Well on men's side there is dissatisfaction and scarcity as well. There are few women willing and able to be a partner in a family . I know several high quality men who are single and not by their choice. And who were not sitting idle either .
I think technology will break this knot . Companion level AIs are not too far away. So humans will have a choice between perfect ai companion and imperfect human.
There is an excellent indy german movie "I am made for you" which explores this theme in depth. And from mainly female perspective.
Humans will choose what works and satisfies them . Current arrangements do not. And I bet technology will solve this problem faster than culture will.
P.s. if not for technology i believe cultures would solve the issue eventually. But it would take several generations .
Hard to be sure! But Mrs. Apple Pie - herself a woman of the very female persuasion - had qualms about:
* feminism seems to have been mostly an elite phenomenon until the 21st century
Maybe true if you use a specific definition of elite, or if our experiences were atypical. We had poor feminist relatives growing up in the 80s.
* Women are so angry because men don't want to invest in having children.
Maybe things are different in Scandinavia, but around here, both sexes have simply extended their adolescent years further and further into their prime childbearing years, as half of them chase educational credentials and the other half spend increasing amounts of time on SnapChat or on drugs.
* They pay tuition fees to make their daughters self-supporting or even high-earning.
If this is what people are consciously trying to do, it really doesn't work. Because those educated, self-supporting, high-earning women end up scaring off men who can't earn as much as they make, and when they do marry they still have fewer children.
Though it may not really be central to your idea, my own point of disagreement is strongest when you claim that "slim reproductive chances enrage us all." Because Tove, most ladies just aren't very much like you. Most women happily go through college, feel a glow of accomplishment as their friends and family praise them for their degree, marry late, and have somewhere from 0-2 children. For them, reproduction is a much weaker drive than following arbitrary social norms and receiving smiles from their friends and family.
You see, one day, long ago, in a far away land called America, young Mister Apple Pie was still in college - that is, before he got his Mr. degree. He went around in a black trench coat lifting weights, solving differential equations, and composing music, and he was enough of a catch that ladies would see him on the street and give him rides. This is more or less how Miss Apple Pie talked him into making pies with her for the rest of his life. But there were other ladies interested as well. One of them, after convincing him to study for a physical anthropology exam, wiggled, and batted her eyes, and asked young Mr. Apple Pie what he was planning after college. He told her, "I want to have twelve babies!" And she laughed, and laughed, and laughed, with that kind of nervous, bug-eyed expression that said she took him seriously enough to actually imagine this, but found it bizarre, overwhelming, and utterly beyond the pale. She was not interested in her reproductive prospects. Instead, what she wanted to hear from young Mr. Apple Pie was: "I plan to be a combination engineer-doctor-lawyer, the better to shower my beloved bride with a never-ending stream of material objects to fill her empty, childless life."
That was funny! And I mostly agree. I think Mrs Apple Pie's description of womenkind is rather accurate, both in Scandinavia and in America.
Above all, I think women are hardwired to seek male investment. Until the 1960s or so, children tended to come automatically, so women probably never evolved any strong wish to have many children. Just like men evolved to crave sexual relations, women evolved to crave male investment. Neither sex evolved to strongly want children. So I think your youth acquaintance who didn't want 12 children is rather typical. She focused on material wealth, because for our ancestors, that was the difficult part. How did the story end? Did you have 12 children?
I thought quite a bit about whether it really is a good idea for women who wish to marry well to become high-earners. I think it is, everything else being equal, because there is a certain degree of assortative mating in our society. High-earning women run a higher risk of not getting married at all and a few women who are not professionally successful end up marrying high-earners. But most don't. So for the individual woman who wants to marry a high-earner, I think the best thing she can do is to become a high-earner herself.
> Above all, I think women are hardwired to seek male investment.
Likely more than males being hardwired to seek female investment, yes. But promiscuity rates are still high. Simply looking around, I don't observe most females being willing to sacrifice their opportunities for short term sexual networking for a partner who will invest in them. Those females that *do* commit to a strategy that leans hard on finding a stable husband/provider/partner tend to be religiously conservative, with attitudes towards sexuality that look somewhat dysfunctional from the outside (e.g. "masturbation is sinful"). Such women are definitely not in the majority; the average woman has something like ten lifetime sexual partners. So yes, a man who invests in the relationship is the *ideal*, but so is a man with smouldering good looks.
> How did the story end? Did you have 12 children?
Twelve was always a bargaining tactic; we had six. And the story didn't really end; there's still some ambivalence about the possibility of a little seven, but two and six were very hard.
> So for the individual woman who wants to marry a high-earner, I think the best thing she can do is to become a high-earner herself.
