2 Lessons About Marriage From ‘Indian Matchmaking' — By A Psychologist
For many, dating has become harder despite countless apps, leaving many craving real connections — ... More and reconsidering overlooked paths like arranged marriages.
As more individuals experience dating burnout and exhaustion from dating apps, many are turning away from the endless swiping in search of something more meaningful. This may be why more and more people are opening up to the idea of their parents and other community members helping them seek lifelong partners. This is where practices like arranged marriages and matchmaking come into play.
Arranged marriages are unions where families, matchmakers or community elders play a significant role in selecting a spouse, often based on compatibility in values, background and long-term goals.
This system is common in cultures across South Asia, the Middle East and even among some Western communities seeking alternatives to algorithm-driven dating. While traditionally rooted in familial and social ties, contemporary arranged marriages now blend tradition with personal choice — making them more of a curated introduction than an imposed decision.
Shows like Netflix's Indian Matchmaking, though controversial, shed some light on how many still find comfort in structured approaches to love — offering valuable insights into what really matters in building a lasting marriage.
Here are two key lessons we can take away from matchmaking practices.
Many viewers have been critical of Sima Taparia, the matchmaker from Indian Matchmaking, who became notorious for advising compromise in the search for a partner. And while no one should ever settle for someone that's not right for them, her emphasis on practicality over passion points to something many modern daters overlook: the difference between initial spark and long-term sustainability.
At its core, matchmaking often prioritizes shared values, long-term goals and emotional compatibility over fleeting attraction. It asks a deeper question: Can you build a life with this person? Not just 'Do you have butterflies right now?'
While mainstream Western dating culture often chases the high of instant chemistry, long-term relationship satisfaction hinges more on factors like mutual respect, emotional intelligence and aligned life visions than raw attraction. That's not to say chemistry doesn't matter — but in arranged setups, it's viewed as something that can grow over time, rather than the starting point.
Some individuals are content to build love with the person they marry, while others chase the elusive spark with someone they've just met. But in the end, it's often the slow burn — not instant chemistry — that sustains a marriage.
Research shows that in successful arranged marriages, love tends to grow over time, largely due to the couple's commitment to each other. This love is often rooted in shared experiences, mutual respect and a willingness to grow together.
This commitment often gives couples the resilience to adopt a 'work it out' mindset, learning to resolve conflicts rather than walking away at the first sign of trouble. Researchers suggest that similar approaches — involving patience, loyalty and commitment — could help sustain love in Western marriages, where, according to research trends, it tends to fade over time.
In Western cultures, we often glorify the idea of romantic love as a deeply private, individual journey — something that should happen spontaneously, without interference. But matchmaking practices remind us that having the support of family and community can actually enhance a couple's ability to thrive, especially when that involvement is balanced and respectful.
In the U.S., many Indian-American couples in arranged marriages report feeling supported, not pressured, by their families. A study published in The Family Journal shows that they enjoy the stability of arranged marriages, but experience fewer family pressures compared to their counterparts in India. For Indians in arranged marriages living in India, those who had more say in choosing their spouse reported higher satisfaction.
Interestingly, researchers also found that Indian-American couples tend to form stronger marital bonds when they live away from extended family. Being physically distanced from parental oversight can allow partners to become more interdependent and united in their decision-making — all while still drawing strength from their cultural roots.
Such individuals likely experience the benefits of community involvement — such as emotional backing, cultural continuity and guidance.
This balance between tradition and autonomy offers an important lesson: strong marriages don't necessarily develop in a vacuum. While too much outside influence can be stifling, completely isolating a couple from community input can be just as risky. Having a circle of trusted people — whether that's family, mentors or cultural community — can provide perspective, emotional reinforcement and even accountability when times get tough.
For many U.S. couples, especially those who feel burned out by hyper-individualized dating culture, looking to family or community for support in choosing or sustaining a relationship might feel unfamiliar — but it's not outdated. It's simply another way of rooting love in something larger than just two people.
For years, in many traditional arranged marriage set-ups, communities may have prioritized fulfilling societal checklists over individual happiness.
Sons and daughters were often married off based on criteria such as financial stability for men and domestic skills like cooking and cleaning for women, leaving little room for personal choice. Many individuals may have preferred to remain happily single rather than enter such unions.
Families today are increasingly recognizing that their children's priorities have evolved. Partner selection now involves deeper considerations. Moreover, the success of a marriage often depends on how much autonomy an individual has in choosing their partner.
A 2019 study published in the International Journal of Psychology shows that people who exercised greater influence in selecting their spouse reported higher levels of intimacy, passion, commitment and overall marital satisfaction.
