Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dating, education, and sex ratios

robkhenderson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 446 posts

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#261

Post by autoexec »

chad1n wrote: post #178
visihuge wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of these kinds of articles are always seem to be slanted in how it negatively affects women. Women desiring more successful partners, yet men aren't keeping up. I'd be interested if there was any good article broaching that subject more, instead of remarkably pithy answers like "it's those damn video games."

I agree, I believe that this high difference between women and men in higher education comes from men being sufficient with a "physical" job that pays almost as a "mental" one. Women just can't these jobs and they have to choose between working at McDonald's or trying to find a job using a Bachelor's degree. Men have many more alternatives, hence the "unequal" pay.

I've seen it argued that it's also the nature of the education system. That it isn't designed for boys, that men are increasingly absent from teaching, that boys aren't encouraged and supported to the extent that girls are, that the success of sports teams can be a larger concern than making sure the student athletes are getting same level/quality of education, etc. I suspect that there are a ton of factors long before you deal with the issues at the university level.

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#262

Post by lostmsu »

scarmig wrote: post #226
lostmsu wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The study can not be accessed without payment, but if they did not correctly control for kids, it is useless.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6731029/ > Covariates. We control for covariates that are likely associated with both psychological distress and marital strain including respondent age, education, and employment status (Mirowsky & Ross, 2003), spouse health status (Kiecolt-Glaser & Wilson, 2017), relationship duration (Proulx et al., 2007), and children in household (Mirowsky & Schieman, 2008). So at lea…

They did, but the study does not make the same conclusion as the article you linked.

TBH I am not familiar with the the way data is presented in this last link, and likely biased toward my own expectations, but my uneducated read of table 2 says that children, education, being a woman, and employment status are the largest contributors to the distress.

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#263

Post by PoignardAzur »

akomtu wrote: post #230
keiferski wrote: post #52

I read a book awhile ago called Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth? , which basically argues that cultures which strongly promote traditional values, having children, etc. will evolutionarily outcompete groups that don’t. It made me think that there must be a kind of cycle in human societies, where certain social values (like the ones mentioned in the article) are able to become popular for a short period of time…

Hinduist "four ugas" capture this idea very well: the golden age when strong and good create values, the silver age when weak and good uphold the values, the bronze age when weak with sloppy morals let the values decline, the iron age when strong and evil destroy the values. I doubt that the current situation with marriage institute is seen as a problem by those in power. As we're progressing towards the iron age, th…

Deveraux's blog makes a good argument that this meme is ahistorical: https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-...

Tldr: we glorify the men of harsh societies shaped by scarcity, but soft liberal societies actually outcompete them militarily and economically.

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#264

Post by more_corn »

The first line was all I needed to know. “Oh he doesn’t got to Yale? He’s out!”

Online dating has is enumerating the qualities we think our ideal mate will have. We think that if we tick the boxes of what we like we can save time. Then we complain that there aren’t enough candidates! But this process eliminates people who might be an awesome fit because they don’t match some arbitrary metric.

My favorite is must be 6’ or taller. Seriously? You think you could never love someone who’s five foot eleven and a half? If you have criteria like that and can’t find anyone to date I don’t feel sorry for you. But I do have some advice. Put down your list and go meet people. You’ll be blown away by how unexpectedly you like or just click with the oddest assortment.

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#265

Post by knightofmars »

politician wrote: post #244
Dalewyn wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard agree, I have no intentions of marrying let alone having children. I'm perfectly happy living my life going my way and my way alone as I see fit. Most human relations are straight bullshit and just aren't worth my time and energy in an age when there's so much to do, so much to see, and so little time. The people moaning about marriage and birth rates can go pound sand.

I respect your individual right to this attitude, but consider that the wonders you enjoy today are sustained by a population of a particular size. As populations contract, the number of places that support the activities and adventures you want to have will necessarily contract as well. Imagine a campfire, throughout the night you'll have to move the dwindling coals closer together if you can't add more wood. So, on…

The opposite side, consider the fact that overpopulation leads to the inability to access the activities and adventures a person may want to enjoy. Imagine a campfire, throughout the night you'll have to move the dwindling coals closer together because the forest has been stripped clear and there's no more wood to add.

