Faroe islands fact of the day

A lot of the women go away to study and don’t come back:

There are already 2,000 more men than women on the Faroes – which has a total population of just under 50,000 – and some of those men have taken matters into their own hands by importing wives and companions from the Philippines and Thailand.

Filipinos and Thais make up two of the largest groups of foreigners on the Faroe Islands . There are now 200 Thais and Filipinos – mostly women – spread out over the islands.

In the tiny hamlet of Klaksvík located in the northern part of the islands, there are already 15 women from Asia.

Bjarni Ziska Dahl, who married his Filipino wife in 2010, said that the foreign women could well be the answer to the issues facing the Faros.

“We must recognise that there is a problem, and welcome these strangers with dignity,” Dahl told DR Nyheder. “We need these people.”

Both Dahl and his wife Che said that they have a lot in common: island life, a dedication to family and a longing for simplicity. Dahl said that Asian woman are often willing to take jobs that Faroese women will not do.

Here is the full report, one Faorese woman does not like having to say hello to everyone she meets in the street there.  And this is not just a news story, the married and younger Asian women were one of the first things I noticed getting on the plane to Faroe.  (They looked not unhappy by the way.  The other thing I noticed right away was how many disparate groups on the flight seemed to know each other.  And that you have to be careful not to assume that people who look somewhat alike are brothers, or sisters, or parents and children.)

You might consider this a metaphor for some broader social trends around the world, albeit in this case unusually concentrated along the dimensions of geography and nation/territory.  Some women just don’t want to hang out with the guys — even the best guys — who are selling to a market of 50,000 people.  Other women are happy to move into that situation.  Solve for the equilibrium.

Comments

Waiting for Ray's comment on the Filipina brides. What about the the Faroe climate ? not too cold for them ?

Pinoy girls are the best. Mine is tall, very good body, cute face. I like her and she likes me, despite the age gap (half my middle age). I rate her 9/10. You can, if you want, get a girl that's Playboy model hot (go to the "Makati" district of Manila), but then you risk the chance she's in in for the money and you're in it for the sex, which is not our relationship at all. I could not buy a date in the USA, Greece, Thailand (well, I did have to buy a date there) despite being in the 1% and looking George Clooney hot. Do the math, solve for the equilibrium as TC says.

Inputs: claims same girlfriend has been half his age for years, despite the mathematical impossibility; claims to be in the 1% with great looks yet can't get a girlfriend in the USA or Greece.

Solve for the equilibrium: talking utter pish.

@Jealous Deek - depends on your age. I can find a girl my age, but she's middle aged. As for math, you can't touch me. EXP(i*pi) = -SQRT (1), T or F?

e to the product of pi times i equals minus one. Everybody here knows that.

Ray's not good at math, When I do the math, rich George Clooney types have no problem getting dates anywhere. But Ray's fun, his trolling is so blatant it's endearing.

He is lying on the internet. WHO does that?

George Cloony probably has charisma/game/ect in addition to having wealth. Being famous no doubt helps. If you're just a regular 50-year old guy with wealth, 25 year old girls from outside the trailer park aren't going to be interested. Typically, rich, divorced 50 year olds end up with women five or ten years younger than them.

I think Clooney could have found a better wife.

Based on observations from a year in Manila, they don't age well at all, unless they are of part Chinese ethnicity.

That's not true IMO, but then again, Swedish girls don't age very well either, nor do most blondes.

Especially after the rapefugees get to them.

There's a certain amount of the same phenomenon in Alaska as well, there being an unfavorable gender ratio there as well. Also, the Asian ladies make better life partners than American women, who are allergic to household chores and generally more demanding.

"..than American women, who are allergic to household chores and generally more demanding"

Hazel? ;)

Hazel Meade is a Heinlein heroine, and I don't think the poster is really female.

It would be somewhat of a shock for an actual human female to comment here.

"Hazel Meade is a Heinlein heroine, and I don’t think the poster is really female."

Hazel, is clearly female. It's weird how many people want to deny the fact that some women are Libertarians. It's some form of mild sexism. So mild that it's amusing more than anything else. And it's nearly pervasive.

"Some women just don’t want to hang out with the guys — even the best guys — who are selling to a market of 50,000 people. Other women are happy to move into that situation. Solve for the equilibrium."

