The moral understanding of family activists in the face of spouse selection - a qualitative study

Author

Assistant Professor of the Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture

10.22081/jare.2026.74244.2144

Abstract

One of the most fundamental ways through which human beings establish social bonds with others has been mate selection and, subsequently, marriage. This process has traditionally been shaped by individual preferences as well as ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds in choosing a person who will play a significant role in one's future life. However, the emergence of social networks and large-scale migration has substantially transformed patterns of mate selection, giving rise to new perspectives on this social phenomenon. Accordingly, the present study seeks to answer the question of how family practitioners and activists interpret and understand the ethical dimensions of mate selection. By focusing on the understanding of moral values and ethical norms within the context of a concrete social issue, this study falls within the domain of applied ethics, and its findings may also have implications for professional practice in the field of family affairs. This study adopts a qualitative approach and employs thematic analysis for data analysis. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 20 family practitioners in the city of Isfahan, who were selected using purposive sampling. Through an iterative process of moving back and forth between basic themes and integrating conceptually similar organizing themes, the findings were organized into three overarching themes: instrumentalization of the other in mate selection, the collapse of normative and professional authority, and the erosion of moral capital.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Abend, Gabriel. (2010). What's new and what's old about the new sociology of morality. In Steven Hitlin & Stephen Vaisey (Eds.), Handbook of the Sociology of Morality (pp. 561–584). Springer.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E (2014). The normal chaos of love. Polity Press.
Becker, G. S (1991). A treatise on the family (Expanded ed.; Original work published 1981). Harvard University Press.
Betta, M (2016). Ethical Capital. In Ethicmentality – Ethics in Capitalist Economy, Business, and Society. Springer.
Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D (1967). The American occupational structure. Free Press.
Bok, S. (1999). Lying: Moral choice in public and private life (2nd ed.). Vintage Books.
Bourdieu, P (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste (R. Nice, Trans.; Original work published 1979). Harvard University Press.
Buss, D. M (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), pp. 1–49.
Butler, J (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
Carver, C (2007). The social construction of the family and moral order. Palgrave Macmillan.
Cherlin, A (2021). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today. Vintage.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977 (C. Gordon, Ed.). Pantheon Books.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. A (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), pp. 173–206.
Giddens, A (1992). The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Polity Press.
Giddens, A (2013). Sociology (7th ed.). Polity Press.
Goffman, E (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books.
Hitlin, S., & Vaisey, S (2013). The new sociology of morality. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 51–70.
Offe, C (1999). Trust and knowledge, rules and decisions: Exploring a difficult concept. In M. Warren (Ed.), Democracy and trust (pp. 62–87). Cambridge University Press.
Prinz, J (2008). Is morality innate? In W. Sinnott-Armstrong (Ed.), Moral psychology: Vol. 1. The evolution of morality: Adaptations and innateness (pp. 367–406). MIT Press.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), pp. 393–404. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926617.
Swidler, A (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51(2), pp. 273–286.
Sztompka, P (1999). Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge University Press.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Eds.). University of California Press.
 

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 21 December 2025
  • Revise Date: 28 January 2026
  • Accept Date: 14 February 2026

Share

How to cite

Statistics