Market Analysis: Stock Imbalance

Today’s post comes as a follow-up to a debate between Zippy and Deti in my post Market Watch. Given the amount of talking past each other, and the fact it was derailing that post, I decided a new one was appropriate. This post will let them, myself  and others answer the questions that were raised. At least, that is my hope.

I will begin by quoting a question that Zippy was trying to address:

What I am interested in is whether women who are trying to do the right thing have an easy time of it compared to men who are trying to do the right thing.

This was, in my view, the best example of that question which he raised. He put it several different ways, but I think that version is the easiest to understand.

Deti had his own set of questions:

  • if women really aren’t satisfied with all this casual sex they’re having, why are they having it?
  • If the casual sex they have is so unsatisfying and they want something else, what are they doing to change such that they don’t have to have all this unsatisfying casual sex (but continue to have, nonstop)?
  • And if casual sex is so unsatisfying, then what would satisfy them?
  • And if something other than casual sex would satisfy them more, why don’t they go get it? Or at least, why don’t they NOT do things they claim are so unsatisfying?

Any other questions they have, which they would like people to try and answer, they can mention in the comments below. I will bring them up here and mention them in the main post if I feel it appropriate.

With all of that out of the way, let me try and answer these questions myself.

Let’s begin with Zippy’s:

What I am interested in is whether women who are trying to do the right thing have an easy time of it compared to men who are trying to do the right thing.

His is fairly simple. I think the answer is that both of them have such a terrible time of it that it is impossible to tell who, if anyone, has it worse.

Something important to note is that Zippy is looking at the market as a whole, which effectively moves the real question to moral agency and the ability/likelihood of choosing what is good over what isn’t. It isn’t about who can marry, or even marry well. Just how easy it is do to what is right- which can include marrying or not marrying. With those parameters, I think men and women are on equally awful footing.

Now, if one were to alter Zippy’s question (and it would be an alteration), towards asking whether men or women have an easier time when it comes to marrying right, then my answer would change somewhat.  In the past I have said that women had it easier. However, as time has passed I’ve reconsidered this. Originally it was a more significant advantage comparatively, although insignificant in an objective lens. it lessened over time, with teh advantage mostly owing to the lower number of marriage-worthy women as compared to men (again, comparatively- absolute numbers are something else). Nowadays I am not sure this is true. Enough men might be dropping out of the market entirely that this has changed.

Now to try and answer Deti’s questions. I will tackle them in order.

  1. A lot depends on the meaning we attach to “satisfaction”. And of course, who we are talking about. However, if we assume just temporary sexual gratification, and women as a general aggregate, then women probably are getting some satisfaction. However, it is not to the level of what they want. They want more satisfaction. Remember, they are women- only the best will do (I jest, I jest). As for why they have it- because they are fools, and to borrow a metaphor, they are throwing good money after bad. They don’t know where else to look for true satisfaction/fulfillment.
  2. They are trying to weed out as many unworthy men as possible from the SMP. Oh, and they are also trying to sabotage each other, too.
  3. Fried Ice. No, in all seriousness the answer depends on who we are talking about again. If it is women as an aggregate, it would be to have a top tier men all to herself. And to be able to toss him if bored or he loses top tier status.
  4. Many possible answers. Perhaps they are lazy. Perhaps they don’t know, or cannot think of anything other/better. Maybe I should let this one go…

And with that, I leave the floor open to others to take there stab at these questions, and related ones.

Who has it harder in the marriage market: devout and serious minded Christian men, or devout and serious minded Christian women?

Can we even tell? And does it even matter?

Go ahead and add your own.

Advertisements

83 Comments

Filed under Marriage, Marriage Market Place, Men, Moral Agency, Red Pill, Sex, Sexual Market Place, Sin, Temptation, Women

83 responses to “Market Analysis: Stock Imbalance

  1. Novaseeker

    They aren’t a write off

    Zippy —

    Not in your mind, no, but I was writing about MK, in light of what *he* has written in the past here. And it isn’t just people who are immorally sexually gratifying themselves who are a write-off, either. Elspeth’s daughters are also a write-off under MK’s criteria (not traditional Catholics, probably would be open to contracepting). That was what I was writing about.

    Otherwise I understand your scheme and I agree that there is a distinction to be made between the two “classes” of people based on the criteria you set forth there (note, this is different from what MK is saying, and which is what I was talking about). I also agree that people shouldn’t see themselves as victims or wallow in a perceived victimization.

