People wed due to social enforcement, loving devotion or economic security. In their absence, marriages plummet. This decline may be sustained by a multitude of single ladies.
Great post. The value proposition for women to get married is weak since women can increasingly find love, financial stability, and social approval without marriage. You address many reasons for why people aren't getting married, but I would add that marriage as an institution has long been associated with religion and conservative values, the global rise of nonbelievers and people with no religious affiliation may be contributing to the rejection of marriage. Additionally, it seems like the recent rise of tyrannical leaders and challenges to women's rights (like Roe being overturned in the US) has created skepticism and concerns about how the government may use marriage to further restrict the independence of women.
There is no evidence that high status men have become less infidel over last 40 years ( Ms Melanie Trump/ Ms Clinton ), yet are married in high number . The women in these cases are economically independent , don't wanna let go high status man .
Love/devotion ( soul mate ) is bullshit. People can delude (fool) themselves anything that help their reproductive success ( Trivers book - folly of fools ) . Love itself is evo adaptation . Anyways , infidelity rates are high ( Buss ).
Lack of men higher in status than women in economic and educational sphere ( feminist revolution ) and open sexual environment ( nothing barred ) is a major factor
Natural state of homo sapiens in polygny , I think with AIwe are reverting back
Our ancestors were polygynous until about three hundred thousand years ago, primarily monogamous until about ten thousand years ago, primarily polygynous again until about two thousand years ago, and primarily monogamous since then.”
The problem with polygamy is that you reduces investment (mainly, men investment) in outspring. This leads to a worst society. And this is what IS happening in the West.
And this is why we are being outplacing by the East.
Feminism has killed the West.
The Patriarchy from the East will ultimately replace us.
A small clarification: are positive/negative feedbacks defined in your field in terms of the desirability of their outcome? In the usage I'm familiar with, the loop you describe would be a positive feedback loop (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback), in that it amplifies itself. A negative feedback loop would be stabilising, in that a small change causes a counter-acting response and the system returns to something close to its original state.
I would add if Women’s financial security is a key driver (I agree as the data is obvious). Then their game theory optionality has increased dramatically the last 40yrs.
So, what an option is in 1970 v 1940 v. 1995 v 2024 are radically different.
The requirements to be met in 2024 for a mean distro education attainment i.e. BS/BA degree women 35 and under (hetro or not) requires a list with substantial quality of candidate.
This candidate must meet a battery, matrix of candidate qualities across a massive range of variables maybe 3-10x larger then 30-80 yrs ago..
My worthless .02 guess is that it will shake out 80/20.. like all things in the universe:)
Top 20% will match across demos & have massive gains while 80% will fight it out for the remaining best candidates, with the next 20% doing above avg. better.
the bottom 60% will have very poor gains that are attributed to marriage benefits .
once again thank you for your great discussion on this.
Because of all this, maybe 70-90% of pair candidates are excluded given their readiness, performance.
Do you have a theory of why (in the US at least, not sure about elsewhere) marriage rates are higher among the middle and upper class of earners than the poor? Social pressure can't be that much higher for the better off. Do you people with financial stability just fall in love more?
Rich women lose out on more earnings than poorer women do when they have children, especially when they don't have a long term partner. In other words, the opportunity cost of having a child out of wedlock for rich women is greater. It makes sense that richer women delay childbearing until marriage, get married at higher rates, and have fewer children.
> If secularisation outpaces gender equality, marriage rates fall.
The paragraph below just supports the claim that secularization reduces marriage rates, without any note that gender equality growing faster than secularization can prevent this. Particularly since you note that gender parity in earnings also reduces marriage rates.
marriage rates tend to fall with secularisation, individualism and gender parity in earnings?
China was always been secular and has enjoyed educational and earnings parity since 1951, but it's hardly individualistic. Indeed, if the PRC can stabilize the population, it will be a tribute to communalism.
