…game theory predicts, and empirical studies of auctions bear out, that auctions will often be won by "weak" bidders, who know that they can be outbid and so bid more aggressively, while the "strong" bidders will hold out for a really great deal. You can find a technical discussion of this here. (Be warned: "Bidding Behavior in Asymmetric Auctions" is not for everyone, and I certainly won’t claim to have a handle on all the math.) But you can also see how this works intuitively if you just consider that with a lot at stake in getting it right in one shot, it’s the women who are confident that they are holding a strong hand who are likely to hold out and wait for the perfect prospect.
This is how you come to the Eligible-Bachelor Paradox, which is no longer so paradoxical. The pool of appealing men shrinks as many are married off and taken out of the game, leaving a disproportionate number of men who are notably imperfect (perhaps they are short, socially awkward, underemployed). And at the same time, you get a pool of women weighted toward the attractive, desirable "strong bidders."
Where have all the most appealing men gone? Married young, most of them–and sometimes to women whose most salient characteristic was not their beauty, or passion, or intellect, but their decisiveness.
Here is the full argument. I don’t, however, quite buy this as the explanation of the phenomenon. I view the real world auction as being held — at least if you wish — continuously rather than at discrete times. So the "strong bidding women" can always cave and settle for a "lesser man" after an optimal amount of waiting, yet many don’t. The distinction between period-by-period happiness and overall lifetime happiness also shapes the market. As smart single women mature, their lives get better and better. "Settling" becomes psychologically harder, even if it would make some of the "settlers" happy in the longer run. So settling doesn’t happen; decisiveness become harder to conjure up at the same time that its long-run value is increasing, or in other words behavioral economics is very much at work here.
“As smart women mature, their lives get better and better.”
Roissy, calling Roissy to the podium….
This isn’t what I personally observe.
Isn’t there a big assumption that relative value (desirability) doesn’t change over time? Garth Brooks effectively addressed this in “Thank God for Unanswered Prayers.” My observations are that people change enormously over time, due to events they can’t control as well as to their own personal characteristics. For those who paired off early, how does one re-value this asset at a point in the future? I don’t think that the elements of relative value remain constant, nor do they carry the same weights over time.
I thought that male survival is weak, so that even though at birth there are slightly more boys then girls, boys get sicker sooner and suffer much higher rates of things like autism, retardation, etc. Also, there is a higher incidence of incarceration and accidental/violent death.
I think there may just be more eligible women than men. Maybe we should reevaluate polygamy?
Wait, Laocoon, wasn’t that song about him being thankful he *didn’t* marry a woman
he knew when he was younger, who *was* relatively desirable then?
I think Tyler has the stylized facts backwards. My experience is that the quality of the median available female starts declining at around age 24 or 25. Just my personal experience. The effect becomes quite noticable by 27/28.
As smart, single women mature, their lives get better and better and perhaps settling becomes psychologically more difficult. However, age (youth) still seems to matter more in the market for women than it does for men, so doesn’t the concern over turning into a cat lady to some extent negate the psychological barriers to decisiveness in older women? Moreover, are their lives really better if they have been without stable companionship for so long? (This last part is an assumption)
However, age (youth) still seems to matter more in the market for women than it does for men
That’s true. It may seem like a cultural construct but more likely is an inevitable recognition of the effects of age on fertility. If women remained fertile into their 60′s and 70′s, while men’s sperm counts sank like the Titanic after age 35, we’d see age being a much bigger market factor for men than for women.
In a way, the decline in women’s fertility at young ages is Nature’s ironic twist, because by nearly all measures other than reproductive ability women remain younger much longer than men. That old line about women getting older while men get distinguished is pure crapola. Today it’s commonplace to see young-looking, physically fit, and mentally vibrant women in their 50′s and 60′s, while all too many men of that age are, as the French would say, eating dandelions by the root. Diseases such as lung cancer, heart disease and prostate cancer slaughter men in massive numbers, with women either not getting these diseases at all or only being affected when quite elderly.
A man goes to the supermarket and picks up a frozen pizza, a six-pack of beer, a half-gallon of milk, and a bag of potato chips.
At the checkout, the cashier is a cute young blond. She asks him, “You must be single, right?”
The man is startled, and replies, “Oh … right, you saw that because of what I’m buying!”
She answers, “Nope, you’re just ugly.”
***
Regarding Kelly’s remark, it’s very difficult for a woman to credibly make an offer like that because of selection effects (“What are the odds a woman will just fall on my lap like that?”) The man will assume it’s a trick. I certainly would…
There’s a neat Dilbert comic about it too.