  2. Of course it is true that one and the same person may pursue both immoral sexual gratification and the good in sex and marriage. To the extent he pursues the former he needs to forget about the marketplace for immoral sex and get clean. To the extent he pursues the latter it makes no sense for him to play the victim card in a circumstance which is monumentally difficult for everyone.

  3. Novaseeker:
    Fair enough.

  4. “The men and women in this group need to show mutual sympathy, because it is frankly a terrible situation for everyone.”

    There’s been plenty of sympathy shown from men to women; not much from women to men. That said, there’s little point in displays of sympathy. Time and effort is better spent on how individual men and women can fix the problems.

    the issue of relative difficulty is being discussed because you raised the question yesterday and it was raised in the OP.

  5. Finally:

    “This is a problem” =! “victim card”.

  6. Like all things the issue of relative difficulty has to be discussed in context, including the context of absolute difficulty and the context of what is being pursued.

    In the context of pursuit of immoral sexual gratification there are all sorts of asymmetries, but see the analogy to meth heads versus heroin addicts. The important thing is not the marketplaces for heroin and meth, but getting clean.

    In the context of pursuing the good in sex and marriage any relative differences in difficulty pale in comparison to absolute difficulty, and fixating on relative differences is counterproductive (not to mention rather pathetic).

  7. @Zippy

    Do you disagree that pursuing the good in sex and marriage is monumentally difficult these days for both young men and young women (whatever may be said about relative difficulty)?

    Yes, I disagree. I do not think it is monumentally difficult for young women. It’s just difficult. Though it is on a bad trajectory.

    Do you disagree that immoral sexual gratification is trivially easy for everyone?

    No.

    Do you agree that pursuing the good in sex and marriage is easier when people are praising one–as an individual and as a member of a group–to others, rather than when they are denigrating one–as an individual as a member of a group–to others?

    Do you disagree that good young men are portrayed on the whole as either creeps or dorks, while good young women are portrayed on the whole as just women making an empowered choice?

  8. “In the context of pursuing the good in sex and marriage any relative differences in difficulty pale in comparison to absolute difficulty,”

    False. Relative differences in difficulty are quite important if one is to solve the problem for oneself, because one can’t solve the problem without understanding it.

    ” and fixating on relative differences is counterproductive (not to mention rather pathetic).”

    On the contrary; it’s not “Fixating” on relative differences; it’s identifying and understanding said relative differences.

    If you really think that understanding a problem in order to resolve it is pathetic, then I don’t see the point in your continuing to discuss the issue.

  9. Cane:

    Do you agree that pursuing the good in sex and marriage is easier when people are praising one–as an individual and as a member of a group–to others, rather than when they are denigrating one–as an individual as a member of a group–to others?

    I’d just suggest that we seem to have very different understandings of successful pursuit of the goods in sex and marriage. I wouldn’t define a couple of decades on the carousel, a facebook wall filled with feminist merit badges, three beta “husbands”, and an apartment filled with cats to be successful pursuit of the goods in sex and marriage. Easy meth addiction isn’t the same thing as easy healthy living.

    Do you disagree that good young men are portrayed on the whole as either creeps or dorks, …

    No.

    … while good young women are portrayed on the whole as just women making an empowered choice?

    See my first paragraph in this comment. And the idea that married young traditional religious stay at home mom with a brood of kids is treated as a high status empowered goal rather than creepy by our culture is risible.

  10. fuzziewuzziebear

    I do not like the word “whining”. It is employed by people who have a sufficiency to shut down people who have a lack complaining this thread is painful. There will be no resolution, much less solution.

  11. fuzziewuzziebear

    There should be a sentence break in my comment between “complaining” and “this thread”. Sorry.

  12. Fuzzie:

    the word “whining” is used to shut down any discussion of legitimate problems and real grievances, and to shame interlocutors into silence. It’s much like the “you’re a racist” canard – all you have to do to delegitimize your opponent is to call him a racist – instant lack of credibility!

    Men aren’t allowed to point out that the SMP/MMP are a problem. If you do, it’s “whining”. If you have a problem with something and you’re calling attention to it, you’re “whining”. If there’s a real unfairness and you’re calling that unfairness an, you know, unfairness, because it’s actually objectively unfair, that’s “whining”.

    If you’re identifying a problem for the purpose of helping others see that, yes, this is a problem, that’s “whining”.

  13. fuzziewuzziebear

    Thanks, Deti, I was afraid that it was just me.

  14. @Zippy

    I wouldn’t define a couple of decades on the carousel, a facebook wall filled with feminist merit badges, three beta “husbands”, and an apartment filled with cats to be successful pursuit of the goods in sex and marriage.

