AZ
Enough of your games You have not attempted to address my question. please tell me what changed. DY outlined it nicely above In order for your “theory” to hold any water you must either assert that 1. People used to marry closer in age. 2. There was minimal population growth year to year or 3. The “crises always existed. (or 4. The percentage of boys born then was a lot higher than today)
If none of these statements are true the “age-gap” can’t be the cause of the “crises”
If you don’t know, or are afraid where the answer will lead you, just man up and say so. Please avoid vague responses that “the numbers were not imbalanced.” Please tell me what changed. This is very relevant because if none of these changed (which I belive to be the case btw, and from your reluctance to reply I take it that you do to)then your “age gap” simply cant be the cause.
DY
Wow ok. Thanks for replying. (Though I wouldn’t consider a 12% gender discrepancy anything remotely resembling reality)
Though if you please, and again this is hypothetical since you provide such convincing alternatives, what if the gender disparity remained the same, and people married women a few years younger, and generations grew year to year, and there was no crises. Would you consider changes in dating as possibly being a cause?