Can someone mark this LNAT essay?
Arranged marriages should no longer be tolerated within Western societies. Discuss.
An arranged marriage is a legal union of two people that has not arisen from a previously existing relationship; in many societies, the choice of bride or groom is encouraged by family elders. Arranged marriages are often considered an unemotional, cold transaction between two people – but there are undeniable positives to it. From forming a solid base to start a family on, to discovering a stable lifelong partner, arranged marriages may actually be the ideal type of union.
What, exactly, constitutes a ‘marriage’? Only in recent history has the concept of a perfect day, the two partners blissfully in love with each other, emerged as a milestone to which all couples must aspire. In fact, for centuries marriages have been used as political unions, for financial gains and for accumulating power and prestige. And whilst forming a marriage on the basis of accruing wealth is perhaps not the most auspicious start to a lifelong commitment, it supports the argument that marriages have not always, and perhaps should not be, founded only on the concept of love. Instead, searching for someone who shares the same aspirations, who fulfils all requirements, could be the beginning of a contented and blissful relationship that lasts the entirety of both partners’ lives. Not everyone wants the fleeting, burning flame of passionate love, the inevitably wounding Cupid’s arrow. For those who crave stability, arranged marriages are often the perfect solution. Furthermore, it is important to note that all marriages, even those in the ‘Western’ world of the twenty-first century, are formulaic to a certain degree. Couples often sign prenups; a wedding ‘certificate’ (as if the participants have accomplished a great feat) is issued; in a register office, witnesses must sign their names. The contractual elements of ‘love’ marriages are not so different to those of arranged marriages.
Likewise, there is a clear, but often misunderstood, difference between an arranged and a forced marriage. The latter should undeniably be banned, in all countries. There is no justification for dragging unwilling partners to the altar and forcing them to slide rings on each other’s trembling fingers. Forced marriages are extremely unlikely to result in anything but lifelong regret and suppressed fury. However, arranged marriages are vastly different. There is no dragging, screaming or crying. There is no reluctance. Arranged marriages are partaken in by two people who are completely aware of the consequences of their actions, who are ready and willing to devote their lives to each other for as long as they may live.
In addition, arranged marriages in many cultures are the primary form of marriages. In India, for example, the different religious sects, state boundaries and nineteen thousand-plus languages, there are simply too many variables for everyone to try and find ‘true love’. Instead, stable family units are formed through arranged marriages within communities. This prevents trying to brave potential cross-cultural boundaries and the inevitable unhappiness that would surely derive from such a predicament. Outlawing, or frowning upon, such typical customs of other countries in the Western world cannot be perceived as anything other than racial discrimination. Do these ‘Western countries’ hate arranged marriages because of the principles associated with the act itself, or because they are inherently prejudiced against anything that comes from another culture?
There are many who argue that arranged marriages should be forbidden because of their inclination to commodify women. Indeed, dowries do objectify them, providing a financial incentive above all else for life partners to seek them out. However, the two should not be confused – arranged marriages do not automatically indicate dowries, and vice versa. Dowries, it is true, should be outlawed. Nobody should enter into a sacred ritual on the basis of settling their debts, or accumulating wealth in a bank account. But this does not automatically apply to arranged marriages. There are others who incredulously question whether the process of an arranged marriage is not the same as dating. After all, the two involve rigorous selection processes, sending out signals to another, a friendship that develops between participants. But what differs is the uncertainty. With an arranged marriage, there is no question of whether the person wants to commit, or move in, or have a baby – all of this is mentioned before the two people even sit down for coffee.
Arranged marriages should not be frowned upon, in any country. They can lead to stable family units, to contented relationships. Unlike passion, which can vanish as quickly as it ignited, the unity and trust formed by two people in an arranged marriage cannot be shaken, even by many years in an institution as complicated or tricky as marriage.
An arranged marriage is a legal union of two people that has not arisen from a previously existing relationship; in many societies, the choice of bride or groom is encouraged by family elders. Arranged marriages are often considered an unemotional, cold transaction between two people – but there are undeniable positives to it. From forming a solid base to start a family on, to discovering a stable lifelong partner, arranged marriages may actually be the ideal type of union.