    That’s a red herring. Those are the results of poor choices. They do not tell us whether she had other options.

    And the idea that married young traditional religious stay at home mom with a brood of kids is treated as a high status empowered goal rather than creepy by our culture is risible.

    Perhaps things are worse in the RC than I thought. In Protland there are lots of churches that at least pay lip service to SAHMs with lots of kids; as long as Momma is happy.

    I think it might help if I provide a better analogy: “Factory fire kills all workers; customers devastated”.

  15. Cane:

    Those are the results of poor choices. They do not tell us whether she had other options.

    Resisting those poor choices is extremely difficult. And if she does resist those poor choices, she becomes an isolated and creepy freak.

    Ironically, I think it was your writing in particular which made it clear to me that most of the manosphere complaints about how much better women have it in the ‘marketplace’ are really complaints that men can’t get high quality immoral sex as easily as women. Average men in pursuit of immoral sex are stuck with a heroin high, whereas women get the good stuff.

    Once we discount the ‘market’ for immoral sex – where getting clean rather than getting higher quality degeneracy is the priority – things aren’t especially easy for anyone.

  16. MK

    deti: By your description, “morally good women” means maybe, MAYBE, 3% of women in the US.

    Much less. But still a lot, actually. My “morally good” women are actually not uncommon. About 70 million RC in the US alone means hundreds of thousands. With the internet and easy travel, this is doable. But for men (not girls) who find hard sledding I would go overseas for the bounty.

    Nova: women from trad Catholic families very closely vetted…everyone else is a write-off per many things he has written here over a long period of time. Anyway, he admits that, I think…he thinks almost all American women are not worthwhile.

    Admits?? Points:

    1) Every person is made in the image of God & thus “worthwhile”. And that includes atheists and mass murderers. Few are good marriage mates tho.

    2) People of any belief have an obligation to marry somebody who shares their views on marriage, sex, children, and faith. To do otherwise is an insult to the other person, any future children, and society itself. It’s utterly irresponsible to think otherwise. That’s just horse sense.

    3) In general I don’t “vet” kids marriage choices (I’m not in the “courting” camp). I merely raise kids to aggressively vet for themselves.

    4) Your caricature of me as some crazy religious nut is seriously amusing. I didn’t invent my views; I follow the tenets of the largest Christian denomination. I’m more liberal than our blog host on marriage partner standards. My wife was a pro-abort CINO when met. My trad friends tolerate me a VII liberal. But whatever.

  17. About the brief discussion on “approaches” – Women might not mean the same thing by that as men do. If I say that I don’t get approached very often at all, what I (and I suspect, most women) mean by that is that men rarely ask me out, ask for my phone number, that sort of thing. AKA, making an actual “move” of some sort. If a man simply speaks to me, looks at me, smiles at me, holds a door open for me, etc, that doesn’t count as an approach. Why not? Because doing those things doesn’t tell me that he is interested in getting to know me as more than just a friend. For example, there is a man that I know from a church activity that I participate in weekly. He behaves in such a way towards me that you all would say means that he’s interested in much more than friendship with me – greets me when I come in from like 20 feet away, sits near me, smiles a lot and chats with me, asks me questions about my life, etc. But he also has a girlfriend that he isn’t shy about mentioning to me. So, why would I consider those behaviors to be him “approaching” me, and by extension – other men exhibiting those behaviors, unless they actually ask me out or ask for my phone number or some other actual move forward? And it’s not like me, or most women, are being asked out all the time.

  18. It doesn’t really have anything to do with how attractive the man is to us. I find that man I mentioned to be attractive, but I don’t see his behavior as being an “approach” – but if an unattractive man were to ask me out, I would recognize that as an approach.

  19. Novaseeker

    Every person is made in the image of God & thus “worthwhile”.

    Of course, but it’s damned obvious I was talking about “worthwhile for marriage” from the context, because that is all we are talking about here. We aren’t discussing someone’s absolute worth in the eyes of God. You can’t possibly think that this was what I meant when I wrote that. And, your last sentence of your point “1” is what I was getting at, in any case.

    In general I don’t “vet” kids marriage choices

    Show me where I said the father would be doing the vetting. Go ahead … show me.

    Your caricature of me as some crazy religious nut is seriously amusing.

    I didn’t use those words or suggest that you were that. What I said was that repeatedly in this combox (and I am not going to go look the instances up, because it isn’t worth my time to do that for a combox comment) you have essentially said that the pool in the US is very, very small, and you need to vet for X, Y and Z and are probably more likely to find that in trad Catholic cultures overseas. Repeatedly. As in many times. Many, many times. If you think that means I am making a caricature of you, that’s your problem — you wrote those things numerous times, not me. I am just recollecting what you have written here over a long period of time.

