There was recently a discussion on Dr. Helen's blog in which the term, "mail-order brides" got whipped around something fierce. This is not unusual in discussions in which problems with the misandrous American culture are discussed (a not uncommon theme on Dr. Helen's blog).
The use of the term bothers me for a variety of reasons. It's a term used to justify heaping a huge amount of contempt on any male who even alludes to the desirability of foreign women. Yet the particular scenario that gave rise to the term ... "here's some money, send me a woman" ... doesn't really exist any more in our culture (or any online service I've been able to find). Epistemologically, it's a referent to an obsolete concept, useful only for the convenient "package deal" of being able to express contempt and about which people will agree, viscerally, because it calls to mind that obsolete concept.
There are a number of reasons for the contempt. Women acquired in this manner were purchased, and our society (having discarded the notion of formal dowry) treats such overt money-for-love situations negatively (although covert, indirect exchanges are pro forma). Being purchased, the generally held notion is that such women were little more than docile, subservient, uneducated slaves. And the clincher: men who have to buy their women are "obviously" such base and undesirable specimens that they could not acquire companionship in any other manner.
These ideas are so pervasive that the most rational woman I know, a close friend, actually compared me to a Taiwanese man quoted in an article as seeking an uneducated and, therefore, more submissive wife on the mainland because Taiwanese women tend to be more educated. She did this after I had been communicating with a Chinese woman (whom I did not pursue because she lacked the degree of conceptual sophistication I expect from a peer ... yes, I said peer ... a fact my friend knew full well.) In other words, despite all evidence to the contrary (after years of interaction and statements about the specific situation), she still compared me to a man who _would_ be pleased with the old concept of a "mail-order bride". So, my interest in this term and its related concepts is personal. I also tend to be fairly meticulous in using terms properly, so when people bandy about an undefined emotionally charged verbal weapon, I get a little peeved. But there's an ulterior interest.
After over a decade of dealing with online dating/matching services (from both sides of the code), I have a pretty thorough understanding of the systems, the manner in which people use them, and their drawbacks, and have been playing with the idea of creating a trans-national service that is more focused on creating mutually beneficial and sustainable relationships than the "oh ma gawd he's so hawt" or the "my last three husbands treated me foully, I want a man who will treat me like a princess" points of view that seem to be pervasive in the existing systems. However, this will be a futile effort if cross-cultural relationships are treated dismally by the citizens of the "more advanced" culture.
And so, I asked the comment thread at large to actually define the term, and gave some boundary conditions to help guide them. I mean these are ostensibly honest people, right? They must be able to accurately define a term they use to condemn people, surely? Ok, ok, stop laughing and dry your eyes. Yes, I got no response.
But I'm still interested, so I have no choice but to repost the question here. If you've ever used the term contemptuously, consider the gauntlet thrown.
---
I'm curious how "mail-order bride" is defined these days. Is it an American man pursuing any foreign woman? Canadian, perhaps? Or just women from significantly different cultures? Or third-world economies? Is a Chinese woman pursued while living in China somehow different than a Chinese woman pursued 6 months after moving to the US? One year?
Is it the mechanism by which the introduction takes place? What is the fundamental aspect distinguishing the decades-old, and mostly obsolete, address purchasing service (traditionally, and inaccurately, referred to as a mail-order bride service) from, say, Match.com? Or its Russian equivalent?
In an Internet world that has diminished the significance of national boundaries in both personal and business relationships, what is the fundamental aspect that distinguishes a "mail-order bride" from, say, the attractive, well-educated, well-mannered lady (in the traditional sense) an American man might have happened to meet through one of the dozens of available online services? Is it the border-crossing that makes it verboten?
Or is it the assumption that the liberated, Western woman is intrinsically superior to all others and, therefore, any pusuit of alternatives is an obvious attempt to acquire a woman with attributes that Western feminism denounces: servility, docility, humility, etc?
