4 ms·

> Historically countries didn't let women fight in wars because they didn't want their civilisation to die out. If a country loses a double-digit percent of its

by sofixa 2y ago

> Historically countries didn't let women fight in wars because they didn't want their civilisation to die out. If a country loses a double-digit percent of its men it can still repopulate just as quickly, because one man can make multiple women pregnant, while if it loses its women then it takes significantly longer to repopulate, because one woman can't have multiple babies at the same time so the birthrate will necessarily be reduced. People keep repeating this, but nobody has so far answered my follow-up question: do you have any example where that actually happened? Even in heavily impacted countries (like Serbia in WWI, which lost around 50% of its prewar male population), there were no laws or campaigns to allow harems or one man - multiple women combinations.

londons_explore 2y ago
I suspect that humans will sleep around enough that you don't need specific laws to make it happen...
- coldtea 2y ago
  Yeah, in fact such laws would make it less tempting (they'd mean those men would have to take financial responsibility and cater to the kids they spread, etc.). Whereas the sheer choice and ability to f... around more is way more tempting and naturally sustainable.
max-ibel 2y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8icpnrLqx0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8icpnrLqx0
niemandhier 2y ago
There is research regarding this. At least in Russia it meant: less options for women, a more male centric dating market and more children born out of wedlock. https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/The-Lasting-Effect-of-Sex-Ratio-Imbalance-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/...
- sofixa 2y ago
  And the research seems to disprove the core premise of the person I responded to ("only men are drafted because women are kept to be bred to repopulate the country, because 1 men can get multiple women pregnant"). From the abstract: > Using unique archival data, the results indicate that male scarcity led to lower rates of marriage and fertility Lower rate of fertility is the important bit.
alexey-salmin 2y ago
Why on earth would you think laws would be necessary? This mechanism is older than laws or human civilization itself.
- prabhu-yu 2y ago
  Some people want laws for everything.
- sofixa 2y ago
  Because in practically every country there are laws on marriage, and it's usually (Muslim world being the exception) 1:1 in partners. It adds legal and financial protections for both parts of the couple. Unless there's a law change, how do you see this working? A married man going around spreading seed and women getting pregnant and going at it alone?
  - mkl 2y ago
    Infidelity exists. Serial monogamy exists. No-strings liaisons exist. Polyamory exists. Etc. Single mothers exist even with an equal number of men and women. The exact legal nature of marriage is not going to stop any of these. Enormous numbers of people have lived and reproduced without any legal or financial protections at all, including the majority of your ancestors.
    - sofixa 2y ago
      And the core premise I'm disagreeing is that countries on purpose draft only men, because women are kept to be bred to repopulate the country in case of military disaster. IF that were the case, governments would do something, anything, to encourage such behaviour (one man getting multiple women pregnant) after the war is over. Nobody is able to come up with any examples of anything like that happening, which again leads me to believe that the premise is bullshit and the real reasons why only men are drafted are somewhere between biology and misogyny.
      - sobriquet9 2y ago
coldtea 2y ago