This could stem from the simple truth that when both partners know they chose each other — freely and willingly — it encourages deeper love, commitment and mutual appreciation. In the end, no matter how you meet your spouse, what truly matters is that you both feel empowered in your decision.
Is your relationship simply happy, or is it truly thriving? Take this test to find out: Relationship Flourishing Scale
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘Absolutely shocking': Netflix documentary examines how the Titan sub disaster happened
If you were sentient in the summer of 2023, you probably remember the feverish speculation, vicarious horror, snap consternation and armchair sleuthing after the disappearance of the submersible called Titan during a commercial voyage to the wreck of the Titanic. The Titan sub disaster was inescapable for weeks as the story evolved from critical rescue mission – the best-case scenario being a mechanical failure deep in the North Atlantic with 96 hours of oxygen for the five passengers, which you better believe became a countdown clock on cable news – to tragic recovery operation. Related: 'Incredibly disturbing': docuseries goes inside jaw-dropping LA mortuary scandal The sub, it turned out, had imploded at 3,300 meters beneath the surface, 90 minutes into a dive that was supposed to reach 3,800 meters deep. All five passengers – British explorer Hamish Harding, British-Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood and his 19-year-old son Suleman, French diver Paul-Henri Nargeolet and submersible owner Stockton Rush – were killed instantly. Even as the search for the sub, whose wreckage was eventually returned to land, continued in earnest, concerning reports about the safety record at OceanGate, the company which operated the vehicle, began to emerge: that a whistleblower had declared implosion of the sub's trademark carbon fiber hull a mathematical certainty years earlier. That Rush, the company's founder and CEO, pursued commercial voyages anyway, eluding any type of third-party certification. For the majority of the public, the story ended along those lines: a preventable tragedy, another sin of human hubris at arguably the most famous shrine to the folly of human hubris in history. That is not wrong; according to the new Netflix documentary Titan: The OceanGate Disaster, the sub's implosion was virtually guaranteed by its design. 'I'm convinced, based on the research and the discussions that I've had, that the submersible Titan could have imploded at any time,' said the film's director, Mark Monroe. In fact, it was 'absolutely shocking' that Titan made as many successful dives – 80 attempts, 13 to Titanic depth, between 2021 and 2022 – as it did. But for those who either worked at OceanGate, were tasked with the investigation or loved someone lost on board, the story is much more complicated, and concerning, than a design flaw. Another film would proceed through an exact timeline of Titan's final mission on 18 June, 2023; include footage of the wreckage or diagrams of its descent coordinated to text messages sent to its surface-level team; play the audio of its implosion, recorded 900 miles away by a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration device; or allow viewers to see Rush's wife Wendy hear the implosion, whose sound reached its support ship, Polar Prince, before their last text message, allowing them to mistakenly assume the sub was fine. The Netflix film, made by the veteran production company Story Syndicate, doesn't do any of that, eschewing a Seconds from Disaster-type narrative and instead focusing on the nearly decade-long procession toward disaster, through numerous decisions prizing flashy ambition over safety. 'It's scarier, in a way, to understand the decision-making over the 10-year period that led to that moment,' said Monroe. 'I feel pretty strongly if the civilians' – the paying customers OceanGate called 'mission specialists' to skirt around commercial maritime safety regulations – 'had seen the decisions made along the way, they would have been a lot more reticent to get into that submersible. And I think that was not clear, or made clear, to the public.' With access to company footage, data, files and several former employees and whistleblowers, the 111-minute documentary paints a fuller picture of a company with idealistic ambition and plenty of scientific backing – at least at first. Founded outside Seattle in 2009 by Rush, an entrepreneur with a rich family and an engineering degree, OceanGate attracted talent from the fields of engineering, diving and marine exploration with its ambition to revolutionize deep sea travel for the masses. The question of how to make deep subs, usually made of very heavy titanium steel, lighter and nimbler – and thus commercially viable – was an appealing puzzle to an array of scientists, deep-sea divers and exploration enthusiasts. It's what drew David Lochridge, a highly experienced submersible pilot, to uproot his family and move to Everett, Washington, to become OceanGate's operations director. In the film, Lochridge explains that he didn't initially understand, on a technical level, OceanGate's answer to the lightweight, deep-sea sub conundrum: carbon fiber, a lightweight but high-strength composite material of tightly pack carbon threads cemented with resin, used in everything from sports cars to deluxe skis. But in time, the material's problems became clear. For one, carbon fiber had never been tested at extreme depths, and thus had no reliable safety record. And two, its integrity naturally degrades with repeated use. 