I think it's called modern science. Male offspring are much weaker than females offspring and therefore used to die at a higher rate. With modern medicine we are able to save more male babies.
This kind of explains why dating was so bad for me in my more populated hometown and why I was able to meet my husband in the middle of nowhere Kansas.
It is no necessary to be a University Professor to understand why this happen. If you look the map of america, women like to live in the most confortable, warm, crouded, city structure, of America. Women like confort and validation. Places not confortable with a minimal life style does not fit on women.
oKAY...let's talk statistics. Research and statistics and social psychology and medicine have been my career for 30+ years and statistics is my favorite. All of the data in this original post AND implied in the first part of your second sentence ("If you look the map of america") are descriptive in nature; not inferential or analytical. As such they cannot make causative or predictive or probability statements. A descriptive statistic, using your statement and some of the statements in the original post, would be, for example, the average number of women in any particular state or county; or, the percentage of women in some geographical areas versus others. BUT the CARDINAL SIN in critical thinking and statistics is misinterpreting or drawing misleading conclusions from data by ignoring statistical assumptions or proper analysis methods. When your second statement went from "if you look the map of america," to "women like to live in the most comfortable, warm, crouded, city structure...." you were revealing your biases and emotions, not anything statistically credible or logically reasonable. You cannot infer that the women like or do not like where they live because the data to which you refer supports nothing more than x# of women live in x, y, and z. Moreover, your most significant error in critical thinking (critical thinking is necessary for--gosh, I don't know--the advancement of civilization!) is this statement: women like comfort and validation. That statement reveals your sex/gender biases and comes OUT OF THE BLUE, not connected to any real hard data. So when you say what you said "is statistic" you are in great error. NOTHING you said has any logical or statistical merit to it. You have shared little more than your biases and sexism. So you have NO basis or credibility to call ME emotional. I am NOT the one that needs to "stay focus o data." YOU are the one that needs to learn WHAT CONSTITUTES DATA
His discussion points out the uneven distribution... but I don't get the point as to why this is a male issue. He seems to bang on that drum... when areas that are slightly more female have their issues too? Or is this all self-selected.
Totally, the more an area leans toward women, the more dating becomes debauched and a race to the bottom, with men demanding more and more concessions in order to pick one over the other. The author’s focus is men though, and men not having women around diminishes their motivation and prevents community growth… so all these places where there’s majority men, will likely become stagnant. It’s also psychologically damaging and demoralizing for them not to have any hope of finding someone, in a way that’s different than it is for women
I’ve lived mostly in male-dominated rural areas. It’s nothing sinister or related to women being too picky as at least one commenter suggests. It’s because of the jobs concentrated in those areas like oil fields, coal mines, logging, and military bases.
Kristen, you will appreciate the faults of men in masculine professions after you’ve dated one of their domesticated counterparts that make you walk street-side and can’t figure out how to navigate in a small city… my personal favorite is when you break up and they have the lack of pride enough to ask for a portion of meals out to be paid back to them
Wow this comment is bonkers sexist. We are not animals to be domesticated. Shitty people exist of both sex and applying stereotypes to blue call workers is beyond offensive and frankly imbecilic. Imagine for a moment if a man talked about how men will appreciate a trad woman after dating nothing but liberal city dwelling feral ones. Not a great description is it. Look in the mirror and realize you are part of the problem.
😂 Cale, the problem is the gender confusion that has been thrown at everyone the last 30 years… I wear dresses every day and can cook; I firmly believe men should have a better sense of vigilance and navigation than I do, if he does not, somebody else help him cross the street and figure out where he parked his car. It won’t be me
I find the article less than informative bc it begs so many questions. First and foremost, is this a change in birth rates of boy vs girls, or a (re)location question? Is this really a new development? Without some context, I can't say I'm concerned...
I guess us women need to get back to the basics and start reproducing again. With the abortion ban that shouldn't be impossible. Once women return to their rightful reproductive place, I'm sure they can lower their standards again and not be so picky when dating and marrying men. 🫢😃
Guess it also needed a laughing emoji. Yes it is very much tongue and cheek. Not wanting to forget that it does represent a certain percentage of the population. Very dangerous ideology that is alive and well
I got the facetiousness on my first read of your initial post. After your second post I just wanted to respond with my opinion as a 65 year old man who has always chosen to not have children. In my experience “that certain percentage of the population” (male and female)you seem to be referring to would not counsel the lowering of standards on the part of women who wanted children and a family nor are they predominantly motivated by ideology. (Dangerous?) And I think abortion “ban” is overstating the current situation. So far that political football may be losing some traction (a good thing for our governance) and actual abortion laws will settle into something the majority of Americans agree upon. Remember “safe, legal and rare”? As opposed to full term abortion btw.
