The AP reported on June 28, 2006: "A jury in Copenhagen convicted nine people, all family members or friends, of murder or accessory to murder in the killing of a 19-year-old woman. The woman was gunned down by her older brother last September, two days after her wedding, because her Pakistani family disapproved of her choice of a husband."
I take the long view of romance--looking at the older books, beginning with Richardson's Pamela. There a reader can see the shift in motives for marriage--from dynastic (marrying out of duty, for reasons of family, property, and so forth) to companionate (marrying for love). Most if not all of contemporary romance novels simply assume that companionate union is the only, best reason for pairing off. What would such a romance mean or say to a reader from a culture that believes in dynastic union?