There were also a handful of women at my high school and again at my college who men disproportionately sought. I'm not sure I see that this is a one-way issue.
women have started going to college in higher numbers than men. the vast majority of women will only date a man who is equal or higher education level than they are.
All they need to do is work towards maintaining a healthy ration between man and women in their alumni. Something around 51% male and 49% women usually causes people to form more serious relationships. When the ratio is too skewed in the man's favor, they women feel pressured to participate in the hookup culture to secure a mate (source: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/24693022-date-onomics).
With the current trend of more women graduating from university, this will probably get worse. Working towards getting more men into universities will end up benefiting women because it will probably create a healthier dating culture.
Business Insider has run several articles of the urban college female "problem". With 30% more females obtaining college degrees currently than males plus that males generally dont marry up, there is a surplus of 20-something college females in all metropolitan areas except San Francisco and Washington DC. Good news for guys then.
One silly article tried explain the success of hookup apps is that more desperate females are willing to put out in this environment.
I agree that it would be degrading to market a college based on this, but I'd also imagine that in an environment with a severe gender imbalance there would be people of the over-represented gender (of either gender) who would welcome the idea of a greater pool of potential partners in that environment (perhaps not enough to be willing to be "sold", as you've said).
> doubling the women/men ratio won't come close to doubling any particular guy's chances of having sex
While doubling the women/men ratio won't necessarily double any particular guy's chances of having sex, it will certainly increase it, and I'm certain you're familiar with the lengths people of either gender will go to to increase their chances of ending up in their ideal mating situation (straightforward sex or otherwise) by even a vanishingly or imaginarily tiny amount. And a favorable gender ratio won't effect a player's chances of having sex all that much, but for an average or socially-stunted guy, it will certainly increase his chances.
For one thing, a greater proportion of his interactions will be with women, increasing his chances by raw bayesian exposure, as well as by the greater socialization to women he will accrue. I do not reject the stereotype we all know, of guys who spend too much of their lives in environments with the opposite gender imbalance, as applicable in a large minority of cases; though I would be interested in hearing your experience and reasoning if you disagree.
As well, as rare in this environment, these men will be more individually valuable to women seeking male partners than they would otherwise be (for whatever benefits of a mating/partnership would apply to the people involved, and could be categorized as valuable). I don't think this concept of "value" would have as much of an effect on the difference in the situation as the 1st reason, but it would exist. The degree to which it would be multiplied from what it would be in a gender-neutral environment would still be dependent on each individual, and a clueless total loss would probably still not get laid or dated or tied-up and pooed on or whatever they're looking for, but it would absolutely make each more appealing to some degree. And (if you are willing to grant that confidence is sexy in many cases), any experience which increases a person's experience in and competence with sex and relationships feeds back on itself, and increases the likelihood of more experience.
So I think it would be pretty reasonable for most people to prefer a gender environment which is favourable to them. Of course, your expectation of the quality of an institution that would directly market itself based on this, and of the quality of the character of the people for whom this was not sufficiently distasteful to turn them away, might offset the benefits of the advertised gender environment. But having been an 18-year-old male and having known 18-year-old males, I do not think this is sufficient to nullify the appeal; and were this imbalance just known and not pimped, it would not be an entirely trivial factor in someone's choice of university.
NB: Pronoun "his" used for readability's sake, though if you'd judge what I've described to be equally applicable to women who are attracted to men in the reciprocal environment, substitute the gender-neutral pronoun of your choice. I also initially included gay women with the men above, but I suppose the dynamic is totally different for them -- the people you're attracted to are also your potential competition. Holy shit.
The problem is probably exacerbated by college educated men being more willing to marry women that aren't college graduates. At least, that's something I think is happening.
This is a supply and demand problem. If the men are in high demand due to low supply, the women need to adjust, whether than means lowering that specific standard, doing without a spouse, or putting more work into the relationship (it's not fair, but I'm talking about reality here, not how we wish things were).
I'm totally open to being wrong. But take the girls' college thing for instance. Many, many people I know met their spouses through college. There simply aren't as many chances to socialize and meet people after you graduate. I think it stands to reason that if you are a straight woman, you are less likely to find a spouse if you go to a college with only women.
Or the pool of dateable men shrinks as women earn more (for those who insist on dating men who earn more than them). Eventually such women can earn too much to have a good chance of finding a man whose salary satisfies them.
The same happens with college degrees. More women than men go to college. But many women with college degrees want a man with a college degree too. Cue articles complaining about the shortage of marriageable men.
I can't see how any of this makes sense. There are not a lot more eligible men than there are eligible women. Interest in relationships is not constrained in any way to "guys". I think you have an alignment problem.
In this case the student wanted to eventually get married and figured his chances were less if he was spending most of his time in classes of mostly males. So it was more of thinking that if he choose a degree path that resulted in fewer female friends, his odds of meeting the right person to marry were lower.
I'll leave it to men to decide whether highly educated women being less likely to want to couple with available men is good for them. But I'm surprised anyone would assume it would be.
This is a known issue but the down stream effect won’t be felt for a while.
Let’s be clear we’re talking about general behavioral trend, not trying to police an individual, which is the crux of contention for these topics.
Many women still hold on to the idea of finding a partner that is wealthier and more educated. This is due to the past (over)reliance of their partners for stability. But this is no longer true.
The education gap between men and women are growing. More women enroll and graduate from college then men. Many young men, mostly lower-middle class, (whether fairly or not) feel like the education system does not work for them.
Society and companies are reconciling the barriers for women’s advancement and we’re only observing this initial gap. That is well and good. But in 10-20 years women will out number men in many fields requiring higher education.
The real problem arises when that clashes with traditional expectations. The women in the article is a successful Yale grad who wants a partner with better pedigree. If you include looks and height requirements her dating pool is like <0.01% of the population. As that cascades to women in general with college education refusing to consider men in trade, that mismatch grows wider.
The implication of the dating “market” not being able to match buyers and sellers would have some interesting dynamics.
reply