Person, I disagree. I don’t think anyone would think it was “a trick” (except you). The first step to getting what you want is asking for it- I think Kelly is on the right track. If he doesn’t call, so what? Would not giving him your number make him more likely to call? Obviously not. Getting asked out by a woman is very flattering, although some men do not like it.
OK, Tyler, that’s a possible rationale. I think it’s swamped by the well-understood rationale that distinguishes “quality” between the sexes.
Quality man: competent
Quality woman: pretty
These are admittedly very simplified, as is the constraint that a woman will not marry a man who is less competent than she, but the implications are clear.
Just run the clock. A man’s competence steadily increases with age. A woman’s prettiness peaks in her late teens, then gradually declines. The most competent men and prettiest women tend to get attached earliest. For the man who holds out, his choices expand as his competence grows since he will gladly marry a pretty girl who is either younger or older than he. For the competent women, her choices shrink, both because she is competing for competent men whose choices are expanding with age, and because her own attractiveness is declining with age.
As oversimplified as this explanation is, it remains the most powerful one I’ve come across.
I doubt my wife will ever find this, but I want to go on the record by saying that her beauty is exceptionally ageless.
If a cute woman gave me her number and I was attracted to her or curious, I would be fearless in calling her. I can’t imagine why one would be suspicious. I think many men have little self confidence when it comes to women, which i think explains much of their silly behavior when it comes to women. Unless…of course…men somehow are assuming that women are thinking as they themselves would be thinking….it would explain a lot of homophobia.
It’s a supply and demand thing. Fewer and fewer women are spending all their waking time looking for an “eligible bachelor.” Instead we’re continuing our education, seeking full-time careers (with the possibility of family later on, with our definition of family as unique and individual as we are), and last but not least -we have our friends. It’s easy to “be alone” more often when you have an urban family and all its branches to fall back on! So we’re not looking that hard or with too much serious intent. Thus the supply of said eligible bachelors dwindles even farther…
Articles bemoaning the lack of eligible single men betray the American media’s East Coast bias. See this map:
http://creativeclass.typepad.com/thecreativityexchange/2008/03/the-singles-map.html
Nice map harryh, but a per capita map would make more sense.
And I agree with Person. Since women never show any interest in me, I’d assume it was a joke or even some kind of scam if a woman gave me her phone number or email address. And for the record, I’m 25, which means women will *never* show interest in me, according to Peter. He’s probably not wrong!
Older women have trouble finding men, because older women want to date men their own age, or slightly older. However, men their age are usually either married, or interested in younger women(or both).
In addition, older women who want to date younger men may be turned down, due to fading looks, or men who want to wait before reproduction, yet are concerned by the ticking of the biological clocks of these women.
kevin, a comedian on Conan O’Brien once jokingly made a point that I had always thought explained Islamo-fascism’s reign: lack of women saying “no.” In some cases it’s due to lack of rights for women, and in other cases it’s because none of them have wives or girlfriends.
My Asian friends tell me I’m ancient by single male standards in their countries.
The biggest may be that the pool of women who want to get married is larger than the pool of men who want to get married. Divorce is costly and the milk is free.
Many women are not thinking of marriage in their 20′s. I know very attractive, intelligent, single women who complain about how there are no men. But eligible peers who are looking for marriage pass them over because they spend their time “fooling around” with men who have similar attitudes. It’s the merry-go-round method of dating: hook up with lots of people and eventually you meet one you want to marry. Women who purposefully set out to find an eligible man have different attitudes and behavior.
All this assumes men aren’t also bidding.
The book, Reviving Ophelia, seemed to mark an inflection point in the relative status of females. Since then, women seem to be much better represented in higher education to the extent that colleges are using higher standards for female admission then male admission, in order to keep the sex ratio in reasonable balance. In addition, women seem to be doing better in their 20′s then men, at least in New York, based on the NYT articles about how twenty something career women should deal with dating men that make less money, are slackers, etc. Totally anecdotal but there seems to be some substance to it. Also women’s skill sets are more in line with the more contemporary corporate culture, with the emphasis on teamwork and less hierarchic structure.
Most of this is pure conjecture, but that plus demographics (men in prison, for example) is one reason that women are finding a shortage of desirable men. Not to mention that (the male) gender is the single biggest risk factor for a number of diseases – including average mortality. High status men have lower life expectancies then low status men.
It’s obvious, but I think a lot of eligible women put off getting married (or rather getting married and having kids) while they build good careers. Men don’t have to do this so much. This would certainly be consistent with eligible men marrying off earlier.
I suspect this really does lead to a disproportionate number of successful & hitherto attractive single women in their mid-thirties who find themselves (by accident or design) really keen to marry off early enough to have one or two kids, but also facing a steep decline in their attractiveness to men as they age. Disproportionate to their women peers at a younger age, or to men of the same age, that is.