I’m just working with what you wrote and hope I haven’t missed the mark, but I’m almost guessing now based on my identification with what I perceive as your sentiments:
I used to feel that way about let’s say those people and their ideology, and I’m glad I do not feel that way anymore. I was the one messed up with ideology
The last four years of Covid, leftist, authoritarianism and destructive social and fiscal policy.. well I had to change with the changes. It’s turned out literally better than I could have imagined.
The threat of “those people” has been overblown by the powers that should not be. For the most part such people want to be left alone to live their lives. The danger potential exists and I will speak to it if I encounter it (already making sure my tools are sharp) but my heart won’t afford the ideas and ideals that I formerly used to “feel safe”. That was a failure and confinement. Insofar as I was feminism aligned and Democrat inclined….. well I’m not anymore. Too much damage and deceit woke me up. All I did was my best to be honest especially with myself.
It is not going to happen. The global fertility rate has been sinking almost everywhere. The US has been below replacement fertility for 50 years. Paying people to breed hasn’t worked. Abortion is the slightest factor. Even Mexico now has a fertility rate as low as the US does.
Richard's posts are always so insightful and full of information. I have in my own life, observed the issues that are present in society. As I female, I do support males, and the ones who are in a better state of mind have always appreciated it. It saddens me that there isn't more of a reach of support for my males, or supports that can reach them. I am appreciative and inspired by Richard's research and objective.
1. Are there more women in southern counties because the Black men have been incarcerated?
2. Were the incarcerated counted, which would ramp up the male population of some counties? Similarly, what about military bases, which I bet also skew male?
3. As more men move to an area, do women flee it? Or is there a tipping point where X percentage of men causes women to flee it?
4. Are women fleeing adverse political counties for friendlier ones? Are men going from progressive counties to patriarchal ones?
5. Why in general are men moving to where they are? Is it jobs, such as fracking fields in ND? Or something else (I had a friend move to PA from NJ because of the more liberal gun laws, for example)?
6. Are changes in the composition of local industries (especially the loss of them) causing the changes in population?
As for Alaska, that ratio is the norm, I believe. As women who go there are told, The odds are good, but the goods are odd.
Hmm, interesting question regarding which counties are credited for the purpose of these statistics with the long term** prison population since prison locations tend to be skew quite rural (similar for the military).
The prison population in rural counties looks to be in total perhaps 0.5% of the _total_ US population (and heavily male skewed) so yeah, it could indeed be a meaningful contributor to the effect.
** >1 year terms, so not so much county jails which IIUC mostly hold inmates whose outside residence is in the same county.
Just from the experience of having been assigned to some of these states, I’m wondering what the age range is of the men and women there?
Idaho for example, it looks like it would be a blast to date there if you’re a woman, but every place I’ve been assigned, ended up being a case of all the men being too young or too old. I’m shocked it’s so green on the map, because in real life, it didn’t feel that way.
Having dated in central and western Montana (not quite Idaho, but pretty darn close), its a lot of dead fish and elk in dating profiles and the strong implication that men in small towns talk making it a bit of a hostile environment for getting comfortable with anyone.
Then again, everyone in small towns talk. But it feels different when you're trying to date someone.
Men were rife for the picking, but I just didn't click with a lot of them. I did end up finding one and we're getting married this summer, but I definitely feel lucky as it comes to finding him. We have similar values and personality, but I don't find that too often with the men from around here.
Oh, that’s wonderful you found someone. I hear you on the small town thing, going out with the wrong guy in a small town definitely has lasting consequences; and if you’re stuck there, nightmare scenario…
In Idaho, I didn’t mind the emphasis on hunting so much; but the ten year age gaps in either direction made it weird. My preference is someone who at least was in high school at the same time as me… be it a few years one direction or the other, as long as there was at least a year or two when we both were there.
“Places without women”? No such place exists…. I looked 😂
I really enjoyed your interview with Theo Von. It was Excellent. I watched it from beginning to end! Great work and I support the work you all do here
I think it's called modern science. Male offspring are much weaker than females offspring and therefore used to die at a higher rate. With modern medicine we are able to save more male babies.
Darn medicine!
Where did all of the women go? Or maybe a better question is where did all of the men suddenly come from?
What purpose does the title of this post serve?
This kind of explains why dating was so bad for me in my more populated hometown and why I was able to meet my husband in the middle of nowhere Kansas.
It is no necessary to be a University Professor to understand why this happen. If you look the map of america, women like to live in the most confortable, warm, crouded, city structure, of America. Women like confort and validation. Places not confortable with a minimal life style does not fit on women.
wow! Thank for the reminder that stereotyping, sexism, and disregard for critical thinking are alive and well.
