There are 5 million more unmarried men than women in the US

Page 2 of 2 [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Izaak
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 981
Location: Perth, Western Australia

24 Jul 2009, 10:44 am

Not entirely true. Women are just "pre-rejected."

I.e. Women have to go to a lot of trouble to get men to approach them. At least... if my sister was anything to go by. She would spend HOURS getting read to go out to town to "pick-up." She was, of course, NT so there were no other problems for her. And even then there were plenty of nights when NO ONE approached her. And others when lots (dunno how many exactly lots means) so it isn't always so simple as "men get rejected, so women have it easier"



Cyberman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,736
Location: hibernating

24 Jul 2009, 10:56 am

I am a member of the unmarried men of which there are 5 million more of. I'm not saying that women "have it easy," but considering the high standards to which men are held in terms of personality and financial status (especially in a failing economy) I do believe that we have a tougher battle.



Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,147
Location: Houston, Texas

24 Jul 2009, 11:44 am

My main issue is that virtually nobody has both the same interests and the same religious/political beliefs as me.

Although I am quite good at putting on shows for people, I end up regretting it in the end.

While I still will only date other Aspies, not limiting myself to spectrumites is a moot point, because there aren't even that many NT women who have the interests/religion/politics combination either.

(Simpsons, South Park, indie/foreign films, is a Christian, votes Republican)


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

24 Jul 2009, 12:46 pm

SilverStar wrote:
MissConstrue wrote:
SilverStar wrote:
Why is it, that when I say anything about a woman on here, they get all defensive, and think it's a verbal attack on them or something? Anyways, that was a generalization about women in general. It doesn't mean there aren't exceptions.


I noticed this paranoia too....



Hector
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,493

24 Jul 2009, 2:02 pm

Izaak wrote:
ruling out polygamous relationships...

how can MORE women be in relationships then men?

All things being equal, shouldn't that number be the same....


maybe more "single" men then "women"...?

One subtle note in the beginning of the thread was that these are women who have married, so they either are now or were in the past. The most obvious thing for me to believe out of that is that it is a reflection of there being more women who are widowed than men who are widowers. However, without looking much at the figures I thought of another possibility which is that it could also reflect that there are more women who are single but divorced than men. I did note in the figures from the original post that there were more divorced women.

So one might conjure up a hypothesis as follows: there is a greater variation in the number of marriages that men go through than women. You may have more men who have had several wives (more than two, say), one after the other, through their lives than women who have had several husbands. On the other side of the coin you then have many other men who never marry. Might be worth testing.



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

24 Jul 2009, 3:25 pm

Hector wrote:
Izaak wrote:
ruling out polygamous relationships...

how can MORE women be in relationships then men?

All things being equal, shouldn't that number be the same....


maybe more "single" men then "women"...?



So one might conjure up a hypothesis as follows: there is a greater variation in the number of marriages that men go through than women. You may have more men who have had several wives (more than two, say), one after the other, through their lives than women who have had several husbands. On the other side of the coin you then have many other men who never marry. Might be worth testing.


This is the most logical explanation so far, Alpha men get married with a lot of women during their lives, even more than most women, while beta men die single. This conforms to the evolutionary logic of natural selection ,so it's most likely the true explanation.

Worth testing indeed...



MissConstrue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,052
Location: MO

24 Jul 2009, 3:28 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:
SilverStar wrote:
MissConstrue wrote:
SilverStar wrote:
Why is it, that when I say anything about a woman on here, they get all defensive, and think it's a verbal attack on them or something? Anyways, that was a generalization about women in general. It doesn't mean there aren't exceptions.


I noticed this paranoia too....


Get off my case LPP!

Most women on this site DO in fact get generalized as well as men. From what I've seen...men don't like it either.

Which is why in fact I ignored this message because women is plural not singular as to me.


_________________
I live as I choose or I will not live at all.
~Delores O’Riordan


LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

24 Jul 2009, 3:48 pm

^ I LOVE when this happens, you look sexier when you're upset. ;)



Hector
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,493

24 Jul 2009, 3:51 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:
Hector wrote:
Izaak wrote:
ruling out polygamous relationships...

how can MORE women be in relationships then men?