Status. The ladies are seeking status more than men (per se)
For Faroese women (who receive the benefits of western education and upbringing) the islands are a cage, too small a pond for one aspiring (to be or catch) a big fish.
For Thai or Phillipine women, where opportunities are are constrained by poverty and culture, the Faroese can be a big step up, even if the climate's dull and food not so exciting.

Thailand has a TFR of 1.4. This will stop soon.

Why? Thailand will start forbidding women to emigrate?

Wow. I learn the most counter intuitive facts on MR. That fact made me look at the estimated TFR for Earth. Which is currently: 2.36 and on a downward trend. For comparison the Earth's TFR in the 1950's was 4.95

Yeah, but variance matters. Who is still doing the procreating? Niger's TFR is 7. Fertility is like musical chairs - it doesn't that we will all be below replacement fertility, what matters is who gets there last. The way things are going, Star Trek had the wrong demographics for the 23rd century.

Moar White Babby!

Exactly! For the sake of diversity!

Thailand's TFR was surprising to me, too, when I first learned about it. The level places it in the pack of Eastern and Southern European countries even though in PPP GDP per capita terms it is about equivalent to Mexico. Philippines, on the other hand, still has a very high fertility rate.

I think it was planned by the government, like the huge drawdown in Iranian fertility. Thailand went from 8 to 64 million in 100 years. Despite its reputation, the environment is cruddy and getting cruddier. Admittedly, my sample size is just two - Bangkok and Samui.

There is no equilibrium, society is in a state of permanent flux.

Believe it or not, Tyler is an economist and it's very probable that "solve for equilibrium" is in the context of supply and demand functions where "flux" is implicit in the model.

So the equilibrium exists in a stylised, fictional reality.

"So the equilibrium exists in a stylised, fictional reality."

Yes. Or phrased a different way, In the long run we're all dead.

Those stylized, abstract and most of time wrong models are what we use to try to understand what happens in the world. We don't/can't know the supply function in detail, but the concept is useful.

Rather than Thailand or the Philippines, I would think the correct bride sourcing country would be Japan. What with all the whale slaughter.

And the better people.

That's the point, though. If you're importing partners, you have to show you're better than their locals. Why would the Japanese see a life in the Faroes as an opportunity?

You're right. I did not think of that. They wouldn't import brides through the Internet, but some sort of program for single Japanese ladies to visit and be stirred in their Japanese soul by the natural beauty of the area? Do Japanese still emigrate?

They could take Japanese from past waves of migration, like Hawaiian or South American Japanese.

"You might consider this a metaphor for some broader social trends around the world..." - Is this the "I am not saying it's aliens, but it's aliens" of pundits?

Yes, because putting it this way sound much more broad-minded than "I find this fascinating because it reinforces all of my firmly-held prejudices."

What's more interesting, where the brides come from or where they don't come from?

Is puffin pie any good?

Precisely. One would think that Japanese women would be interested for the diet alone... But then, they aren't as economically motivated as are the Thai.

"Some women just don’t want to hang out with the guys — even the best guys — who are selling to a market of 50,000 people."

I don't think I'd interpret it that way. In the U.S., there is a similar pattern:

"There is a lot of awareness that younger people are leaving rural communities," Shepard said. "Where some of the men can come back, because there are a lot of traditionally male jobs like agriculture and industry to return to, many rural communities don't often provide the same opportunity to women. "

http://newsroom.unl.edu/releases/2014/05/15/Young+men+increasingly+outnumber+young+women+in+rural+Great+Plains

The rural men (working in agriculture and industry), are, in fact, selling to a market of hundreds of millions. And the same is true of the Faroe Islands with fish exports to Europe. In the past, women were looking for employed men who could support them and their families, and they could still find that in the Faroes as well as small towns in the Great Plains. But now they're looking for career opportunities for themselves and there just aren't many for women in rural places.

It's interesting how easily you've assumed that women can't / won't work in agriculture, industry, or fishing.

Is it interesting, or not interesting at all?

Is there employment data available for these industries? Do you think the male/female gap is due to massive discrimination keeping out all the women who want to be lumberjacks?