In this world, the parasitic nature of individuals on the environment robs it of its bounty.

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#266

Post by KptMarchewa »

dahwolf wrote: post #260
itishappy wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people recognize that fact, some don't. Surely that disparity is itself an aspect of emotional intelligence? I'm not sure I follow how that's insulting.

It's insulting in the sense that the stoicism of many men is considered unintelligent, primitive, underdeveloped. You can frame it how you want. It can also be projected as a strength (emotional control). Or men simply being less interested in exchanging emotions intensely as it's just not that important to them.

The "emotional control" that causes them to absolutely blow the fuck up? It's not unintelligent, primitive or underdeveloped, it's simply a meme, an idea that some people can even sincerely believe but at the end it's a pure lie.

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#268

Post by michaelbrave »

visihuge wrote: post #165
friend_and_foe wrote: post #161

All the data is good, but the way it is framed is a bit misleading. First, lets get one thing straight: dysfunction in the dating world negatively affects both men and women. So framing it as "men floundering, women most affected" is disingenuous. What is it about the prospects a man has that he has no desire to become desirable? If men's lives are less rewarding wouldn't it be them, not the women, that are the most…

Many of these kinds of articles are always seem to be slanted in how it negatively affects women. Women desiring more successful partners, yet men aren't keeping up. I'd be interested if there was any good article broaching that subject more, instead of remarkably pithy answers like "it's those damn video games."

Honestly it would be hard to touch on without insulting large swaths of society. Just thinking about my own friend and family circle the way a college aged woman is treated is vastly different, even just by parents. For example my sister (22) still lives at home, drives the family car, stepdad pays for her fuel, mom pays for food, is on the family cell plan, has basicaly 0 expenses except wanting to eat out. My brothers and I were expected to leave nearly right away, were not still on cell plan, and never had access to any of those other percs. I wouldn't be shocked if this played a large role into the why women are accessing higher education more today, because they financially can, because of their support systems, which many men don't have. Juggling a job to survive and scrape by while also going to school is although maybe possible, absolutely miserable at the same time, I can't imagine anyone pulling it off without hitting some kind of burnout after a few years of it.

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#269

Post by austhrow743 »

monksy wrote: post #173
friend_and_foe wrote: post #161

All the data is good, but the way it is framed is a bit misleading. First, lets get one thing straight: dysfunction in the dating world negatively affects both men and women. So framing it as "men floundering, women most affected" is disingenuous. What is it about the prospects a man has that he has no desire to become desirable? If men's lives are less rewarding wouldn't it be them, not the women, that are the most…

> he has no desire to become desirable? Funny thing about that, it's women (for hetros) that are the determination of what is 'desirable'. As a man, I agree with a lot of those who are discouraged with dating and running through the unwinnable rat race.

In a hetero relationship context it makes perfect sense to me that women would determine what is desirable in men. How else would it work?

Re: Dating, education, and sex ratios

#270

Post by bsder »

majormajor wrote: post #78
redmerchant2 wrote: post #38

This is a known issue but the down stream effect won’t be felt for a while. Let’s be clear we’re talking about general behavioral trend, not trying to police an individual, which is the crux of contention for these topics. Many women still hold on to the idea of finding a partner that is wealthier and more educated. This is due to the past (over)reliance of their partners for stability. But this is no longer true. Th…

> The education gap between men and women are growing. More women enroll and graduate from college then men. Many young men, mostly lower-middle class, (whether fairly or not) feel like the education system does not work for them. So, like, isn't the question "why"? Why do boys, particularly lower- or lower-middle class, not believe in the education system as much as their sisters? School sucks, work sucks, then you…

> School sucks, work sucks, then you die. But that's not new. And it's not stopping the girls/women. So why aren't the boys doing what previous generations did?

Because schooling is now expensive and doesn't immediately translate to better economic outcomes nowadays for men. It generally does over time, but it takes a bit for the return, nowadays.

For women, as the article points out, school is also an economic investment for hunting for a partner. The fact that women won't "date down" like men will means that there is a difference in reciprocity in the investment.

Post reply on HN