It is statistic, no critical thinking or sexism. Stop to be emotional and stay focus on data.
oKAY...let's talk statistics. Research and statistics and social psychology and medicine have been my career for 30+ years and statistics is my favorite. All of the data in this original post AND implied in the first part of your second sentence ("If you look the map of america") are descriptive in nature; not inferential or analytical. As such they cannot make causative or predictive or probability statements. A descriptive statistic, using your statement and some of the statements in the original post, would be, for example, the average number of women in any particular state or county; or, the percentage of women in some geographical areas versus others. BUT the CARDINAL SIN in critical thinking and statistics is misinterpreting or drawing misleading conclusions from data by ignoring statistical assumptions or proper analysis methods. When your second statement went from "if you look the map of america," to "women like to live in the most comfortable, warm, crouded, city structure...." you were revealing your biases and emotions, not anything statistically credible or logically reasonable. You cannot infer that the women like or do not like where they live because the data to which you refer supports nothing more than x# of women live in x, y, and z. Moreover, your most significant error in critical thinking (critical thinking is necessary for--gosh, I don't know--the advancement of civilization!) is this statement: women like comfort and validation. That statement reveals your sex/gender biases and comes OUT OF THE BLUE, not connected to any real hard data. So when you say what you said "is statistic" you are in great error. NOTHING you said has any logical or statistical merit to it. You have shared little more than your biases and sexism. So you have NO basis or credibility to call ME emotional. I am NOT the one that needs to "stay focus o data." YOU are the one that needs to learn WHAT CONSTITUTES DATA
Safety, too.
I disagree, rurale area are more safe the urban area. The majority of crimes are in the urban area.
Only because there are more people in urban areas and people cause crime.
Should we not also be concerned about the Majority female areas?
What issues does that raise?
Look to K-12 education and other areas of gynocracy e.g.
Kids raised to be scared to leave the house.
His discussion points out the uneven distribution... but I don't get the point as to why this is a male issue. He seems to bang on that drum... when areas that are slightly more female have their issues too? Or is this all self-selected.
Totally, the more an area leans toward women, the more dating becomes debauched and a race to the bottom, with men demanding more and more concessions in order to pick one over the other. The author’s focus is men though, and men not having women around diminishes their motivation and prevents community growth… so all these places where there’s majority men, will likely become stagnant. It’s also psychologically damaging and demoralizing for them not to have any hope of finding someone, in a way that’s different than it is for women
I’ve lived mostly in male-dominated rural areas. It’s nothing sinister or related to women being too picky as at least one commenter suggests. It’s because of the jobs concentrated in those areas like oil fields, coal mines, logging, and military bases.
Kristen, you will appreciate the faults of men in masculine professions after you’ve dated one of their domesticated counterparts that make you walk street-side and can’t figure out how to navigate in a small city… my personal favorite is when you break up and they have the lack of pride enough to ask for a portion of meals out to be paid back to them
Wow this comment is bonkers sexist. We are not animals to be domesticated. Shitty people exist of both sex and applying stereotypes to blue call workers is beyond offensive and frankly imbecilic. Imagine for a moment if a man talked about how men will appreciate a trad woman after dating nothing but liberal city dwelling feral ones. Not a great description is it. Look in the mirror and realize you are part of the problem.
😂 Cale, the problem is the gender confusion that has been thrown at everyone the last 30 years… I wear dresses every day and can cook; I firmly believe men should have a better sense of vigilance and navigation than I do, if he does not, somebody else help him cross the street and figure out where he parked his car. It won’t be me
Jesus, a note of simple good sense.
I find the article less than informative bc it begs so many questions. First and foremost, is this a change in birth rates of boy vs girls, or a (re)location question? Is this really a new development? Without some context, I can't say I'm concerned...
It could be migration due to jobs? 🤔 Hopefully they’ll delving into it for a follow up article
Btw, left me share my view from Spain.
Spain is more or less the side of Texas, with people Very concentrated in 2 Big cities
And although there are sligthly more women than men in big cities, this is driven by old women..between the youngs, we dont see that difference.
So, we have 2 iptions:
1. We increase the options of females in rural areas and decrece their options in urban by increasing the options of males there
2. We imvent robot wifes and husdbands
I guess us women need to get back to the basics and start reproducing again. With the abortion ban that shouldn't be impossible. Once women return to their rightful reproductive place, I'm sure they can lower their standards again and not be so picky when dating and marrying men. 🫢😃
What abortion ban?
LMAO
Hoping this is tongue in cheek.
