4 ms·

I propose not distinguishing the "winners" and "losers" by sex to understand who has the upper hand, but by those who act on what they want and those who don't.

by pohl 13y ago

I propose not distinguishing the "winners" and "losers" by sex to understand who has the upper hand, but by those who act on what they want and those who don't. It sounds like you didn't make it through the article, because you didn't manage to capture the central model it discussed. (I can't say I blame you.) Nevertheless, the central model isn't about winners vs losers: it's two functions: sexual-market-value over time by gender, and what people want over time by gender, and how each gender selfishly maximizes in a way that leaves older women out in the cold. Really, it's just a re-hash of the ancient maxim that "women grow old; men grow distinguished".

Zimahl 13y ago
While I am happily married, I have seen the 'sexual-market-value' change first hand now that I'm in my mid-30s. The women my age who are attractive but unmarried and childless seem to now be with men who they would've probably never even considered 10 years ago. They've been passed up for whatever reason - bad relationship choices, too picky, etc. - but still want a family so are willing to lower their standards. I thought this was funny: Naomi explains: "He's 36 years old and is definitely someone who falls into the alpha-male category: excellent job in finance, PhD, high income, six feet two, sporty and very handsome. And he's an utter sweetheart." Just clueless. That guy, if he even exists and isn't already married, has the resources to date a nice girl in her late-20s. Again, it's a symptom of the problem. Many women waited for the perfect situation and never found it. And even if they found their white whale we all know how that story ends.
- ahoy 13y ago
  The idea of being 'settled for' upsets me greatly.
  - Zimahl 13y ago
    Let me rephrase what I was saying. Not every woman out there is settling on a least-common denominator. Some women are single because they were too picky (like the text I quoted) but some are just single because of bad luck.
  - _random_ 13y ago
    Humanism is good until it clashes with your basic instincts unfortunately.
- theorique 13y ago
  That guy, if he even exists and isn't already married, has the resources to date a nice girl in her late-20s. Or several.

by pohl 13y ago

Zimahl 13y ago

While I am happily married, I have seen the 'sexual-market-value' change first hand now that I'm in my mid-30s. The women my age who are attractive but unmarried and childless seem to now be with men who they would've probably never even considered 10 years ago. They've been passed up for whatever reason - bad relationship choices, too picky, etc. - but still want a family so are willing to lower their standards. I thought this was funny: Naomi explains: "He's 36 years old and is definitely someone who falls into the alpha-male category: excellent job in finance, PhD, high income, six feet two, sporty and very handsome. And he's an utter sweetheart." Just clueless. That guy, if he even exists and isn't already married, has the resources to date a nice girl in her late-20s. Again, it's a symptom of the problem. Many women waited for the perfect situation and never found it. And even if they found their white whale we all know how that story ends.

ahoy 13y ago
The idea of being 'settled for' upsets me greatly.
- Zimahl 13y ago
  Let me rephrase what I was saying. Not every woman out there is settling on a least-common denominator. Some women are single because they were too picky (like the text I quoted) but some are just single because of bad luck.
- _random_ 13y ago
  Humanism is good until it clashes with your basic instincts unfortunately.
theorique 13y ago
That guy, if he even exists and isn't already married, has the resources to date a nice girl in her late-20s. Or several.