'There is a fatigue aspect to carbon fiber – once you use it, it won't be as good the next time you use it, by increments,' Monroe explained. The documentary includes ample footage from OceanGate's years-long test phase, as various carbon fiber designs failed in experiments simulating high pressure. Nevertheless, Rush persisted, dismissing safety concerns from engineers on staff and continuing to insist to credulous media that commercial ventures to the Titanic were soon within reach. Lochridge and others attest to Rush's hardheaded approach, at times openly hostile to any intra-company dissent. He openly admired Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, expressing a desire to, as one employee recalled, be a 'big swinging dick'. In that vein, Rush claimed to be working with Boeing, Nasa and the University of Washington, though no formal partnerships existed. (In fact, a Boeing engineer involved in Titan's early designs emailed Rush in March 2012: 'We think you are at high risk of a significant failure at or before you reach 4,000 meters. We do not think you have any safety margin.') Rush also elected to withhold any OceanGate craft from third-party safety inspections, the industry standard for submersibles. That decision proved to be a breaking point for several employees; Lochridge was fired after he inspected Titan himself, and said in a written report to Rush that he had no confidence in the submersible. The documentary includes remarkable audio of a 2018 senior staff meeting in which Rush fires Lochridge and quashes his concerns as a discrepancy of vision – 'I don't want anybody in this company who is uncomfortable with what we're doing. We're doing weird shit here and I am definitely out of the mold. There's no question. I am doing things that are completely non-standard.' 'There is a danger in the kind of cult of personality, particularly the tech bro, 'move fast and break things,'' Monroe said. 'When other people's lives are in the balance, I think we should all take a step back and be careful about that. It's one thing to put unmanned spacecraft into space, but you're taking money to provide an expedition.' One has to wonder, given all the dissent, given the fact that the sub would produce loud cracking sounds with each descent (which Rush called, unscientifically, the carbon fiber 'seasoning' with use) – did the CEO actually believe it was safe? 'I'm not in Stockton's mind, so I don't know,' said Monroe. But he took into account Rush's public personality as a maverick, the media tailwinds in his favor. 'When you say you're going to go to Titanic in a new submersible that no one's ever done before, and the sound of your own voice resonates year after year while you're trying to figure out how to do it, I think there's a pressure that builds, that suggests 'I have to do this.'' What is clear, from numerous interviews, was that 'if you went against the boss, there were going to be repercussions.' Lochridge knows this well; after he filed a whistleblower complaint with the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Osha), OceanGate sued him for improperly disclosing confidential information to regulators. The legal costs, and Osha's protracted investigation, forced him to withdraw his complaint, ending what could have been the one regulatory oversight on the company. OceanGate continued apace; the film lingers only briefly on the dive in 2022 which seemed to damage the sub, even according to the company's own 'real-time monitoring system'. Titan imploded on its next dive to Titanic depths a year later, after several aborted attempts due to inclement weather. Though the 'delamination' of the carbon fiber hull is the presumed cause, the US Coast Guard's official written report, including recommendations for the prevention of a similar tragedy, has yet to be publicly released. 'I don't know what those recommendations could be,' said Monroe, 'but you would think they would have to do with how to run an experimental submersible when offering it to the public.' Such as, perhaps, oversight, or a healthier sense of skepticism when the only safety assurances come from the company itself. Rush 'believed in the ethos of move fast and break things. Rules don't apply when you want to change the way things work,' said Monroe. 'That's dangerous when other people's lives are at stake. There are certain rules that do apply, like the rules of physics, the rules of science – these rules do apply to all of us.' Titan: The OceanGate Disaster is now available on Netflix
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Yahoo
The Biggest Revelations From Netflix's 'Titan: The OceanGate Disaster'
It was billed as a once-in-a-lifetime adventure: a deep-sea dive to the Titanic shipwreck 12,500 feet (3,800 meters) below sea level aboard a sleek, experimental sub made out of carbon fiber—a material never used prior for submersibles. CBS's David Pogue, who went on a dive with OceanGate in July 2022, said he was told that the company boasted to have a robust safety culture with a 'rule of three,' in that if even three 'little things' went wrong, missions would be scrapped. But what unfolded was a slow-moving disaster years in the making. As OceanGate's former engineering director Tony Nissen says in Netflix's new documentary Titan: The OceanGate Disaster, it wasn't 'that we didn't follow a set of regulations' that led to the imposition, but that it was the company 'culture.' That might sound like a startling admission, but it's only one of many revelations being shared by former OceanGate employees