The Eligible Bachelor Paradox • Hacker News Board

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#81

Post by time_management » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:14 PM UTC

dgabriel wrote: post #74

whacked_new wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I apologize for being unclear and imprecise. Evidence is not the word I should have used. I'm just talking about perspective. What the OP stated was not evidence, and neither did I have that confused. Those were judgments based on Bayesian reasoning. They are efficient and correct, by probability, in his life. I defended him because in asking "how dare you," you seem to think his opinions violate a basic right of dig…

It is difficult to see oneself repeatedly characterized as such without getting one's dander up a bit. My suspicion is that his friends probably love their wives, and he's using their occasional and exaggerated venting to support his weird misogyny. That, or he knows the two unluckiest and easily fooled men in the country.

I think what he's describing is more common than you'd prefer to admit. It's not universal, but it's not uncommon either, so it's probably more accurate to say that he knows two men in the unluckiest quartile. That said, one can't always place the blame on the women deliberately changing into bad people after marriage; a more likely explanation is that the men ignored warning signs early in the process, because they were in love. The phenomenon of a relationship fizzling out and turning hellish is not unique to the US.

No one with a brain will say that all American women are bad. This country is way too racially and culturally diverse for a statement like that to be valid across the board. It's just much harder to find decent women if your selection pool overlaps significantly with the suburban American mainstream, because that section of society is a materialistic, vapid, and alienating cultural wasteland. Decent women exist everywhere, but the proportions are lower.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#82

Post by vaksel » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:15 PM UTC

dgabriel wrote: post #80

vaksel wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By spending all the money she earns on herself.

And you know many of these lazy women! In fact, all the American women you know are just like that! This is so far-fetched, so unlikely a scenario, that you have to see how ridiculous you're being. Unless you have their balanced checkbook on hand to prove me wrong, I sincerely doubt any mom is spending all the money on herself. Working mothers don't have the freaking time to spend a whole paycheck on themselves, espe…

not all American women, just the married ones I know. Look I'll be the first to say, that based on the area that I live in the women are most likely slanted into the princess syndrome area. But that doesn't make what I'm saying any less true(at least for this area).

And yes they are spending all the money on themselves, they can do that, since their husbands cover all the other expenses.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#83

Post by chadmalik » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:20 PM UTC

tlb wrote: post #29

vaksel wrote: post #24

I think additional part of the problem is that men are starting to realize that they really don't have anything to gain by being married. And they are so afraid of having to go through a divorce that can wipe them out, that they don't feel like trying. I mean a 50% divorce rate in this country, is pretty much a coin toss on whether or not you lose everything. Seriously the only thing to gain by being married is savin…

Assuming you're in the US, you see a biased sample. That is, you see a complete cross section of American women, but only a select group of ambitious European women who emigrated as adults. They are here because they are serious about their careers, so they are more likely to believe in working hard to get ahead rather than getting by on their looks.

Thats a great point and thats why I always take glorification of whatever society immigrants come from with a grain of salt. Immigrants are almost by definition more motivated than the normal people in whatever society they come from.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#84

Post by whacked_new » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:22 PM UTC

huherto wrote: post #54

whacked_new wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this situation very perplexing because there seems to be a grossly unsustainable "mating economy" here but I have never seen a discussion addressing it (possibly because they seem to be held by, almost exclusively, men). But consider this scenario. There are a group of farmers, who only know how to plant food X. For one reason or another, food X starts tasting bad. Then, the farmers discover a food Y in the vi…

I do not understand your analogy. Please explain.

Women don't spontaneously mutate into bad women. The problem is likely deep, and societal. If it is societal, then we might (irresponsibly) say that the society produces bad women. If this is the case, then, speaking extremely, at some point you'll run out of the "good" non-native women, but the society is still a factory of bad women. Unsustainable.

This strategy reminds me of: we need energy; drill oil; oil dries; find new; repeat.

And never have I read someone talking about this, at least in regards to a sustainable society.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#85

Post by time_management » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:28 PM UTC

vaksel wrote: post #82

dgabriel wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you know many of these lazy women! In fact, all the American women you know are just like that! This is so far-fetched, so unlikely a scenario, that you have to see how ridiculous you're being. Unless you have their balanced checkbook on hand to prove me wrong, I sincerely doubt any mom is spending all the money on herself. Working mothers don't have the freaking time to spend a whole paycheck on themselves, espe…

not all American women, just the married ones I know. Look I'll be the first to say, that based on the area that I live in the women are most likely slanted into the princess syndrome area. But that doesn't make what I'm saying any less true(at least for this area). And yes they are spending all the money on themselves, they can do that, since their husbands cover all the other expenses.

If you don't mind my asking, where do you live?

I've been well-aware of the low average quality of American women since college. In high school, I expected them to have horrible tastes in men (pro-meathead jock, anti-smart guy) because that's what the movies told me was "normal" for HS. Actually, HS was not nearly as bad as I'd been led to anticipate. It was the realization that women's tastes didn't improve when I went to an elite college that led me to think something might be rotten in America. A semester abroad confirmed that there really is a difference in the average quality of women, and that the US comes up short.

However, this is an incredibly diverse country, and I live in New York. So, although the average quality might be low, it doesn't need to affect me and, since college, the problem has never prevented me from having a solid dating life in spite of it. Amazing women are definitely out there.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#86

Post by old-gregg » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:33 PM UTC

geebee wrote: post #23

critic wrote: post #9

There's a simpler explanation than appealing to math the author admits not understanding: male attractiveness ages better. A 40 year old man can be attractive to 20 year old women, but a 40 year old woman is rarely attractive to 20 year old men. In other words, women past their prime who restrict themselves to mates their own age will may be in relatively low demand.

