6 ms·

"It's not a gender thing, it's an effort thing." Then why are there vast asymmetries along gender lines in virtually all aspects of dating? Look at OkTrends (h

• EGreg 13y ago
  Um, it's pretty explainable by the following theory: "Men put more work up front -- making the first move, taking the women out and showing them a good time, etc. Women put more work once the relationship gets going (i.e. after much sex has been had). They put up with their guy's frustrating habits and work to advance the relationship forward." Now, this is a description of the MAJORITY of interactions, not all, of course. And of course there's this: http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm
  • drzaiusapelord 13y ago
    I think its sexist to portray men as dumb sex-starved creatures and only the feminine mystique of women can lead to fulfilling relationships. I hate the political correctness that is popular today. Essentially, men and boys are punching bags to the feminist activists and attitudes like yours aren't helping.
    • EGreg 13y ago
      Why do you have to characterize it like that? You're attacking a straw man. Men are attracted to women based largely on factors that are more immediately apparent -- such as physical appearance. Women get more attracted the more they invest into a relationship. This follows from biological differences - see that article.
      • javert 13y ago
        Women are highly biased by attractiveness, and as a man, I really care about more than just physical appearance in a woman. So, yeah, you're incorrectly attacking men.
        • EGreg 13y ago
          I am not sure what "women are highly biased by attractiveness" means. Everyone is highly biased by attractiveness by definition of attractiveness. Also it is truism that, as a man, you care more than JUST physical appearance in a woman. And you, personally, might even not care about looks at all -- though you'd be quite rare in that case. I am talking about the overall majority of men and women and what makes them attracted and at what time. There have been studies done on this and it's pretty clear: women's biological appearance plays a larger role for men to be sexually attracted, than a man's biological appearance. (I say biological because obviously if you consider clothes, cars, cologne, hairstyle etc. to be part of the equation then those factors matter, but they can be manipulated and are related more to lifestyle than biology.) Men are more visually stimulated. It's a fact that's been shown over and over. I did not say men are JUST interested in that. I said that in most societies, men put more work up front -- witness how many men devote countless hours to learning pickup techniques and tricks, or getting a great car, or working their ass off to have money to take women out. Meanwhile, women start putting in more effort than the guy once they have invested in the relationship, and it's probably due to the nesting instinct / biological clock. They put a lot of biological investment into having kids, more than men. And so forth. I am not "attacking men". You are being knee-jerk reactionary.
          • selmnoo 13y ago
            > Meanwhile, women start putting in more effort than the guy once they have invested in the relationship, and it's probably due to the nesting instinct / biological clock. I am not sure where you are getting this from. I just want to point out that existing data about who iniatiates divorces and break-ups would seem to contradict what you're saying. According to a study published in the American Law and Economics Review, women have filed slightly more than two-thirds of divorce cases in the United States.[80] There is some variation among states, and the numbers have also varied over time, with about 60% of filings by women in most of the 19th century, and over 70% by women in some states just after no-fault divorce was introduced, according to the paper. Evidence is given that among college-educated couples, the percentage of divorces initiated by women is approximately 90%.
    • blktiger 13y ago
      Amen! I hate how (at least in American culture) we men are portrayed as having no self control. When did society get such a low opinion of us?
      • eli_gottlieb 13y ago
        I feel a need to go even further with that statement. Self-control implies that you're bottling up a fundamental harmful impulse. Dear God, are we back in the age of the Puritans, or is it allowed for normal, committed couples to get some mutual enjoyment out of "male" and "female" things? And yes, I do mean sex. But not just sex. I'm a man who likes to cook and bake, for instance, and I'm good enough at it that my friends and family routinely enjoy the results. What kind of stupidly over-gendered society expects that I should throw away a good hobby because it's "women's work"?! Relationships are not trades. The husband does not trade "his" household chores for "her" sex. The wife does not trade "her" cooking for "his" income. What the hell is wrong with people who think this way?!