in this documentary among others amid the ongoing investigation by the U.S. Coast Guard and other governing bodies. Here's an overview of some of the most important things viewers learned in the Netflix documentary about the Titan, OceanGate, and its founder, the late Stockton Rush. For a ship to be classed means it has been reviewed and certified by an independent maritime classification society to meet established structural and safety standards. This process ensures the vessel's design, construction, and maintenance adhere to international guidelines for seaworthiness. After the first hull on Titan was completed, Rob McCallum, founding partner and operator of EYOS Expeditions, says in the documentary that Rush told the crew in 2018 while at lunch near the company's headquarters that he saw no need for classification or third-party oversight. (McCallum was consulting given his experience on deep sea tours.) McCallum says he stood up and resigned on the spot. 'I said, 'I'm sorry I can't be a part of this conversation, nor can I be associated with OceanGate or this vehicle in any way,' and I left,' McCallum says. 'He had every contact in the submersible industry telling him not to do this.' In 2016, an OceanGate submersible piloted by Rush became stuck beneath the wreck of the Andrea Doria off the coast of Massachusetts. Despite warnings from OceanGate's then-director of marine operations, David Lochridge, about the dangers of approaching the deteriorating site, Rush moved too close and wedged the Cyclops 1, another one of the company's submersibles, into the bow. Accounts vary on what happened next. Some reports claim Rush panicked and threw the controller at Lochridge to take over. The documentary includes the most footage ever shown of the incident: Rush, indeed, looks flustered. Lochridge very clearly and calmly is able to regain control of the sub and steer it back to the surface. That said, it still cannot be confirmed if the controller was thrown or not, as camera angles inside the sub are limited due to its size. After the 'classed' incident, Rush assigned Lochridge to write a safety report on the Titan. Lochridge raised concerns about the carbon fiber hull and the lack of non-destructive testing. He was then summoned to a meeting the following day with Stockton, finance and administration director Bonnie Carl, quality assurance director Scott Griffith, and Nissen. Curiously, the meeting was recorded, and the audio playback was shared in the documentary. Lochridge was fired, and bizarrely, Rush tried to replace him with Carl, positioning her as the company's first female pilot, even though Carl herself points out she was an accountant. She says in the documentary she knew 'at that moment, she couldn't work at the company anymore' and decided to leave. Lochridge filed a whistleblower complaint with OSHA, alleging retaliation under the Seaman's Protection Act. OceanGate responded with a lawsuit, accusing him of breaching a non-disclosure agreement and misusing proprietary information. Lochridge countersued, claiming wrongful termination for raising safety concerns. He later said the legal battle became too draining for him and his wife to continue. At a U.S. Coast Guard hearing, he removed his glasses to wipe his eyes while describing the ordeal. At the end of the 2022 diving season, OceanGate left the Titan on an exposed dock in St. John's, Newfoundland for the winter—without shelter, garage, or even a tarp beyond a small blue one for the porthole. Nissen said he warned Rush the sub could not withstand sub-zero temperatures or the carbon fiber would begin to fracture. In the documentary interviews as well as testimony in front of the U.S. Coast Guard investigative panel, former employees said the company didn't have the budget to ship the sub back to Washington. No explanation was offered for why even a rental garage or temporary cover couldn't be provided. The Netflix documentary highlights that several missions were attempted beforehand in June 2023, including one featuring YouTuber Scuba Jake. On that second-to-last dive, the sub briefly submerged before losing communications and aborting the mission after just a few feet under water. Jake has since shared his experience both in the documentary and to his social media accounts, but he noted on his Instagram page that he took several months away for his mental health after the implosion. You Might Also Like 12 Weekend Getaway Spas For Every Type of Occasion 13 Beauty Tools to Up Your At-Home Facial Game
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
13 Sad Signs Your Friendships Are All Superficial
Not all friendships are created equal. Some nourish your soul, while others barely scratch the surface. If you constantly feel emotionally underfed after hanging out with friends—or like you're playing a role just to stay included—you may be stuck in a loop of shallow, surface-level relationships. Superficial friendships can look perfectly fine from the outside. But underneath the brunches, group chats, and birthday texts, there's a quiet lack of depth, vulnerability, and mutual investment. These are the subtler signs your social life may need a reset. You catch yourself rehearsing what to say, avoiding certain topics, or holding back your real thoughts out of fear it'll be 'too much.' Instead of feeling seen, you feel curated. The version of you they know is safe—but not real. Betterhelp highlights how authenticity is key to healthy relationships. If authenticity feels risky, the connection isn't real intimacy Over time, it's exhausting to be liked for your