Isn’t this really a settled issue? Don’t we know there’s a bell curve shape to this? You know, a handful of people are very eligible and therefore are only single if they choose to be. A reasonable size of people are reasonably eligible. Another reasonble size are mildly eligible. And, of course, there’s a handful who are rather ineligible. Invariably the high-end men and women command a high price of which low-end people can’t attain. Maybe Say’s Law would go something along the lines of ‘if you can’t get any your standards are too high’?
Ramie’s comments are spot on – it’s the same here in NYC. On the lighter side, I’m considering writing a paper for (nonexistent) Journal of Romantic Psychiatry under the title: “Why are the Pretty Ones Always Crazy – the Bayesian Approach”
All I got so far is the title, but it gives away the essence: when you meet an attractive woman over thirty, the chances are she is not capable of having a normal relationship – not because all pretty women are crazy, but because ones that are pretty but not crazy have already been taken. Let’s not forget that women score higher than men on neuroticism scale (they are also more conscientious and agreeable), which in common parlance means the average woman is ‘crazier’ that the average man. Then, because of biological time pressure, well adjusted women find and marry whom they can, and the others keep wondering why they can’t find ‘the right one’.
In general, the thesis of the main post shows grave problem with this kind of social research – there are always a lot of unexamined assumptions (in this case that two genders have the same emotional and physical needs and limitations) that lead to absurd conclusions.
I think there is a pretty well-noted effect of a woman’s desirability dropping off with age faster than a man’s. At it’s most dramatic, there is the issue that post-menopausal women can’t have children whereas men of that age can. And fertility is an attribute of desire (in general). Somehow, your pondering ought to include the aspect of this issue. In addition, I think you’ll find that men tend to have first marriage at a LATER age then women. So I don’t quite get your picture of women waiting and men jumping. Statistics and personal experience talking/observing people shows me that it’s the reverse.
There is no shortage of men for women ages 18-25. They have to fight the men off.
All the women complaining about the man shortage tend to be in their 40s and living in Manhattan. If they moved to some city in the midwest and would accept marrying someone with a five-figure salary who looked like a regular guy in his 40s and not a Hollywood actor, they’d have no problem getting hitched.
“As smart women mature, their lives get better and better.”
Um, I’m not sure which world you found this in, but here on Earth, women generally get more and more miserable as they age. They develop the anger that men had in their teens, because — like teeen boys — they find themselves “invisible” to a world that has no use for them. The looks and attention they used to get are gone. There’s no more free coffe or dorrs being opened.
Even rich, married women seem to struggle with this. Also, what does “smart women” mean? Do you mean that when stupid women mature, their lives get worse?
Of course there is a shortage of eligible bachelors out there. It’s why I get laid so frequently.
Do men really have a different bidding strategy than women? If men are engaged in the auction too, wouldn’t “strong bidders” also hold out? If hold-out males engage in a prolonged period of youthful promiscuity while waiting for Mrs. Right, wouldn’t that imply a reward for hold out females? Perhaps for hold-out females of a younger age cohort.
This is the most interesting site i’ve ever come across!
Interesting comments. I am a single female lawyer who owns her own home and has a good retirement nest egg. I am also non white. I’m above average in attractiveness and on the thin and modelesque side. I look much younger than my years as I am in my fortieth year. I am very, very fit as a result of family genes and personal training. I have a very strong and confident persona and very set spiritual beliefs. Do I find it hard to meet men over 35 who are serious and established at my level of attractiveness and physical fitness who have similar personality and spiritual beliefs– of any race… YES!!! Is is because I have high standards.. YES!!! I have high standards for myself and would love to find a guy who has high standards for his self. If I do not it’s simply a sad commentary on how many people don’t go all out in their lives. I can only respect a man that will go all out. Why to we respect the nerdy guy who turns into a good catch and not the nerdy woman who turns into a better catch??? I’m considering dating more and more dating younger men who aspire to have amazing lives.
Ziggurats were built by the Sumerians, Babylonians, and Assyrians for local religions. Each ziggurat was part of a temple complex which included other buildings. The precursors of the ziggurat were raised platforms that date from the Ubaid period during the fourth millennium BC. The earliest ziggurats began near the end of the Early Dynastic Period. The latest Mesopotamian ziggurats date from the 6th century BC. Built in receding tiers upon a rectangular, oval, or square platform, the ziggurat was a pyramidal structure with a flat top. Sun-baked bricks made up the core of the ziggurat with facings of fired bricks on the outside.
Comments on this entry are closed.