What, exactly, constitutes a ‘marriage’? Only in recent history has the concept of a perfect day, the two partners blissfully in love with each other, emerged as a milestone to which all couples must aspire. In fact, for centuries marriages have been used as political unions, for financial gains and for accumulating power and prestige. And whilst forming a marriage on the basis of accruing wealth is perhaps not the most auspicious start to a lifelong commitment, it supports the argument that marriages have not always, and perhaps should not be, founded only on the concept of love. Instead, searching for someone who shares the same aspirations, who fulfils all requirements, could be the beginning of a contented and blissful relationship that lasts the entirety of both partners’ lives. Not everyone wants the fleeting, burning flame of passionate love, the inevitably wounding Cupid’s arrow. For those who crave stability, arranged marriages are often the perfect solution. Furthermore, it is important to note that all marriages, even those in the ‘Western’ world of the twenty-first century, are formulaic to a certain degree. Couples often sign prenups; a wedding ‘certificate’ (as if the participants have accomplished a great feat) is issued; in a register office, witnesses must sign their names. The contractual elements of ‘love’ marriages are not so different to those of arranged marriages.
Likewise, there is a clear, but often misunderstood, difference between an arranged and a forced marriage. The latter should undeniably be banned, in all countries. There is no justification for dragging unwilling partners to the altar and forcing them to slide rings on each other’s trembling fingers. Forced marriages are extremely unlikely to result in anything but lifelong regret and suppressed fury. However, arranged marriages are vastly different. There is no dragging, screaming or crying. There is no reluctance. Arranged marriages are partaken in by two people who are completely aware of the consequences of their actions, who are ready and willing to devote their lives to each other for as long as they may live.
In addition, arranged marriages in many cultures are the primary form of marriages. In India, for example, the different religious sects, state boundaries and nineteen thousand-plus languages, there are simply too many variables for everyone to try and find ‘true love’. Instead, stable family units are formed through arranged marriages within communities. This prevents trying to brave potential cross-cultural boundaries and the inevitable unhappiness that would surely derive from such a predicament. Outlawing, or frowning upon, such typical customs of other countries in the Western world cannot be perceived as anything other than racial discrimination. Do these ‘Western countries’ hate arranged marriages because of the principles associated with the act itself, or because they are inherently prejudiced against anything that comes from another culture?
There are many who argue that arranged marriages should be forbidden because of their inclination to commodify women. Indeed, dowries do objectify them, providing a financial incentive above all else for life partners to seek them out. However, the two should not be confused – arranged marriages do not automatically indicate dowries, and vice versa. Dowries, it is true, should be outlawed. Nobody should enter into a sacred ritual on the basis of settling their debts, or accumulating wealth in a bank account. But this does not automatically apply to arranged marriages. There are others who incredulously question whether the process of an arranged marriage is not the same as dating. After all, the two involve rigorous selection processes, sending out signals to another, a friendship that develops between participants. But what differs is the uncertainty. With an arranged marriage, there is no question of whether the person wants to commit, or move in, or have a baby – all of this is mentioned before the two people even sit down for coffee.
Arranged marriages should not be frowned upon, in any country. They can lead to stable family units, to contented relationships. Unlike passion, which can vanish as quickly as it ignited, the unity and trust formed by two people in an arranged marriage cannot be shaken, even by many years in an institution as complicated or tricky as marriage.
Sorry you've not had any responses about this. 
Are you sure you've posted in the right place? 
Here's a link to our subject forum which should help get you more responses if you post there. 
Are you sure you've posted in the right place? Here's a link to our subject forum which should help get you more responses if you post there. Original post by TSR Jessica
Sorry you've not had any responses about this. Are you sure you've posted in the right place? Here's a link to our subject forum which should help get you more responses if you post there.
Are you sure you've posted in the right place? Here's a link to our subject forum which should help get you more responses if you post there. Hi! What forum do you think this would work best in? I'm not sure where it could go
Original post by McGinger
Far too lomg and clearly not written under exam conditions.
Sorry, I should have made it clear! This was just me trying to get an idea of what the essay content should look like - it wasn't done under timed conditions, but is this the correct writing style?