All things being equal, shouldn't that number be the same....


maybe more "single" men then "women"...?



So one might conjure up a hypothesis as follows: there is a greater variation in the number of marriages that men go through than women. You may have more men who have had several wives (more than two, say), one after the other, through their lives than women who have had several husbands. On the other side of the coin you then have many other men who never marry. Might be worth testing.


This is the most logical explanation so far, Alpha men get married with a lot of women during their lives, even more than most women, while beta men die single. This conforms to the evolutionary logic of natural selection ,so it's most likely the true explanation.

Worth testing indeed...

I'm glad you agree, but I don't think it necessarily has to be "the" true explanation. The figures can be indicative of multiple trends.



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

24 Jul 2009, 3:55 pm

^^can be , but still worth testing...



Demonira
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jul 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 20
Location: Hell

25 Jul 2009, 12:43 am

There are also more men than woman. :roll:



CrinklyCrustacean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,284

26 Jul 2009, 2:28 pm

Izaak wrote:
ruling out polygamous relationships...

how can MORE women be in relationships then men?

All things being equal, shouldn't that number be the same....


Lol, it's a problem with they way it was phrased.


Quote:
maybe more "single" men then "women"...?


^ I think this is what was implied. By the way, what do you mean by "All things being equal"? What things?



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

26 Jul 2009, 2:57 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:
Hector wrote:
Izaak wrote:
ruling out polygamous relationships...

how can MORE women be in relationships then men?

All things being equal, shouldn't that number be the same....


maybe more "single" men then "women"...?



So one might conjure up a hypothesis as follows: there is a greater variation in the number of marriages that men go through than women. You may have more men who have had several wives (more than two, say), one after the other, through their lives than women who have had several husbands. On the other side of the coin you then have many other men who never marry. Might be worth testing.


This is the most logical explanation so far, Alpha men get married with a lot of women during their lives, even more than most women, while beta men die single. This conforms to the evolutionary logic of natural selection ,so it's most likely the true explanation.

Worth testing indeed...


I don't think it's a testable hypothesis. "Alpha male" and "Beta male" aren't objective categories that all men could be slotted into. To do this you would have to come up with criteria for both groups that would account for all men and have no overlap so that men could be objectively assigned to one group or the other statistically. These criteria would have to be something that could be assessed without ever meeting the person or knowing anything about them other than demographic facts.



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

26 Jul 2009, 4:11 pm

Janissy wrote:
LePetitPrince wrote:
Hector wrote:
Izaak wrote:
ruling out polygamous relationships...

how can MORE women be in relationships then men?

All things being equal, shouldn't that number be the same....


maybe more "single" men then "women"...?



So one might conjure up a hypothesis as follows: there is a greater variation in the number of marriages that men go through than women. You may have more men who have had several wives (more than two, say), one after the other, through their lives than women who have had several husbands. On the other side of the coin you then have many other men who never marry. Might be worth testing.


This is the most logical explanation so far, Alpha men get married with a lot of women during their lives, even more than most women, while beta men die single. This conforms to the evolutionary logic of natural selection ,so it's most likely the true explanation.

Worth testing indeed...


I don't think it's a testable hypothesis. "Alpha male" and "Beta male" aren't objective categories that all men could be slotted into. To do this you would have to come up with criteria for both groups that would account for all men and have no overlap so that men could be objectively assigned to one group or the other statistically. These criteria would have to be something that could be assessed without ever meeting the person or knowing anything about them other than demographic facts.



Quote:
To do this you would have to come up with criteria for both groups


it can be done, it's hard but nothing is impossible , like making an 'average' score of health/masculinity/attractiveness/wealth/education and finally you would be able to categorize males into alphas and betas.

or they can just take this test : http://www.modernhumorist.com/mh/0006/alpha/



Homer_Bob
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,562
Location: New England

26 Jul 2009, 5:35 pm

That's no surprise, after all, getting a boyfriend for a girl is about 10 times easier then a guy getting a girlfriend in the first place. The guy is the one who has to do everything, girls have it so much easier.