I agree. The thing to keep in mind is that this works against men as well as women, it just hits them at different points in their lives. If women between the ages of 21 and 25 are interested in (and pursued by) men between the ages of 21 and 35+, while men between 21 and 25 are limited to women who are roughly the same age, then men will face a very difficult dating "market" in their early 20s, and women will experi…

You're right, life gets tougher for women after 30 but I am not following you in where does this benefit men?

According to your analysis a larger pool of men 21-40 are always competing for a smaller pool of attractive women 21-30, so if you're a single male, the ratio is always against you no matter how old you are.

And that's what I'm observing in real life. Perhaps I'm too young, but every public gathering I go to features a disproportional number of guys. And if you subtract overweight people from the picture, the ratio gets downright scary.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#87

Post by vaksel » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:38 PM UTC

time_management wrote: post #85

vaksel wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not all American women, just the married ones I know. Look I'll be the first to say, that based on the area that I live in the women are most likely slanted into the princess syndrome area. But that doesn't make what I'm saying any less true(at least for this area). And yes they are spending all the money on themselves, they can do that, since their husbands cover all the other expenses.

If you don't mind my asking, where do you live? I've been well-aware of the low average quality of American women since college. In high school, I expected them to have horrible tastes in men (pro-meathead jock, anti-smart guy) because that's what the movies told me was "normal" for HS. Actually, HS was not nearly as bad as I'd been led to anticipate. It was the realization that women's tastes didn't improve when I w…

I live in NJ, so you being from New York can probably attest to the low quality of marriage material in the area. Not that it doesn't exist, but its more of a needle in a haystack problem.

So I find that its easier to date, at least that way when you both grow tired of each other, you don't lose half your stuff in the divorce.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#88

Post by vaksel » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 7:51 PM UTC

tlb wrote: post #29

vaksel wrote: post #24

I think additional part of the problem is that men are starting to realize that they really don't have anything to gain by being married. And they are so afraid of having to go through a divorce that can wipe them out, that they don't feel like trying. I mean a 50% divorce rate in this country, is pretty much a coin toss on whether or not you lose everything. Seriously the only thing to gain by being married is savin…

Assuming you're in the US, you see a biased sample. That is, you see a complete cross section of American women, but only a select group of ambitious European women who emigrated as adults. They are here because they are serious about their careers, so they are more likely to believe in working hard to get ahead rather than getting by on their looks.

I'm not really talking about immigrants. They can be even worse, if they came here before they were 20-25. Why? Because they pick up the way to act by watching MTV.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#89

Post by time_management » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 8:07 PM UTC

vaksel wrote: post #87

time_management wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't mind my asking, where do you live? I've been well-aware of the low average quality of American women since college. In high school, I expected them to have horrible tastes in men (pro-meathead jock, anti-smart guy) because that's what the movies told me was "normal" for HS. Actually, HS was not nearly as bad as I'd been led to anticipate. It was the realization that women's tastes didn't improve when I w…

I live in NJ, so you being from New York can probably attest to the low quality of marriage material in the area. Not that it doesn't exist, but its more of a needle in a haystack problem. So I find that its easier to date, at least that way when you both grow tired of each other, you don't lose half your stuff in the divorce.

I live in NJ, so you being from New York can probably attest to the low quality of marriage material in the area.

No. New York is very diverse. This city's so big that I don't even know what the average quality is, but it doesn't matter; you can definitely find good women here-- including women who've never been corrupted by mainstream American culture, on account of having grown up elsewhere. Of course, there are also the disgusting, materialistic Sex and the City sluts, but if you're not an idiot, you can avoid them.

Not that it doesn't exist, but its more of a needle in a haystack problem.

If you know what you're doing, you can get the low-quality women to reject you pretty quickly. (You'll get rejected a lot.) Don't try to impress them by playing the infantile games that attract low-quality women (e.g. pretending to be aloof to project high status) and don't buy them shit.

The strategy a lot of men use to get laid is to play to the lowest common denominator. It works for racking up a lot of casual sex. It sucks for finding a marriage partner. It's like trying to make an ice sculpture using a battle axe. Keep your sets of habits separate and, if you can't do that, then play it straight and don't fuck around.

Re: The Eligible Bachelor Paradox

#90

Post by electromagnetic » Mon, Feb 23, 2009, 8:11 PM UTC

time_management wrote: post #81

dgabriel wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is difficult to see oneself repeatedly characterized as such without getting one's dander up a bit. My suspicion is that his friends probably love their wives, and he's using their occasional and exaggerated venting to support his weird misogyny. That, or he knows the two unluckiest and easily fooled men in the country.

I think what he's describing is more common than you'd prefer to admit. It's not universal, but it's not uncommon either, so it's probably more accurate to say that he knows two men in the unluckiest quartile. That said, one can't always place the blame on the women deliberately changing into bad people after marriage; a more likely explanation is that the men ignored warning signs early in the process, because they…

I believe your somewhat right with your first point. The friends he knows are two unlucky, weak personality males who were too blind or too stupid to realise the inherent problems in getting into a relationship with a dominant woman.

I'm married and extremely happy. My wife has a dominant personality and I have a comparatively relaxed personality, I take things much easier yet I learnt from an early age (with help from my father) that you have to establish your boundaries. When my wife is being snappy or pushy I simply say "do not talk to me like that, I do not appreciate it" and I rarely have a problem beyond that.

I know how I should be treated, I know exactly how much respect I should be getting from my spouse and despite being an easy going person I know I have to stand up for myself because if I don't I'll end up a pathetic divorced loser like so many people do.

Edit: I'd also like to add that most of my friends are in stable happy relationships. In fact I'd probably say my friends in relationships are happier than those who aren't, and I simply don't buy the whole 'getting married makes you unhappy' BS people purport.