>there were no laws or campaigns to allow harems or one man - multiple women combinations. You don't need laws or campaigns, it happens naturally, due to the increased sexual selection availability. And of course, given that, why would men opt of harems (especially where they aren't even historically relevant to their culture)? They'd just have relationships on the side, jump ship and marry again, etc.
- sofixa 2y ago
  > You don't need laws or campaigns, it happens naturally, due to the increased sexual selection availability Again, do you have any examples of this actually happening in the real world? It naturally happens that men become more desirable because there's less of them, but is there any actual case where it became widespread for men to get multiple different women pregnant to repopulate the country? Not to mention, even if it did happen (and again, nobody has come up with any examples in the tens of times I've asked this question, and Google hasn't been helpful either), unless there was a concentrated government policy to that effect, you'd be mistaking correlation with causation - less men than women, so men are more desirable and can pull off multiple kids from multiple women doesn't mean that's the reasoning why only men were drafted.
  - coldtea 2y ago
    >Again, do you have any examples of this actually happening in the real world? You were given examples already: "Using unique archival data, the results indicate that male scarcity led to lower rates of marriage and fertility, higher nonmarital births, and reduced bargaining power within marriage for women most affected by war deaths" You can read about similar post-war periods with similar problems and outcomes in history books too. >unless there was a concentrated government policy to that effect you'd be mistaking correlation with causation - less men than women, so men are more desirable and can pull off multiple kids from multiple women doesn't mean that's the reasoning why only men were drafted. Women were needed to raise the present kids, and to be able to raise future kids. People didn't need to have this spelt out in law, or to have subsidies for sex with more different partners post war. Even so, the very link you continue to ignore mentions such legal changes too in the case of post-WWII USSR: "The impact of sex ratio imbalance on marriage and family persisted for years after the war's end and was likely magnified by (...wait for it...) policies that promoted nonmarital births"
gampleman 2y ago
Why do you think the sexual revolution happened right on the heels of WW2?
- quesera 2y ago
  WWII ended in 1945. The sexual revolution was a full generation later.
Maken 2y ago
You probably should look at single mothers' statistics. Edit: To provide more context: It was not exactly "official policy", but single mothers became much more common in Britain after WWI due to the fathers either dying in the war or, well, being already in another marriage. To the point the women started organizing and campaigning for their rights https://www.gingerbread.org.uk/about-us/gingerbread-history/ https://www.gingerbread.org.uk/about-us/gingerbread-history/
- fwip 2y ago
  Naively, it seems like there'd be a lot more of the "dead fathers" case than the "out of wedlock because women want to have kids but there aren't enough husbands to go around" case.
  - Maken 2y ago
    Given one of their first goals was to end the discrimination against bastards (children with unknown father), I would say not.
red-iron-pine 2y ago
Post-WW2 Soviet Union, or maybe Paraguay post-War of Triple Alliance In no cases were there laws, government doesn't need to pass laws to make it happen, just just because there weren't laws doesn't mean it didn't happen a lot
- sofixa 2y ago
  Post-WW2 Soviet Union had a drop in fertility rates, so no: https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/The-Lasting-Effect-of-Sex-Ratio-Imbalance-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/... Any data on Paraguay?