Guess it also needed a laughing emoji. Yes it is very much tongue and cheek. Not wanting to forget that it does represent a certain percentage of the population. Very dangerous ideology that is alive and well
I got the facetiousness on my first read of your initial post. After your second post I just wanted to respond with my opinion as a 65 year old man who has always chosen to not have children. In my experience “that certain percentage of the population” (male and female)you seem to be referring to would not counsel the lowering of standards on the part of women who wanted children and a family nor are they predominantly motivated by ideology. (Dangerous?) And I think abortion “ban” is overstating the current situation. So far that political football may be losing some traction (a good thing for our governance) and actual abortion laws will settle into something the majority of Americans agree upon. Remember “safe, legal and rare”? As opposed to full term abortion btw.
I’m just working with what you wrote and hope I haven’t missed the mark, but I’m almost guessing now based on my identification with what I perceive as your sentiments:
I used to feel that way about let’s say those people and their ideology, and I’m glad I do not feel that way anymore. I was the one messed up with ideology
The last four years of Covid, leftist, authoritarianism and destructive social and fiscal policy.. well I had to change with the changes. It’s turned out literally better than I could have imagined.
The threat of “those people” has been overblown by the powers that should not be. For the most part such people want to be left alone to live their lives. The danger potential exists and I will speak to it if I encounter it (already making sure my tools are sharp) but my heart won’t afford the ideas and ideals that I formerly used to “feel safe”. That was a failure and confinement. Insofar as I was feminism aligned and Democrat inclined….. well I’m not anymore. Too much damage and deceit woke me up. All I did was my best to be honest especially with myself.
It is not going to happen. The global fertility rate has been sinking almost everywhere. The US has been below replacement fertility for 50 years. Paying people to breed hasn’t worked. Abortion is the slightest factor. Even Mexico now has a fertility rate as low as the US does.
I agree with you 100%. I was just being facetious.
Never be facetious without a smiley face. That’s the law.
You're right. I rushed and forgot
Richard's posts are always so insightful and full of information. I have in my own life, observed the issues that are present in society. As I female, I do support males, and the ones who are in a better state of mind have always appreciated it. It saddens me that there isn't more of a reach of support for my males, or supports that can reach them. I am appreciative and inspired by Richard's research and objective.
- Jen from Australia
Men, not appreciating Jen is ipso facto evidence that you are not in your right mind. You have your orders.
This is fascinating and begs so many follow ups:
1. Are there more women in southern counties because the Black men have been incarcerated?
2. Were the incarcerated counted, which would ramp up the male population of some counties? Similarly, what about military bases, which I bet also skew male?
3. As more men move to an area, do women flee it? Or is there a tipping point where X percentage of men causes women to flee it?
4. Are women fleeing adverse political counties for friendlier ones? Are men going from progressive counties to patriarchal ones?
5. Why in general are men moving to where they are? Is it jobs, such as fracking fields in ND? Or something else (I had a friend move to PA from NJ because of the more liberal gun laws, for example)?
6. Are changes in the composition of local industries (especially the loss of them) causing the changes in population?
As for Alaska, that ratio is the norm, I believe. As women who go there are told, The odds are good, but the goods are odd.
Hmm, interesting question regarding which counties are credited for the purpose of these statistics with the long term** prison population since prison locations tend to be skew quite rural (similar for the military).
The prison population in rural counties looks to be in total perhaps 0.5% of the _total_ US population (and heavily male skewed) so yeah, it could indeed be a meaningful contributor to the effect.
** >1 year terms, so not so much county jails which IIUC mostly hold inmates whose outside residence is in the same county.
Just from the experience of having been assigned to some of these states, I’m wondering what the age range is of the men and women there?
Idaho for example, it looks like it would be a blast to date there if you’re a woman, but every place I’ve been assigned, ended up being a case of all the men being too young or too old. I’m shocked it’s so green on the map, because in real life, it didn’t feel that way.
Having dated in central and western Montana (not quite Idaho, but pretty darn close), its a lot of dead fish and elk in dating profiles and the strong implication that men in small towns talk making it a bit of a hostile environment for getting comfortable with anyone.
Then again, everyone in small towns talk. But it feels different when you're trying to date someone.
Men were rife for the picking, but I just didn't click with a lot of them. I did end up finding one and we're getting married this summer, but I definitely feel lucky as it comes to finding him. We have similar values and personality, but I don't find that too often with the men from around here.
Oh, that’s wonderful you found someone. I hear you on the small town thing, going out with the wrong guy in a small town definitely has lasting consequences; and if you’re stuck there, nightmare scenario…
In Idaho, I didn’t mind the emphasis on hunting so much; but the ten year age gaps in either direction made it weird. My preference is someone who at least was in high school at the same time as me… be it a few years one direction or the other, as long as there was at least a year or two when we both were there.