September 12, 2014 1:31 am at 1:31 am #613662recipesMember
Folks you know this whole Shidduch crises theory. Well guess what folks on the world, not by Orthodox Jews in the world at large on average there are 86 single men to 100 single women, google it.
So what’s going on?!September 12, 2014 2:52 am at 2:52 am #1032043
What’s the kashya? On them or on us?September 12, 2014 3:18 am at 3:18 am #1032044
In nursing homes, the ratio is even worse.September 12, 2014 3:42 am at 3:42 am #1032046popa_bar_abbaParticipant
I don’t believe that number.September 12, 2014 4:48 am at 4:48 am #1032048
86 single men to 100 single women
and the first result will be to the US Census Bureau with exactly that figure.September 12, 2014 4:50 am at 4:50 am #1032049
If the mods permit a very neutral census.gov link:September 12, 2014 4:54 am at 4:54 am #1032050
But yehudayona’s point may explain it: Women tend to outlive men so they’re single when they’re older after there spouse and other older men passed away, thus skewing figures showing more unmarried women than men.
Though with this large a disparity I don’t think that fact could nearly explain it all. In which case the frum communities own disparity on this point may simply be part of the larger natural similar general statistic in the world population, rather than being explained primarily due to an age gap. (In the sense that an age gap is any different than general society or otherwise a natural occurrence of marriage.)September 12, 2014 5:09 am at 5:09 am #1032051
This statistic refers to the entire population 15 and above, whereas the shidduchim population referred to in the discussion of the shidduchim crisis is in a much narrower range.
The key to understanding the 86/100 number is that statistic which has a huge disparity between male and female widows. To whatever extent it reflects more deaths of males due to violence than to females, it would seemingly not apply to the frum population.September 12, 2014 5:13 am at 5:13 am #1032052
Lior, aside from my previous post (which I wrote before seeing yours), even if age gap is similar, our population growth rate is undoubtedly higher.September 12, 2014 10:25 am at 10:25 am #1032053akupermaParticipant
1. Men live shorter lives (this has been the case since modern medicine eliminated what had been the leading cause of death in women: childbirth complications)
2. In many cultures women are not valued, and female babies are frequently aborted (not a problem among frum Jews, butg a serious problem in several countries including China and India)
3. Wars sometimes increase the unbalance, but many countries have taken to killing women and children, which of course reduces the problem (e.g. after World War II, Germany had serious shortages of males since the Allies killed many German men but few German women, but among Jews this wasn’t a factor since the Germans murdered women equally with men)September 12, 2014 11:59 am at 11:59 am #1032054
Akuperma, these are US census statistics.September 12, 2014 1:45 pm at 1:45 pm #1032055
If you take the census stats kindly provided by Lior snd subtract widowed from total, you’ll find that there are more men than women. I’m guessing this is a fairly accurate reflection of my original point that the overall gap is due to women outliving men. I suspect there’s an age breakdown somewhere on the census website, but I’m too lazy to look.September 12, 2014 2:29 pm at 2:29 pm #1032056akupermaParticipant
DaasYochid: Women tend to be healthier and live longer than men (the only reason this wasn’t a factor in the past was due to high maternal mortality, which Baruch ha-Shem, is history). That comfortably explain the statistic you consulted. The gap is much smaller if limited to newborns.September 12, 2014 4:59 pm at 4:59 pm #1032057
Yes, akuperma, that’s what I was saying, plus commenting that additionally, death due to violence is more common among males, and that this discrepancy doesn’t affect the demographics in the frum community.
My comment regarding your post was that Germany, China,and India were not included in the stats mentioned in the OP.September 14, 2014 7:18 pm at 7:18 pm #1032058Torah613TorahParticipant
That’s not a useful statistic because above 15 includes all people above 15 and as yehudayona pointed out, women live much longer which skews the ratio.
There are more men than women at birth, so looking at the numbers at birth is just as useless.
If you want a useful statistic, look at the male:female ratio at childbearing age – let’s say 15-50 years. Nearly all people who start families, marry within these years.
Even better, look at the dating ages of 20-35.September 15, 2014 5:32 am at 5:32 am #1032059AryeaParticipant
This is a very interesting thread. I’d like to see the sources that folk here are referencing. I remember back when I was in college in the biology and anthropology courses I took, I remember the professor stating that since females are more important to the propagation of the species than males, (biologically speaking, of course). I believe he said at the time that females make up 52-54% of the population. But of course, I took these courses decades ago and I might remember the details a bit incorrectly.September 15, 2014 6:39 am at 6:39 am #1032060
OK, here are the stats, courtesy of the Census Bureau (and the mods, if you please):
As I suggested, there are more never-married men than women in the relevant age range.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.