  20. @Zippy

    Ironically, I think it was your writing in particular which made it clear to me that most of the manosphere complaints about how much better women have it in the ‘marketplace’ are really complaints that men can’t get high quality immoral sex as easily as women. Average men in pursuit of immoral sex are stuck with a heroin high, whereas women get the good stuff.

    I think that’s true, but we haven’t been talking about those people; at least I haven’t.

    Deti is overstating the case, but it’s just true that +70% of divorces are filed by the wife. It’s also just true that women lie/obscure their sexual history much more than do women. Both of these things Even so, all the good will goes to women while men attempt to navigate the discouragement. Good work if you can get it.

    Regardless, we need better terms to have a more fruitful discussion. In one sentence you write “extremely difficult”, and a bit later you write “aren’t especially easy”. Those phrase aren’t synonyms. Also, in one paragraph you write about the addicted, and in the next you write about the clean. All of this as if we were debating the same groups in both.

    @Nova

    Word.

  21. Peter Webb

    QUOTE – 2) People of any belief have an obligation to marry somebody who shares their views on marriage, sex, children, and faith. To do otherwise is an insult to the other person, any future children, and society itself. It’s utterly irresponsible to think otherwise. That’s just horse sense.”

    Not horse sense, but non-sense.

    I am not some generic breeding-age-male-sperm-donor-and-wallet, and decline to be regarded as such. I am nor a serf, to be put to this or whatever other work that “society” deems me obligated to perform. I am not cannon-fodder to be marched toward the guns regardless of outcome.
    …….. and that is MY belief.

    I see no reason to let you define me as the human version of one of my own stud rams, any more than I will permit you to refer to any woman that I “might” marry as little more than a breeding cow. That whole “worth” thing cuts two ways.
    Seems to me that you love your ideas more than you love me.

    Here is the thing. I am not convinced that “husband and father” is a job for which I am particularly well qualified. I am willing to take the gamble, if and when the odds look as tho they are in my favour, but I am not just going to toss myself off the matrimonial cliff in the hope that God will catch me. The God that I worship has commanded me to seek wisdom. He does not bless stupid.

  22. Peter Webb

    …… and I am convinced that this whole debate centres around two unstated claims.

    1. ……. that it is soooooo difficult for X that X has an alibi and cannot be held responsible for doing nothing (Y should do it all)

    2. …….. that it is even more difficult for Y, so X has no alibi and should DO SOMETHING!

    Reality? You get to make your own choices, but whining about the outcome just makes you less responsible and less attractive. There is no objective measure of difficulty.

  23. Cane:

    In one sentence you write “extremely difficult”, and a bit later you write “aren’t especially easy”.

    The latter was used sardonically, as in “climbing Everest solo isn’t especially easy”.

  24. MK

    Nova: I didn’t use those words or suggest that you were

    Your comment that I would “admit” to certain beliefs implied to me I’m embarrassed or evasive about them. So I clarified. Hey, it’s you who went off about me to a third party for some reason. I merely responded out of need.

    PW: Not horse sense, but non-sense. I am not some generic breeding-age-male-sperm-donor…

    Maybe you misread me or I wasn’t clear? I’m certainly not claiming people must hold whatever set of values. I’m just saying parents should get alignment on their values before raising kids together or expect a raw deal.

    PW: You get to make your own choices, but whining about the outcome just makes you less responsible and less attractive.

    That’s a great summary. Fully agree.

  25. Thanks for the contributions everyone. I probably won’t post the next thread in this series until next week. In the meantime feel free to continue the discussion.

  26. I think the relative difference is also due to the different struggles women and men face. While significant social pressure affects us all to a degree, it affects the general population of women more than it affects the general population of men. I think it is correct to say that men have a hard time marrying well because there are so few options for them. However, even if we stipulate that there are an abundance of good choices for women (which is far from obvious), they will have a tougher time making good choices because social pressure affect them in general more than they do men.

    I don’t think it is that important who has it more difficult. In absolute numbers, there just aren’t that many marriageable people of either sex, and the relative differences are not significant enough to delve into unless it is productive; discussing the relative differences for men and women should be an exercise oriented towards men figuring out what they can do to make things less difficult for women, and women figuring out what they can do to make things less difficult for men.

