trivers, R.L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. In Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971, edited by B. Campbell, 136–179. Aldine, Chicago.
43. Williams, G.C. Sex and Evolution. Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press.
44. Xu, X., and K.J. Whyte. 1990. Love matches and arranged marriages: A Chinese replication. Journal of Marriage and the Family 52: 709–722.
45. Yelsma, P., and K. Athappilly. 1988. Marriage satisfaction and communication practices: Comparisons among Indian and American couples. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 19: 37–54.