Latest articles
Latest comments
- 1001cures: religion is important as the road we...
- kumbangtanah: But Why in my place cannot go through...
- kumbangtanah: Yaa… Don’t be like...
- kenk3n: article bout myself..is it...
- lotsaluvreina: i’m still waiting for my...
- awawaw: I seem to be the only one gives a...
- thehiddencroucher: Got a pantun for u in malay: ...
- miszlily: why a student always had a bored...
- emeimei: The Wait is Over for Malaysian...
- awawaw: Oct 25? Oh how badly this ship lists....
Bookmarklet
Drag the following link to your browser's bookmarks. Everytime you surf to a blog that you'd like to submit, simply copy the text and click on the bookmarklet link.
For some, the myth of “happily ever after” remains a MYTH
Antonia says:
Seriously, I think an intercultural marriage involves more than just appreciation for pop culture and superficial success. It requires a profound understanding of each culture’s thoughts, actions and words, as well as deep social and historical knowledge. Of course, the most important factor is the personal understanding and communication between the couple involved. They must have the initiative to keep the relationship going, not let their differences come in between like a silent third party. They need to confront these differences and find common grounds in order to live in harmonious matrimony.
Simple advice about intercultural marriage. But maybe harder to follow?
Discussion
Add your comments
You must be logged in to post a comment. Register here to become a member. It's free!





Being Malaysian and born of an intercultural marriage myself, this article was totally not what I expected.
In lieu of the overly general blurb above, here’s some context: This is about poor Vietnamese (and other “inferior Asian”) women who dream of marrying South Korean men with unrealistic “happily ever afters” in mind. “Pop culture” here refers to the Korean Wave of movies and TV serials that has propogated the Romantic Korean stereotype all over Asia.
I thought this, the main point of the article, was far more interesting than the quasi-point that seems to be the focus here.