Original post by chrissi04
Hi! What forum do you think this would work best in? I'm not sure where it could go
you placed it in the right forum
fyi TSR Jessica is a bot that bumps threads that haven't been answered yet and just asks if it's in the right forum is all (in case it isn't and that's why you haven't get a response). my guess is you may not have had a response yet cuz it is too long and too hard to read without paragraphs Original post by Joleee
you placed it in the right forum fyi TSR Jessica is a bot that bumps threads that haven't been answered yet and just asks if it's in the right forum is all (in case it isn't and that's why you haven't get a response). my guess is you may not have had a response yet cuz it is too long and too hard to read without paragraphs
fyi TSR Jessica is a bot that bumps threads that haven't been answered yet and just asks if it's in the right forum is all (in case it isn't and that's why you haven't get a response). my guess is you may not have had a response yet cuz it is too long and too hard to read without paragraphs Oh, didn't realise - thanks!
Unless you are 'writing to time' you will not get the brevity that is needed for an LNAT essay.
It is not an aademic essay - it is a written answer that show that you have understood the question - ie. 'other' culture versus dominance of western culture - and can write in clear English. A short introduction, one paragraph for the arguement, one against - and a quick conclusion.
If you can do that in the time limit (which includes choosing a question and thinking about how to answer it...) in clear, gramatically correct English, and without over-long sentances, job done.
Avoid 'flowery' langauge ('Not everyone wants the fleeting, burning flame of passionate love, the inevitably wounding Cupid’s arrow' etc), do not try to write 'like a lawyer' (you are not in Court) and use short, succinct sentances.
Useful book - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultimate-LNAT-Collection-comprehensive-admissions/dp/1913683966
It is not an aademic essay - it is a written answer that show that you have understood the question - ie. 'other' culture versus dominance of western culture - and can write in clear English. A short introduction, one paragraph for the arguement, one against - and a quick conclusion.
If you can do that in the time limit (which includes choosing a question and thinking about how to answer it...) in clear, gramatically correct English, and without over-long sentances, job done.
Avoid 'flowery' langauge ('Not everyone wants the fleeting, burning flame of passionate love, the inevitably wounding Cupid’s arrow' etc), do not try to write 'like a lawyer' (you are not in Court) and use short, succinct sentances.
Useful book - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultimate-LNAT-Collection-comprehensive-admissions/dp/1913683966
Original post by McGinger
Unless you are 'writing to time' you will not get the brevity that is needed for an LNAT essay.
It is not an aademic essay - it is a written answer that show that you have understood the question - ie. 'other' culture versus dominance of western culture - and can write in clear English. A short introduction, one paragraph for the arguement, one against - and a quick conclusion.
If you can do that in the time limit (which includes choosing a question and thinking about how to answer it...) in clear, gramatically correct English, and without over-long sentances, job done.
Avoid 'flowery' langauge ('Not everyone wants the fleeting, burning flame of passionate love, the inevitably wounding Cupid’s arrow' etc), do not try to write 'like a lawyer' (you are not in Court) and use short, succinct sentances.
Useful book - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultimate-LNAT-Collection-comprehensive-admissions/dp/1913683966
It is not an aademic essay - it is a written answer that show that you have understood the question - ie. 'other' culture versus dominance of western culture - and can write in clear English. A short introduction, one paragraph for the arguement, one against - and a quick conclusion.
If you can do that in the time limit (which includes choosing a question and thinking about how to answer it...) in clear, gramatically correct English, and without over-long sentances, job done.
Avoid 'flowery' langauge ('Not everyone wants the fleeting, burning flame of passionate love, the inevitably wounding Cupid’s arrow' etc), do not try to write 'like a lawyer' (you are not in Court) and use short, succinct sentances.
Useful book - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultimate-LNAT-Collection-comprehensive-admissions/dp/1913683966
Thank you for the advice, I really appreciate it!
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- LNAT prep
- Full marks LNAT
- LNAT
- arbitio vs law mind (lnat+ps)
- any Lnat practice tests worth doing?
- UCL LNAT score 2024
- lnat - i flunked it
- Durham Law 2024
- LNAT
- Chances of LSE/UCL/Bristol with low LNAT?
- When to start preparing for LNAT
- Any advice for the LNAT?
- LNAT for 2024 entry
- lnat results thread 2024
- Could I get into UCL Laws with poor GCSEs?
- LNAT
- Are LNAT universities better? Should I do the LNAT?
- LNAT essay
- Can someone mark my LNAT essay?
- How important is the LNAT score for Cambridge?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
