While I'm skeptical about some of the tenets here, I've also always been somewhat to the right of my Boomer peers on this issue-thus, I'm glad to see more younger people more interested in having a relationship that leads to something permanent than the mindless "hooking up" that was ostensibly so popular not that long ago.
This is confusing. When women outnumber men (campus example) they can't get the men to commit and think less of them, but when men outnumber women the women play the field and string guys along while presumably thinking less of them?
Do men and women have the same goal or different goals?
In 1976, I'm sitting with my Grandpa (80 something at the time) who's reading the paper. With no warning, he lowers the paper slightly and says "Boys and girls have always been doing it, and if a girl got pregnant, everyone knew the doctor to go to."....then goes right back to reading the paper. I have no idea what the current situation means, but I'm hesitant to attach any long term trend to it.
Great article. Sounds right. Tove K made a similar point a while back. Will try to find it.
However, I should note that the growth rate of 4% is specifically Ultra Orthodox, but the article you linked seems to be about non Ultra.
Additionally, the age gap issue is only in a specific segment of the Ultra Orthodox community: only the non Hasidic and only in the USA. Even there it’s highly disputed. If I have time I may link discussions in that.
seems there are always more and more types of stats that could support this or that theory, here i'm noticing lack of STD impacts, plus environmental and psycho-socio-physiological factors in sperm counts/ fertility rates etc, plus of course economics of spawning, no jokes anywhere
This is an interesting and plausible theory, but shouldn't the essay credit others who have advanced it before, in other work? Eg Date-Onomics by Jon Birger?
Why does a shortage of men promote pre-marital sex, and a shortage of women discourage it? In other words, though we may perhaps see some period- and culture-specific correlation what exactly is the causal variable in your theory and is there any evidence that the theory is actually generalisable?
This is definitely a real phenomenon (whether or not its the driving factor in 1920s-present day changes in causal sex rates, which I'm less sure about). It's basically down to markets and the fact that men want more casual sex than women do. If there's a shortage of men, women have to compete for men and are forced to adopt more male-preferred norms. And vice-versa, although the evidence for that is weaker (there's also some evidence that prostitution and sex-selling increases in very male-skewed populations; the majority of women are less promiscuous, but total non-marital sex may not go down much).
But on this logic there would have been staggering amounts of extra-marital sex going on in the 1920s - when there was a massive shortfall in men - and the late-1980s (when the baby boom had long faded) would have seen a return to Victorian-style courtship rituals!
While I'm skeptical about some of the tenets here, I've also always been somewhat to the right of my Boomer peers on this issue-thus, I'm glad to see more younger people more interested in having a relationship that leads to something permanent than the mindless "hooking up" that was ostensibly so popular not that long ago.
This is confusing. When women outnumber men (campus example) they can't get the men to commit and think less of them, but when men outnumber women the women play the field and string guys along while presumably thinking less of them?
Do men and women have the same goal or different goals?
In 1976, I'm sitting with my Grandpa (80 something at the time) who's reading the paper. With no warning, he lowers the paper slightly and says "Boys and girls have always been doing it, and if a girl got pregnant, everyone knew the doctor to go to."....then goes right back to reading the paper. I have no idea what the current situation means, but I'm hesitant to attach any long term trend to it.
Articles predicting a simple return to traditional 1930s romance ignore the fact that men have alternative options today.
Unlike works in progress today: acting on emotions instead of data yeah.
Where is the full data, and why the sure conclusion at the end.
Factor in the growing red/black pills organizations and the mordern stoicicms.
The opt-outs are many in number, enough to shift the hypothesis.
It may also be contributing to the mainstreaming porn as a surrogate for the real experience.
Great article. Sounds right. Tove K made a similar point a while back. Will try to find it.
However, I should note that the growth rate of 4% is specifically Ultra Orthodox, but the article you linked seems to be about non Ultra.
Additionally, the age gap issue is only in a specific segment of the Ultra Orthodox community: only the non Hasidic and only in the USA. Even there it’s highly disputed. If I have time I may link discussions in that.
Here’s the article from Tove K.
https://woodfromeden.substack.com/p/oppression-of-males-is-the-gender
She is quoting from Marcia aguttentag’s book.
seems there are always more and more types of stats that could support this or that theory, here i'm noticing lack of STD impacts, plus environmental and psycho-socio-physiological factors in sperm counts/ fertility rates etc, plus of course economics of spawning, no jokes anywhere
This is an interesting and plausible theory, but shouldn't the essay credit others who have advanced it before, in other work? Eg Date-Onomics by Jon Birger?
Why does a shortage of men promote pre-marital sex, and a shortage of women discourage it? In other words, though we may perhaps see some period- and culture-specific correlation what exactly is the causal variable in your theory and is there any evidence that the theory is actually generalisable?
This is definitely a real phenomenon (whether or not its the driving factor in 1920s-present day changes in causal sex rates, which I'm less sure about). It's basically down to markets and the fact that men want more casual sex than women do. If there's a shortage of men, women have to compete for men and are forced to adopt more male-preferred norms. And vice-versa, although the evidence for that is weaker (there's also some evidence that prostitution and sex-selling increases in very male-skewed populations; the majority of women are less promiscuous, but total non-marital sex may not go down much).
But on this logic there would have been staggering amounts of extra-marital sex going on in the 1920s - when there was a massive shortfall in men - and the late-1980s (when the baby boom had long faded) would have seen a return to Victorian-style courtship rituals!