Great post. The value proposition for women to get married is weak since women can increasingly find love, financial stability, and social approval without marriage. You address many reasons for why people aren't getting married, but I would add that marriage as an institution has long been associated with religion and conservative values, the global rise of nonbelievers and people with no religious affiliation may be contributing to the rejection of marriage. Additionally, it seems like the recent rise of tyrannical leaders and challenges to women's rights (like Roe being overturned in the US) has created skepticism and concerns about how the government may use marriage to further restrict the independence of women.
There is no evidence that high status men have become less infidel over last 40 years ( Ms Melanie Trump/ Ms Clinton ), yet are married in high number . The women in these cases are economically independent , don't wanna let go high status man .
Love/devotion ( soul mate ) is bullshit. People can delude (fool) themselves anything that help their reproductive success ( Trivers book - folly of fools ) . Love itself is evo adaptation . Anyways , infidelity rates are high ( Buss ).
Lack of men higher in status than women in economic and educational sphere ( feminist revolution ) and open sexual environment ( nothing barred ) is a major factor
Natural state of homo sapiens in polygny , I think with AIwe are reverting back
Our ancestors were polygynous until about three hundred thousand years ago, primarily monogamous until about ten thousand years ago, primarily polygynous again until about two thousand years ago, and primarily monogamous since then.”
The problem with polygamy is that you reduces investment (mainly, men investment) in outspring. This leads to a worst society. And this is what IS happening in the West.
And this is why we are being outplacing by the East.
Feminism has killed the West.
The Patriarchy from the East will ultimately replace us.
Thank you for yet another fascinating post.
Interesting piece, as always!
A small clarification: are positive/negative feedbacks defined in your field in terms of the desirability of their outcome? In the usage I'm familiar with, the loop you describe would be a positive feedback loop (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback), in that it amplifies itself. A negative feedback loop would be stabilising, in that a small change causes a counter-acting response and the system returns to something close to its original state.
Excellent piece like usual,
I would add if Women’s financial security is a key driver (I agree as the data is obvious). Then their game theory optionality has increased dramatically the last 40yrs.
So, what an option is in 1970 v 1940 v. 1995 v 2024 are radically different.
The requirements to be met in 2024 for a mean distro education attainment i.e. BS/BA degree women 35 and under (hetro or not) requires a list with substantial quality of candidate.
This candidate must meet a battery, matrix of candidate qualities across a massive range of variables maybe 3-10x larger then 30-80 yrs ago..
My worthless .02 guess is that it will shake out 80/20.. like all things in the universe:)
Top 20% will match across demos & have massive gains while 80% will fight it out for the remaining best candidates, with the next 20% doing above avg. better.
the bottom 60% will have very poor gains that are attributed to marriage benefits .
once again thank you for your great discussion on this.
Because of all this, maybe 70-90% of pair candidates are excluded given their readiness, performance.
Finally , Prof Alice is reading some evo psych stuff .
Humans are pair bonding species and have innate desire for connection.
So future stocks for cat food and depressive med look bright
Do you have a theory of why (in the US at least, not sure about elsewhere) marriage rates are higher among the middle and upper class of earners than the poor? Social pressure can't be that much higher for the better off. Do you people with financial stability just fall in love more?
Rich women lose out on more earnings than poorer women do when they have children, especially when they don't have a long term partner. In other words, the opportunity cost of having a child out of wedlock for rich women is greater. It makes sense that richer women delay childbearing until marriage, get married at higher rates, and have fewer children.
Would this solidify the demographic transitions that are happening or have happened in this countries?
> If secularisation outpaces gender equality, marriage rates fall.
The paragraph below just supports the claim that secularization reduces marriage rates, without any note that gender equality growing faster than secularization can prevent this. Particularly since you note that gender parity in earnings also reduces marriage rates.
marriage rates tend to fall with secularisation, individualism and gender parity in earnings?
China was always been secular and has enjoyed educational and earnings parity since 1951, but it's hardly individualistic. Indeed, if the PRC can stabilize the population, it will be a tribute to communalism.