If she wants to restrict herself to traditional avenues, OK. But given growing female overrepresentation in education, and the risks to limiting the pool of high-earning men, I don't think this traditional avenue is very effective. High earning men aren't looking to marry a breadwinner:
The key is to *meet* high-earning men, and then *charm* them with beauty, elegance, style, discretion, and wit. Going to college functions, enrolling in a few low-level classes in prestige fields, or working on campus or nearby restaurants is wiser than the traditional route which will saddle you with debt, strange values, and expectations of a career which will harm rather than help your reproductive prospects.
Given the choice between Amy, who is stressed out by her course load, dresses eclectically, babbles about White Privilege, and has good career prospects, or Beth, who exercises religiously, focuses on her makeup and dress, and keeps abreast of the 101 Interesting Things To Talk About... well, who is Prince Chad going to pick?
I think women are hardwired to seek the male investment they can get, in every environment. If promiscuity is what gives women the attention of men with resources, then they will be rather promiscuous. I think the book Mother Nature by Sarah Blaffer Hrdy describes the flexibility of female nature very well in that sense. And yes. Women care for good looks.
>Twelve was always a bargaining tactic; we had six.
Congratulations! Then you and I live more similar lives than I imagined.
>The key is to *meet* high-earning men, and then *charm* them with beauty, elegance, style, discretion, and wit.
Probably, yes, at least to some degree. And I think that is a reason why women are resentful. Playing it clean doesn't pay off that well: When superficial and deceptive Beth wins over honest and hardworking Amy, Amy feels that life isn't fair to her. The same phenomenon takes place on the male side: Honest and hardworking men who play by the official instructions lose out to Chads who know how to do it better.
> I think women are hardwired to seek the male investment they can get, in every environment.
Well, it could be that we're reading more into your position that you really intend, but, it really sounds to Mr. and Mrs. Apple Pie like you are going far overboard when you say that women want a man who will invest in them above all. Do you really mean to claim that every sexual strategy most women pursue is ultimately for the sake of convincing a mate to commit to caring for them and supporting their offspring?
This just doesn't match what we see. To most women, traits like confidence, height, or musical ability matter as much as (if not more than) investment. In fact - though I'm skeptical that it's really the case - there are many psychologists who even argue that men who are less willing to invest in a partner are more attractive to women: https://pipubs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/The-Dark-Triad-Personality-1.pdf
> [Y]ou and I live more similar lives than I imagined.
Yep. As I wrote the first half of this reply, I was holding a little tantruming Six on my lap while Mrs. Apple Pie caught a break downstairs. Toddlers can be very noisy when they don't get their way!
Well on men's side there is dissatisfaction and scarcity as well. There are few women willing and able to be a partner in a family . I know several high quality men who are single and not by their choice. And who were not sitting idle either .
I think technology will break this knot . Companion level AIs are not too far away. So humans will have a choice between perfect ai companion and imperfect human.
There is an excellent indy german movie "I am made for you" which explores this theme in depth. And from mainly female perspective.
Humans will choose what works and satisfies them . Current arrangements do not. And I bet technology will solve this problem faster than culture will.
P.s. if not for technology i believe cultures would solve the issue eventually. But it would take several generations .
Nice article, Tove - about 80% right makes for an interesting read.
That's good enough, I guess.
Which 20 percent do you find wrong?
Hard to be sure! But Mrs. Apple Pie - herself a woman of the very female persuasion - had qualms about:
* feminism seems to have been mostly an elite phenomenon until the 21st century
Maybe true if you use a specific definition of elite, or if our experiences were atypical. We had poor feminist relatives growing up in the 80s.
* Women are so angry because men don't want to invest in having children.
Maybe things are different in Scandinavia, but around here, both sexes have simply extended their adolescent years further and further into their prime childbearing years, as half of them chase educational credentials and the other half spend increasing amounts of time on SnapChat or on drugs.
* They pay tuition fees to make their daughters self-supporting or even high-earning.
If this is what people are consciously trying to do, it really doesn't work. Because those educated, self-supporting, high-earning women end up scaring off men who can't earn as much as they make, and when they do marry they still have fewer children.
Though it may not really be central to your idea, my own point of disagreement is strongest when you claim that "slim reproductive chances enrage us all." Because Tove, most ladies just aren't very much like you. Most women happily go through college, feel a glow of accomplishment as their friends and family praise them for their degree, marry late, and have somewhere from 0-2 children. For them, reproduction is a much weaker drive than following arbitrary social norms and receiving smiles from their friends and family.
You see, one day, long ago, in a far away land called America, young Mister Apple Pie was still in college - that is, before he got his Mr. degree. He went around in a black trench coat lifting weights, solving differential equations, and composing music, and he was enough of a catch that ladies would see him on the street and give him rides. This is more or less how Miss Apple Pie talked him into making pies with her for the rest of his life. But there were other ladies interested as well. One of them, after convincing him to study for a physical anthropology exam, wiggled, and batted her eyes, and asked young Mr. Apple Pie what he was planning after college. He told her, "I want to have twelve babies!" And she laughed, and laughed, and laughed, with that kind of nervous, bug-eyed expression that said she took him seriously enough to actually imagine this, but found it bizarre, overwhelming, and utterly beyond the pale. She was not interested in her reproductive prospects. Instead, what she wanted to hear from young Mr. Apple Pie was: "I plan to be a combination engineer-doctor-lawyer, the better to shower my beloved bride with a never-ending stream of material objects to fill her empty, childless life."