    Both sexes have it very difficult, but for different reasons. There are so few good people that it is vital that men and women work together to make sure as many marriageable people as possible find each other and raise their children to be good people.

  27. Peter Webb

    MK….
    I did quote you directly, so I don’t know how I could have misunderstood. The quote itself seems long enough to ensure that I didn’t take you out of context.
    Here it is again.QUOTE – ” People of any belief have an obligation to marry somebody who shares their views on marriage, sex, children, and faith. To do otherwise is an insult to the other person, any future children, and society itself. It’s utterly irresponsible to think otherwise. That’s just horse sense.”

    Did you mean “people of any (KIND of) belief”?
    Or did you mean “people of any (SIGNIFICANT DEGREE of) belief (in YOUR DOCTRINE)?

    Because the first seems more obvious……. while the latter excludes anyone who does not share your doctrine.

    I believe in God as per the Nicene creed. What I do not believe, is that God has commanded that I marry.
    If I DID finds someone who “shares(my) views on marriage, sex, children and faith”, that would be pretty damned positive as my views also respect my interests and a number of issues that are more implicit than explicit, but it doesn’t make my “obligation” obvious.

  28. Peter Webb:

    Did you mean “people of any (KIND of) belief”?
    Or did you mean “people of any (SIGNIFICANT DEGREE of) belief (in YOUR DOCTRINE)?

    I’m not MK and can’t say what he means. But for my own part I think it is utterly foolish, self destructive, unfair to the other person and indeed gravely immoral to marry unless there is clear agreement between the spouses about basic matters of marriage, sex, children, and faith.

    That the Catholic religion is the one true faith (which is to say, all other belief systems about the nature of God and man are deficient), and that everyone has an obligation to move toward acceptance of the truth in general, are distinguishable from the specific point.

  29. Peter Webb:

    “I believe in God as per the Nicene creed. What I do not believe, is that God has commanded that I marry.”

    I think a more generous reading of MK’s comment would show he is not saying that all Christians have an obligation to marry; he is saying that should you marry, you are obligated to marry someone who is in clear agreement with you on matters of marriage, sex, children, and faith. In other words, you are obligated not to marry someone who is not in clear agreement with you on these issues.

  30. MK

    “MK: People of any belief have an obligation to marry somebody who shares their views” PW: Did you mean “people of any (KIND of) belief”?

    Never specified what “kind” of belief since it’s not relevant to my point: that spouses should share values.

    My comment was only prompted by folk who seemed incredulous I would demand a spouse who shares my values & spurn all others (e.g, the OMG <3%!). Myself, I'm incredulous anyone does anything else.

    I agree a "shared values for marriage" approach creates 4 issues:
    1) how many people hold said values,
    2) how well defined and clear are said values,
    3) how firm and unchanging are said values,
    4) are said values good for marriage itself.

    But I figured I had it rosy on all 4 issues: 1) largest value pool, 2) values are clearly defined, 3) values unchanging, 4) values good for spouses who desire family (no divorce, BC, & male headship). Not everyone who wants to marry has it so easy or low-risk. Myself, I wouldn't even consider marriage today as a secular guy or as a bible-only type Christian (issues 2-3) because I'm a coward. YMMV.

    Zip: I’m not MK and can’t say what he means.

    I agree with everything you say, but my point was less ambitious (& I thought boring & non-controversial!): that spouses should be unified on values.

  31. Peter Webb

    MK…..
    I will simplify my own response, then.
    It is not your criteria for choosing spouse that are objectionable.
    It was your apparent assertion that we have a duty to marry, regardless of other circumstances..

  32. On a scale of 0 – 10, 10 being trivial and 0 being impossible, it seems like moral modern men ages 18-30 trying to get married face a difficulty of 0 to 0.5.
    Their female counterparts may face something like 0 to 1.

    In my mind the fact that some virtuous women have it twice as easy to get married than some virtuous men pales compared to the overall problem that these numbers are so low to begin with. I think it needs to be like at least a 3 in order for large numbers of moral families to be able to form.

    But it is also worth noting that certain men definitely (due to attractiveness, local markets, etc) have it much easier than certain women.

    This talk of “who has it worse” doesn’t seem that useful to someone trying to overcome this difficulty. As a man, knowing that some virtuous women counterparts to myself might have an easier time finding a spouse than myself is just… not helpful. At best it is mostly irrelevant, and at worst it provides an excuse to myself to not try because “I have it so much harder.”

    But I don’t think I am saying anything Zippy + MK didn’t already say.

  33. Pingback: Market Analysis: Adjustments And Imbalances | Donal Graeme

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s