[throwaway4837]

Totally worth it if you think of a family as a multi-million dollar investment over the course of your lifetime. $100k is actually nothing in comparison, and could mean the difference between having a family and not having one.

I think this is why Indian matchmaking is such a successful industry. My prediction is that matchmaking grows in the US and eventually becomes one of the main methods for looking for a serious partner online. It won't be called "arranged marriages" in the US due to some generational stigma around that term, but the base concept will be very similar. Could see this being common within 15 years.

[OkayPhysicist]

Industrial matchmaking would run into the exact same issues that dating apps do, chiefly that the population of users is disproportionately less desirable partners (due to selection bias), but on top of that a matchmaking service wouldn't even be able to attract the "desirable and promiscuous" backbone of the dating app industry.

Matchmaking only "works" in places where women are denied autonomy, and it results in them being sold off like cattle. This is not a desirable state of affairs to anyone but the most loathsome, pathetic basement dwellers.

[throwaway4837]

> Matchmaking only "works" in places where women are denied autonomy, and it results in them being sold off like cattle. This is not a desirable state of affairs to anyone but the most loathsome, pathetic basement dwellers.

This take sounds out of touch, and reveals a misunderstanding. There's no reason why matchmaking in America has to be one-sided, or treat women like "cattle". Women and men can both hire matchmakers to find their partner. That you can not see this is perhaps more of a projection of your own views on women.

Are you suggesting that all men who have arranged marriages in India are "loathsome, pathetic basement dwellers"? This viewpoint seems entirely indefensible.