What on earth could have made me think women are less likely to pursue those careers in those industries? Could it be....data?

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat18.htm

I don't doubt that the proportion of women working in these fields is presently small. But we're talking about change here. It's interesting that you assume the change won't take the form of women working in non-traditional fields. And it's interesting that the same easily-made assumption is not prominent in other discussions where it would seem relevant.

Women entered the workforce en masse decades ago and have taken up many formerly male-dominated professions in large numbers -- in some cases, so much so that these fields have flipped to become heavily female dominated (e.g. veterinary services). They are also well represented in the kinds of manufacturing that are clean, safe, and depend on fine motor skills (e.g. electronics and especially textile manufacturing) rather than dirty, potentially dangerous jobs that require muscle strength. So, yes, I'm assuming that -- by this point -- if women were generally interested, willing, and able to work in, say, coal mines and sawmills, they would already be doing so in percentages greater than single-digits.

Sick burn! Better go back to 4chan and high five your buddies.

I think you may not appreciate the diversity and multiplicity of reasons that something can be described as "interesting".

"It’s interesting how easily you’ve assumed that women can’t / won’t work in agriculture, industry, or fishing."

I think the data indicates that first world women won't work in those fields. At least not to an equal degree with men.

For young women in the WEIRD west, big cities are Prince Charming's ball. Leave the villages and the drudgery of ordinary work and small town boys. Big cities offer the seductive allure of Mr. Big, Hedge Fund Millionaires, etc. etc. but only offer an endless carousel of shallow relationships, empty meaningless sex and broken hearts.

The seductive imagery of our global media probably is more destructive to community and family than international trade and immigration.

Those women who don't find Prince Charming in the big city can always move back to the sticks, and often do.

They don't move back to the sticks. They stay in the city, where they live in small apartments with their cats. Socially it's acceptable to be a childless woman in a big city; it's much more difficult in the suburbs.

It's a mix. Certainly some women realize that the city isn't the right fit for them and move somewhere that is and some don't. It seems to be highly correlated with a desire to raise kids. If a woman doesn't want children and she can't find an acceptable mate, she probably stays put.

They do, but usually after their fertility falls dramatically and their risk of carrying disabled babies rises significantly. Or they return as single mothers with mulatto or mischling kids in tow.

I'm sure you totally care about women's life satisfaction and not your own inability to have meaningless sex. Do you want to buy a bridge?

Projecting your own selfish narcissism perhaps?

My own satisfaction and destiny are irrelevant on the grand scheme. But I've got mine so perhaps I shouldn't care. However if men and women aren't getting together and the next generation isn't getting born that's something else. Otherwise the mass urban atomization has left men and women with a lower level of life satisfaction than before the patriarchy was dismantled. Sure we've got freedom, but where is the meaning? No one individual can change things when the market and the society are a sum of billions of independent individual actors and their decisions.

I have to think there is something basically wrong with this picture. First of all, the populations the article talks about are less than tiny, they are miniscule. Microscopic even. " . . .In places with 800 or fewer residents, . . ." Second, the male percentage of rural pops has been on a downward slide for decades - with women frequently outnumbering men. Oil and gas boom cities are an obvious exception, but they are also of limited area.

I recall with favor memories of business trips to ND and SD, and going out to the discos, where the women outnumbered the men by a goodly margin.

The article says they could not find any prior research into the decrease of rural populations sorted by gender - "He found no previous research that evaluated migration patterns of his target group, young adults who would be starting families." Which I just find hard to believe. Even if it is, there is plenty of reason in this work to second guess any immediate conclusions, such as "there is work for men but not women". Late in the article is a perfect example of why:
"Another surprise was that in some communities, young men left in greater numbers than young women -- but the ratio of males to females still increased. That's because the number of women in that community already was small. Blaine township in Clay County, Kan., for example, lost 11 of 19 males and 9 of 11 females from 2000 to 2010. Its ratio of males to females in the cohort changed from less than two men for every woman to four men for every woman."

Item one, look at the sample size. Item two, he's finding regional discrepancies in his own work.

There aren't career opportunities for anyone in rural communities. I would suggest throwing educational level into the analysis.