by sofixa 2y ago

londons_explore 2y ago

I suspect that humans will sleep around enough that you don't need specific laws to make it happen...

coldtea 2y ago
Yeah, in fact such laws would make it less tempting (they'd mean those men would have to take financial responsibility and cater to the kids they spread, etc.). Whereas the sheer choice and ability to f... around more is way more tempting and naturally sustainable.

max-ibel 2y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8icpnrLqx0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8icpnrLqx0

niemandhier 2y ago

There is research regarding this. At least in Russia it meant: less options for women, a more male centric dating market and more children born out of wedlock. https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/The-Lasting-Effect-of-Sex-Ratio-Imbalance-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/...

sofixa 2y ago
And the research seems to disprove the core premise of the person I responded to ("only men are drafted because women are kept to be bred to repopulate the country, because 1 men can get multiple women pregnant"). From the abstract: > Using unique archival data, the results indicate that male scarcity led to lower rates of marriage and fertility Lower rate of fertility is the important bit.

alexey-salmin 2y ago

Why on earth would you think laws would be necessary? This mechanism is older than laws or human civilization itself.

prabhu-yu 2y ago
Some people want laws for everything.
sofixa 2y ago
Because in practically every country there are laws on marriage, and it's usually (Muslim world being the exception) 1:1 in partners. It adds legal and financial protections for both parts of the couple. Unless there's a law change, how do you see this working? A married man going around spreading seed and women getting pregnant and going at it alone?
- mkl 2y ago
  Infidelity exists. Serial monogamy exists. No-strings liaisons exist. Polyamory exists. Etc. Single mothers exist even with an equal number of men and women. The exact legal nature of marriage is not going to stop any of these. Enormous numbers of people have lived and reproduced without any legal or financial protections at all, including the majority of your ancestors.
  - sofixa 2y ago
    And the core premise I'm disagreeing is that countries on purpose draft only men, because women are kept to be bred to repopulate the country in case of military disaster. IF that were the case, governments would do something, anything, to encourage such behaviour (one man getting multiple women pregnant) after the war is over. Nobody is able to come up with any examples of anything like that happening, which again leads me to believe that the premise is bullshit and the real reasons why only men are drafted are somewhere between biology and misogyny.
    - sobriquet9 2y ago

coldtea 2y ago

>there were no laws or campaigns to allow harems or one man - multiple women combinations. You don't need laws or campaigns, it happens naturally, due to the increased sexual selection availability. And of course, given that, why would men opt of harems (especially where they aren't even historically relevant to their culture)? They'd just have relationships on the side, jump ship and marry again, etc.

sofixa 2y ago
> You don't need laws or campaigns, it happens naturally, due to the increased sexual selection availability Again, do you have any examples of this actually happening in the real world? It naturally happens that men become more desirable because there's less of them, but is there any actual case where it became widespread for men to get multiple different women pregnant to repopulate the country? Not to mention, even if it did happen (and again, nobody has come up with any examples in the tens of times I've asked this question, and Google hasn't been helpful either), unless there was a concentrated government policy to that effect, you'd be mistaking correlation with causation - less men than women, so men are more desirable and can pull off multiple kids from multiple women doesn't mean that's the reasoning why only men were drafted.
- coldtea 2y ago
  >Again, do you have any examples of this actually happening in the real world? You were given examples already: "Using unique archival data, the results indicate that male scarcity led to lower rates of marriage and fertility, higher nonmarital births, and reduced bargaining power within marriage for women most affected by war deaths" You can read about similar post-war periods with similar problems and outcomes in history books too. >unless there was a concentrated government policy to that effect you'd be mistaking correlation with causation - less men than women, so men are more desirable and can pull off multiple kids from multiple women doesn't mean that's the reasoning why only men were drafted. Women were needed to raise the present kids, and to be able to raise future kids. People didn't need to have this spelt out in law, or to have subsidies for sex with more different partners post war. Even so, the very link you continue to ignore mentions such legal changes too in the case of post-WWII USSR: "The impact of sex ratio imbalance on marriage and family persisted for years after the war's end and was likely magnified by (...wait for it...) policies that promoted nonmarital births"

gampleman 2y ago

Why do you think the sexual revolution happened right on the heels of WW2?

quesera 2y ago
WWII ended in 1945. The sexual revolution was a full generation later.

Maken 2y ago

You probably should look at single mothers' statistics. Edit: To provide more context: It was not exactly "official policy", but single mothers became much more common in Britain after WWI due to the fathers either dying in the war or, well, being already in another marriage. To the point the women started organizing and campaigning for their rights https://www.gingerbread.org.uk/about-us/gingerbread-history/ https://www.gingerbread.org.uk/about-us/gingerbread-history/

fwip 2y ago
Naively, it seems like there'd be a lot more of the "dead fathers" case than the "out of wedlock because women want to have kids but there aren't enough husbands to go around" case.
- Maken 2y ago
  Given one of their first goals was to end the discrimination against bastards (children with unknown father), I would say not.

red-iron-pine 2y ago

Post-WW2 Soviet Union, or maybe Paraguay post-War of Triple Alliance In no cases were there laws, government doesn't need to pass laws to make it happen, just just because there weren't laws doesn't mean it didn't happen a lot

sofixa 2y ago
Post-WW2 Soviet Union had a drop in fertility rates, so no: https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/The-Lasting-Effect-of-Sex-Ratio-Imbalance-on?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/99/2/229/58403/... Any data on Paraguay?