That was funny! And I mostly agree. I think Mrs Apple Pie's description of womenkind is rather accurate, both in Scandinavia and in America.
Above all, I think women are hardwired to seek male investment. Until the 1960s or so, children tended to come automatically, so women probably never evolved any strong wish to have many children. Just like men evolved to crave sexual relations, women evolved to crave male investment. Neither sex evolved to strongly want children. So I think your youth acquaintance who didn't want 12 children is rather typical. She focused on material wealth, because for our ancestors, that was the difficult part. How did the story end? Did you have 12 children?
I thought quite a bit about whether it really is a good idea for women who wish to marry well to become high-earners. I think it is, everything else being equal, because there is a certain degree of assortative mating in our society. High-earning women run a higher risk of not getting married at all and a few women who are not professionally successful end up marrying high-earners. But most don't. So for the individual woman who wants to marry a high-earner, I think the best thing she can do is to become a high-earner herself.
> Above all, I think women are hardwired to seek male investment.
Likely more than males being hardwired to seek female investment, yes. But promiscuity rates are still high. Simply looking around, I don't observe most females being willing to sacrifice their opportunities for short term sexual networking for a partner who will invest in them. Those females that *do* commit to a strategy that leans hard on finding a stable husband/provider/partner tend to be religiously conservative, with attitudes towards sexuality that look somewhat dysfunctional from the outside (e.g. "masturbation is sinful"). Such women are definitely not in the majority; the average woman has something like ten lifetime sexual partners. So yes, a man who invests in the relationship is the *ideal*, but so is a man with smouldering good looks.
> How did the story end? Did you have 12 children?
Twelve was always a bargaining tactic; we had six. And the story didn't really end; there's still some ambivalence about the possibility of a little seven, but two and six were very hard.
> So for the individual woman who wants to marry a high-earner, I think the best thing she can do is to become a high-earner herself.
If she wants to restrict herself to traditional avenues, OK. But given growing female overrepresentation in education, and the risks to limiting the pool of high-earning men, I don't think this traditional avenue is very effective. High earning men aren't looking to marry a breadwinner:
https://qz.com/work/1607995/most-men-in-the-top-1-of-us-earners-have-a-spouse-who-stays-home
The key is to *meet* high-earning men, and then *charm* them with beauty, elegance, style, discretion, and wit. Going to college functions, enrolling in a few low-level classes in prestige fields, or working on campus or nearby restaurants is wiser than the traditional route which will saddle you with debt, strange values, and expectations of a career which will harm rather than help your reproductive prospects.
Given the choice between Amy, who is stressed out by her course load, dresses eclectically, babbles about White Privilege, and has good career prospects, or Beth, who exercises religiously, focuses on her makeup and dress, and keeps abreast of the 101 Interesting Things To Talk About... well, who is Prince Chad going to pick?
I think women are hardwired to seek the male investment they can get, in every environment. If promiscuity is what gives women the attention of men with resources, then they will be rather promiscuous. I think the book Mother Nature by Sarah Blaffer Hrdy describes the flexibility of female nature very well in that sense. And yes. Women care for good looks.
>Twelve was always a bargaining tactic; we had six.
Congratulations! Then you and I live more similar lives than I imagined.
>The key is to *meet* high-earning men, and then *charm* them with beauty, elegance, style, discretion, and wit.
Probably, yes, at least to some degree. And I think that is a reason why women are resentful. Playing it clean doesn't pay off that well: When superficial and deceptive Beth wins over honest and hardworking Amy, Amy feels that life isn't fair to her. The same phenomenon takes place on the male side: Honest and hardworking men who play by the official instructions lose out to Chads who know how to do it better.
> I think women are hardwired to seek the male investment they can get, in every environment.
Well, it could be that we're reading more into your position that you really intend, but, it really sounds to Mr. and Mrs. Apple Pie like you are going far overboard when you say that women want a man who will invest in them above all. Do you really mean to claim that every sexual strategy most women pursue is ultimately for the sake of convincing a mate to commit to caring for them and supporting their offspring?
This just doesn't match what we see. To most women, traits like confidence, height, or musical ability matter as much as (if not more than) investment. In fact - though I'm skeptical that it's really the case - there are many psychologists who even argue that men who are less willing to invest in a partner are more attractive to women: https://pipubs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/The-Dark-Triad-Personality-1.pdf
> [Y]ou and I live more similar lives than I imagined.
Yep. As I wrote the first half of this reply, I was holding a little tantruming Six on my lap while Mrs. Apple Pie caught a break downstairs. Toddlers can be very noisy when they don't get their way!