Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no very significant imbalance of sexes in the U.S. even accounting for more males born (slightly) or more female survivors (less than 3% more) after age 70.
JerZ, have you seen this graph? The New, Interactive Singles Map.
Adjust the slider to ages below 50. This shows you singles in the US by age. There are blue circles everywhere (a surplus of single men) across the entire country pretty much until 50. And things have only gotten worse for men since this graph was published in 2012.
Don't let the media fool you, they're conflating different age groups to make you believe that there are approximately equal numbers of eligible single men/women on the dating market. Which is not the case!
^ Yes. Sire have seen that map by "a pop sociologist."
And thenx, I've seen actual stats compiled NY the actual U.S. Census. As well as birth, death and population actual statistics. I posted some of these above.
'Pop sociologist'? No, the numbers presented in the graph I linked to come from the US Census. Nothing more and nothing less! Single = Never Married, Divorced, and Widowed. 3 categories comprise 'Single.'
Your link is irrelevant, it doesn't distinguish single from married people, it's just a population pyramid. Even in the pyramid, though, you can probably see that the Male side (left) is longer than the Female side until middle age. But again the real picture is even worse for men -- among single unmarried people there is a male surplus.
'Pop sociologist'? No, the numbers presented in the graph I linked to come from the US Census. Nothing more and nothing less! Single = Never Married, Divorced, and Widowed. 3 categories comprise 'Single.'
Your link is irrelevant, it doesn't distinguish single from married people, it's just a population pyramid. Even in the pyramid, though, you can probably see that the Male side (left) is longer than the Female side until middle age. But again the real picture is even worse for men -- among single unmarried people there is a male surplus.
I took the phrase "pop sociologist" from the very site you linked. Read down the page. It is the author's own description.
Exactly. There are many men who have multiple children by multiple women. I don’t know why only the women seem to be blamed by some posters. There is a guy called Desmond Hatchett who has over thirty children by eleven different women and another man, Orlando Shaw, who has twenty-two children by fourteen different women. Men can father many more children than any one woman can give birth to.
Why do these women procreate with such degenerate men? Guys can be total jerks and slimeballs, no denying that, but as long as they show confidence or charisma they'll do well with women, so if that behaviour is rewarded then more guys will do it.
Ultimately women are the gatekeepers of sex, and the gate keepers of whether they give birth or not, so who women choose to procreate with is what determines the next generation of fathers.
Why do these women procreate with such degenerate men? Guys can be total jerks and slimeballs, no denying that, but as long as they show confidence or charisma they'll do well with women, so if that behaviour is rewarded then more guys will do it.
Ultimately women are the gatekeepers of sex, and the gate keepers of whether they give birth or not, so who women choose to procreate with is what determines the next generation of fathers.
Nice way of getting men off the hook with regard to taking responsibility for their behavior. As usual, make women responsible for male behavior.
Why do these women procreate with such degenerate men? Guys can be total jerks and slimeballs, no denying that, but as long as they show confidence or charisma they'll do well with women, so if that behaviour is rewarded then more guys will do it.
Ultimately women are the gatekeepers of sex, and the gate keepers of whether they give birth or not, so who women choose to procreate with is what determines the next generation of fathers.
Let's recap: women behaving badly is women's fault, and men behaving badly is women's fault and then the very existence of future men who will behave badly is women's fault.
(Sitting back. Adjusting circle wire frame glasses. Casually lighting pipe and crossing legs) So. Tell me about your mother.
Nice way of getting men off the hook with regard to taking responsibility for their behavior. As usual, make women responsible for male behavior.
How is it getting men off the hook? There's enough jerks and bad men in the world. Don't have kids with them and they won't be fathers. It's not that difficult to grasp.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
Let's recap: women behaving badly is women's fault, and men behaving badly is women's fault and then the very existence of future men who will behave badly is women's fault.
(Sitting back. Adjusting circle wire frame glasses. Casually lighting pipe and crossing legs) So. Tell me about your mother.
Er no, apologies if it's badly worded, but EVERYBODY is responsible for their own behaviour. It's the simple fact that women choose who they have kids with. If there's 'feckless' fathers who were jerks anyway, and there's plenty of them, then there's a mother somewhere who in a majority of cases has chosen to procreate with that person which puts the child at a disadvantage in life. Everybody is responsible. It works the same the other way. it works both ways.
Children can't choose their parents. Men and women both choose who they have kids with.
'Pop sociologist'? No, the numbers presented in the graph I linked to come from the US Census. Nothing more and nothing less! Single = Never Married, Divorced, and Widowed. 3 categories comprise 'Single.'
Your link is irrelevant, it doesn't distinguish single from married people, it's just a population pyramid. Even in the pyramid, though, you can probably see that the Male side (left) is longer than the Female side until middle age. But again the real picture is even worse for men -- among single unmarried people there is a male surplus.
The US Census definition of single is very different from a dating and relationship definition. The census counts people living under the same roof. They’re not asking if you have a committed relationship with someone you don’t live with.
How is it getting men off the hook? There's enough jerks and bad men in the world. Don't have kids with them and they won't be fathers. It's not that difficult to grasp.
Er no, apologies if it's badly worded, but EVERYBODY is responsible for their own behaviour. It's the simple fact that women choose who they have kids with. If there's 'feckless' fathers who were jerks anyway, and there's plenty of them, then there's a mother somewhere who in a majority of cases has chosen to procreate with that person which puts the child at a disadvantage in life. Everybody is responsible. It works the same the other way. it works both ways.
Children can't choose their parents. Men and women both choose who they have kids with.
The only problem I have with this is, age. I've said it before, I just don't think that the arbitrary invisible line into adulthood of 18 is a good measure of maturity for making life altering permanent choices. I don't like that we send 18 year old boys off to war, and I don't like when 18 year old (or younger!) women are having babies. Our bodies might be ready, but our brains aren't. Bit of a design flaw, if you ask me.
Putting choices of the weight as you describe, on the shoulders of semi-children...yet ask most men who want a family, no matter THEIR age, and they are often enough looking for women who are younger than 25.
If at age 25+, I'd been presented with the person of my ex-husband and the facts of him and had the chance to make a mature, informed decision as to whether he should father my children and be part of my future, I'd have run fast and hard. Even at 18 I knew I didn't really want that life with him, and told him so repeatedly. It was my intention to just have a transitory relationship with him for a time, not something permanent. I did not give informed consent to what I wound up doing. Life just...happened. But he, at age 29, though he wasn't telling me so up front (knowing I'd leave if he did) knew he wanted me to be his wife and have his kids. He played along to get what he wanted from me. Yet now, predictably, it is all my fault he didn't get to spend the rest of his life making mine hell.
I should have chosen better. Sure. But the fact that he played me false in the beginning, and that I was only 18 at the time...I dunno man. Tough to be so responsible at a fairly irresponsible age.
Meanwhile the wife he married in HIS youth, he abandoned her with his 2 kids, and guess who got to square up the $20K+ back child support owed to the state of Iowa? Yeah, I did, by and large. He got off the hook for his youthful stupidity, but I paid and paid for mine.
Of course women get to stand as targets of male anger when we say no, and targets of it when we say yes. As JerZ noted, at fault for all outcomes, especially the ones any given man does not like. I suspect this is a result of a general unease with the notion of women making our own choices, rather than being viewed as the wards of our fathers, and then our husbands.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