Meanwhile, black neighborhoods have far more young adult women than men. There's an equilibrium problem that could be bettered by black women moving to these places or meeting rural men online. Actually getting there seems difficult. Anecdotally, it seems rural white women are bringing more men from other areas than are rural white men, except for the occasional foreign bride.

Hypergamy in action, or: 5 minutes of alpha male c*ck
in London >>> 5 years of beta in Faroes

I wouldn't automatically assume that people are beta just because of low income, especially people reared in a harsh environment, where higher than the current norm of masculinity is probably to be expected.

sure, but most Faroese men are still beta. The women are going to cities where they can get alpha c*ck more anonymously

I find it interesting that the same woman who stated she enjoyed her anonymity in Denmark, also stated she moved because she had been abused on the Faroe Islands and could not talk about it there. Why did you choose to highlight the former and not the latter?

Further, "Tina said that the men on the Faroe Islands are at least part of the reason that the Faroese women leave." I agree, you could consider this a metaphor for broader social trends. Some guys simply do not want to adjust to changing markets, even when the failure to adjust is self-defeating. If trends are any indicator, the Asian women will not remain complicit in a subordinate role for long. Importing women is not a solution, it's a quick-fix that fails to address the underlying problem.

"it’s a quick-fix": in the long run we are all dead.

A consequence of this trend is women end up in the big cities where the most wealthy/powerful/smart/good-looking men concentrate, skewing the dating pool in our favor. NYC has been like this for a long time, now it's happening in cities everywhere across the globe.

Back in the day they could just sail out southerly and pillage some monastery towns to get their brides. Of course the EU put a stop to that.

"This drops the number of women of childbearing age dramatically, leading to a falling birth rate and an unsure future for the picturesque but rugged Faroes.

“It is a question of survival,” Hermann Oskarsson, a former chief economic advisor in the Faroe Islands, told Politiken newspaper. “The young women that should be here to give birth to children are gone.”"

Actuality, the Faroe Islands have a crude birth rate higher than that of Denmark, Sweden, or Norway. Their fertility rate of 2.37 is higher than anywhere else in the White world:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html

I think maybe you and your eth nat buddy need to get on the same page. He says 1.4.

Islands in the middle of nowhere seem to be poorer than would be expected based on their ethnic compositions. Iceland has a significantly lower rate of per-hour productivity than do other Nordic/Celtic countries(But has a similar GDP per capita since people work so many hours). New Zealand is less productive than Britain. Hawaii has silicon valley's White/Asian demographics, but it's no silicon valley. Maybe the same effect explains Israel's low performance, given its isolation from its neighbors.

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=PDB_LV

"You might consider this a metaphor for some broader social trends around the world, albeit in this case unusually concentrated along the dimensions of geography and nation/territory. Some women just don’t want to hang out with the guys — even the best guys — who are selling to a market of 50,000 people. Other women are happy to move into that situation. Solve for the equilibrium."

With pretty Nords finding their way to the big city and being replaced by the probably less intelligent Thais(I'd think the brides don't represent the best Thailand has to offer), is the equilibrium that less-desirable places become filled with less desirable people and visa versa? In America today, you have a migration of smart Whites into the major cities, so that even as the country is becoming less White, Manhattan and San Francisco are becoming more White. Around the time America is projected to have a non-White majority, San Francisco, currently majority non-White, is expected to become majority White:

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/nevius/article/Study-finds-S-F-s-ethnic-diversity-dwindling-6222673.php

Yet, this trend is in contrast to the pattern in California as a whole, which is Whites moving out to make room for non-White immigrants. Those Whites who are crowding into San Francisco, how many children will they have? They are smarter than the farmers in Kansas, but, as with much else, quantity has a quality of its own:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_fertility_rate

Even with the exodus of women, the Faroe Islands has a higher crude birth rate than Denmark, Norway, or Sweden. The foreign brides aren't numerous enough to account for it, besides, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden all have larger non-White populations that are pushing their birth rates up. So the Faroese Nords are having more genetically Nordic kids than are the Nords in mainland Scandinavia. They are not being replaced. The sterilizing effect of the big city will counter its allure. There is no equilibrium.

"taken things into their own hands" -- yeah they do. Subtle masturbation jokes ftw.

Comments for this post are closed