  • return0 13y ago
    > They put up with their guy's frustrating habits and work to advance the relationship forward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce#Sex_and_divorce http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce#Sex_and_divorce Myth busted
    • EGreg 13y ago
      I am not sure what myth is busted. Just because women are more likely to file for divorce does not mean that they don't push before the marriage, saying, "where do you see all this going" or hoping he'd propose. Women have a lot more invested in sex and children than men do. And therefore, they are looking to have a stable situation to have a family more than men are. That situation was typically marriage, but now with the state being able to take care of the children so much of the time (public school, various welfare programs etc.) there are lot more single mothers. I think single motherhood is highly correlated to the amount of governmental assistance in a neighborhood. To the extent that there is single motherhood in an area, you may be right -- women may be much less willing to make a relationship work. As an aside, I am not sure we think that's healthy or desirable. Children born into two-parent households have been shown to do far better on average than children born into single parent households.
      • deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
    • enraged_camel 13y ago
      I think you need to try a little harder than simply linking a wikipedia article section and saying "myth busted." Specifically, women being more likely to initiate divorce has nothing whatsoever to do with what the parent is saying. The reason behind that statistic is that women are no longer as dependent on men and therefore have more freedom to end the marriage if they aren't happy with it.
      • return0 13y ago
        In my defense, the article is heavily referenced, and "60% of filings [were filed] by women in most of the 19th century", when women were still dependent on men. What is your non-anecdotal evidence that women contribute equally or more to relationships? Marriage is a losing deal for men. It's no wonder we have "MGTOW"s, but no "WGTOW"s.
  • return0 13y ago
    Baumeister has a fully developed theory that explains a great deal about modern relationships in economic terms: http://www.carlsonschool.umn.edu/assets/71503.pdf http://www.carlsonschool.umn.edu/assets/71503.pdf
• auctiontheory 13y ago
  My reaction to the "many men and women ..." sentence was "I think that's the most insightful comment I've ever read on HN!" Take a closer look at it. The use of "many" does not imply a platitude - 35.22% of the time it's a kinder way of saying "most," and 63.09% of the time we don't have a precise percentage, neither of which negates the validity or importance of the observation.
• duaneb 13y ago
  First, let's get "correlation ≠ causation" out of the way. Second, where does gender lie—is it a physical characteristic, a social characteristic, a cultural one? I'm physically male but don't really identify myself with any gender. It's not at all clear which direction the identity/behavior causality moves, and most likely it's both ways. Third, I don't think much positive can come from drawing conclusions that restrict people's capabilities—in this case, ascribing broad behavior to what women and men want. It's an inaccurate viewpoint of the world and only helps you if the viewpoint happens to be a blind spot of yours, i.e. if you're a woman who does believe she won't have an issue finding a male in her thirties or a male who believes he won't be able to find a woman. In this case, of course it will make brilliant sense to you and help you, but not everyone has this problem. I certainly don't; I'm 22 and (hopefully) looking at marriage. In other words, I don't think examining the cause will necessarily help us in any way but to change it, and binding poor or undesirable to an unalterable part of people will only retard change.
  • ahoy 13y ago
    It might also be the case that the gender you identify as isn't what's most important, but the gender that 'normal' society perceives you as.
  • PeterisP 13y ago
    Of course 'not everyone has this problem' - the article itself states that it is about ~30% of women in a certain age group, so a majority of women don't have this problem, but it's still large enough to have a noticeable impact on society. And if you're looking at general statistical trends (i.e., any statments in form 'what women want'), then you're talking about approximations/averages up to the first significant digit, and you can easily be accurate to that degree with simplifying by clearly false assumptions as two clear genders and everyone being heterosexual. And it still is worthwhile to make such analysis, since it can provide insight about why/how large trends occur.
    • duaneb 13y ago
      > Of course 'not everyone has this problem' The problem is that not everybody takes this premise for granted!