The proxy problem — when parents search for you

There is a scene that plays out in thousands of Indian households every weekend. A parent — usually a mother, sometimes a father, occasionally an uncle who has taken it upon himself — sits down with a cup of chai and starts browsing profiles. They are not looking for themselves. They are looking for their son or daughter, who is "too busy" or "not taking this seriously" or simply lives in a different timezone.

In the West, this would be considered overstepping. In Indian culture, it is love expressed through action.

This is not a new phenomenon

Long before matrimonial apps existed, parents placed newspaper classifieds on behalf of their children. "Wanted: fair, slim, convent-educated girl for well-settled boy" — entire lives distilled into three lines of newsprint. The child often had no say in what was written or who responded.

Shaadi.com and Bharat Matrimony digitized this pattern. They even built separate parent login portals because the demand was so obvious. Parents are not just participants in Indian matchmaking — they are often the primary operators.

We do not think this is inherently wrong. But we think it needs guardrails.

The consent problem

Here is where things get complicated. A parent creates a profile using their child's photos, their child's biodata, their child's credentials. They filter matches based on what they think their child wants — or, more honestly, what they want for their child. Conversations happen. Interest is expressed. Sometimes a match progresses significantly before the actual person even knows their profile exists.

We have heard stories. A woman in Toronto discovered her mother had been exchanging messages with a family in Ahmedabad for three weeks before mentioning it. A man in Chicago found out his father had rejected fourteen profiles on his behalf, including two people he might have actually liked.

The problem is not that parents care. The problem is that caring without consent creates matches built on incomplete information — and sometimes, on the wrong information entirely.

How Masii handles proxy profiles

We allow parents to start the process. We think that is culturally honest. A mother who wants to explore options for her daughter should be able to do that. Pretending this does not happen, or designing a system that forbids it, would be naive.

But here is what we require: before any match is finalized, the actual person must participate. They must have their own conversation with Masii. They must confirm their own preferences, values, and dealbreakers. The parent's input becomes context — valuable context — but it does not replace the individual's voice.

In practice, this means a parent might tell us: "My son is a software engineer in Seattle, vegetarian, wants someone who values family." That is useful. But when we talk to the son, we might learn that he is actually flexible on diet, cares deeply about intellectual curiosity, and would prefer someone who is not in tech. Both perspectives matter. Neither alone is sufficient.

Why both perspectives make better matches

Here is something that surprised us early on. When we have both the parent's perspective and the individual's perspective, our matches are measurably better than when we have only one.

Parents notice things their children do not articulate. They understand family dynamics, temperament compatibility, lifestyle patterns. A mother might say, "He needs someone patient — he gets very focused on work and forgets everything else." The son would never describe himself that way, but it is true, and it matters for compatibility.

Conversely, the individual knows their own emotional landscape in ways a parent cannot. What kind of humor they need. What intellectual energy they are drawn to. Whether they want someone who challenges them or someone who grounds them.

The best matchmakers in Indian tradition — the real masis and the local aunties who did this for generations — understood this intuitively. They talked to everyone. They triangulated. They did not just take the parents' word for it, and they did not just ask the individual in front of their parents.

Setting boundaries with love

We have also built in explicit boundary-setting. When an individual joins Masii after a parent has started the process, we ask: what role do you want your family to play? Some people want their parents involved at every step. Others want their parents to have visibility but not veto power. Some want a clean separation — "Let me handle this, but I appreciate that you got it started."

All of these are valid. We do not judge the answer.

What we will not do is let a proxy profile operate indefinitely without the actual person's knowledge. That is where we draw the line. After a reasonable window, if the individual has not engaged directly, we pause the profile. We are not going to facilitate matches where one person does not know they are being matched.

The deeper truth

Indian matchmaking works because it is a community effort. One person cannot find another person alone — or at least, it is much harder that way. Parents, extended family, friends, community connections — they all widen the search radius in ways that algorithms alone cannot.

But community effort requires community consent. Everyone involved should know they are involved. Everyone's voice should be heard, weighted appropriately, and respected.

That is what we are building. Not a system that excludes parents. Not a system that gives parents full control. A system that treats both generations as adults with valid perspectives, and builds matches from the overlap.