costume. That's not friendship—it's into your power, be who you, resist the urge to edit or shrink yourself, people will either like you or not. You know what they post, what they wore last weekend, and maybe even what they're bingeing on Netflix—but not what keeps them up at night. Their pain, fears, or emotional struggles never come up. It's all vibe, no vulnerability. As Psychology Today notes, sharing deeper thoughts and feelings is a hallmark of meaningful friendships. True friends ask deeper questions. When conversation stays in safe zones forever, it's a red flag. People can hang out for years and still know nothing real about each other. A true friend will want to dig deeper and know the real you, in all your messy glory. Spending time together doesn't fill your cup—it depletes it. Instead of feeling uplifted, you feel more tired, small, or emotionally off afterward. That's not your overthinking—it's your nervous system noticing a friendships leave you more at ease with yourself, not less. Emotional hangovers are a sign something isn't aligned. Chemistry without depth doesn't nourish. If you feel uneasy after being with people, perhaps they are not your people. You initiate the texts, the plans, the check-ins. If you stopped trying, you suspect the relationship would fade completely. That lopsided effort can feel invisible—and lonely. As Psychology Today points out, healthy friendships are built on mutual effort and reciprocity. Friendship should feel mutual, not transactional. If you're carrying all the weight, it's not a bond—it's a convenience. Connection requires effort and reciprocity. If it's one-sided perhaps they aren't your true friend. You bite your tongue when you're hurt or confused. You don't share your real feelings because you know they'll ghost, deflect, or downplay it. The friendship feels too fragile to hold not friendship—that's emotional tiptoeing. True connection can handle difficult truths. If the price of honesty is silence, you're in a shallow space. Friends should be able to share your wins and your loses without judgement. You hype them up, share their wins, and cheer them on—but when it's your turn, their support feels muted or performative. There's a subtle envy, detachment, or indifference that kills the vibe. They can't hold space for your friends feel competitive, not collaborative. Their energy reveals more than their words. A little healthy competition is OK and you should inspire each other to be the best versions of yourselves. If your light makes them dim, they're not your people. Your conversations orbit around everything but their actual emotions. You know about their boss and their brunch plans—but not their beliefs, wounds, or what they're healing from. It's all surface, no isn't just about trauma dumping—it's about emotional honesty. If you've never heard them say 'I feel lost,' 'I'm afraid,' or 'I'm growing,' they're likely holding back. Or they don't trust you or themselves, to go there. Vulnerability is a strength, not a weakness and when someone opens up the connection deepens. They show up when it's fun or social media-worthy, but disappear when life gets messy. Crisis, heartbreak, illness? Radio silence. Their presence is friendships can't hold grief, confusion, or real life. If they vanish when the sparkle fades, they were never really in it. Hard times reveal what soft friendships can't carry. Real friends step in and step up and always help you carry the load. If bonding means trashing someone else, it's not connection—it's a coping mechanism. Conversations that center on drama, judgment, or negativity leave no room for mutual growth. There's more shade than can feel like intimacy—but it's counterfeit closeness. When you remove the shared disdain, what's left? Often, not much. Gossiping about others or feeling the need to bring others down is also the sign of an insecure or vindictive person—steer clear. It's all memes, logistics, events, or complaints—but no real reflection. You rarely talk about purpose, growth, or what you're navigating emotionally. The friendship is stuck on repeat. Without emotional expansion, friendship becomes routine. You're not growing together—you're just existing nearby. That's not soul connection—it's social stagnation. It's depth that makes friendships feel authentic and meaningful. You notice subtle micro-dismissals: eye rolls, minimizing comments, quick subject changes. When you open up, they move on quickly—or make it about themselves. Your experiences don't seem to in a room with people who don't truly see you is a unique kind of loneliness. Toleration is not affection. Real friends witness you fully—even when it's anyone makes you feel less than, it says more about them, than you. Choose your circle wisely. Humor is their shield. Whenever a serious moment starts to land, they pivot to sarcasm, distraction, or 'just kidding.' Emotional discomfort is always deflected with can build rapport—but overused, they create distance. If everything is a punchline, nothing becomes sacred. And sacred space is where true friendship lives. Hiding behind humor is usually a trauma response or defense mechanism that shows someone lacks emotional depth or intelligence. You sense it deep down. You're always the backup plan, the extra invite, the one who fits only when someone else cancels. You feel peripheral in the group, not friendship feels like home—not a favor. If you always feel like an afterthought, it's time to rethink what you're calling connection. True friends make time for each other and go out of their way to invest and make sure you feel valued.
