May 21, 2013 10:31 pm at 10:31 pm #956871
I never said girls have the upper hand.
All along I have been saying that Chasidim do not have the rigid guy says yes protocol that we have, and this levels the playing field thus easing alleviating any “crises” Mamelehs’ statment (which at first you seemed to accept) supports what I’ve said.
the rest of the first half is incomprehensible giberish. (The first part was wrong but comprehensible)
Why wouldn’t a one year gap create a crises, Shouldnt it leave 4% of chasidish girls unmarried? (or more if their growth rate is greater than the 4% commonly mentioned for yeshiva circles)May 21, 2013 10:35 pm at 10:35 pm #956872
To be clear, This was clearer at the start but we have veered into a more narrow discussion. I am not saying the only thing that matters is who says yes first. The real problem is the entire rigidity of our recent dating system. The halacha that a guy must give the yes first is but one example, but try not to get too caught up on that.
Here is a useful rule of thumb: (for life too) When a complex problem is deemed to have an easy-quick-fix-solution, the simplistic solution will rarly solve the problemMay 22, 2013 1:24 am at 1:24 am #956873mazal77Participant
A topic for discussion- how have larger families affected affluence and financial stability? And just to make the discussion more effective: Add to this the societal change nobody thinks to mention; i.e. the steady, exponential rise in the number of young men wanting to defer involvement in their own parnassa for years (the number of years also steadily going up); and the number of young ladies (-arguably greater than men, as seminaries seem to be doing a finer job inculcating these ideals) who want more and more years devoted to Torah learning exclusively on the part of their husbands.
Thank you Golfer, I agree with you and have been saying this for longest time. What has changed in our society from 20 years ago till now, is that learning boys wanting to be supported by their in-laws and the few families actually able to do that.May 22, 2013 2:13 am at 2:13 am #956874
the sentiment expressed by a majority of the girls who enrolled in the seminary where my wife works. In “our circles” a prerequisite to getting married is getting a “yes” from a boy. Many, many girls express the sentiment that they wait and wait for that elusive yes and when they do get one, it seems like he was dragged up from the bottom of a barrel
I didn’t put those words in your mouth.May 22, 2013 1:10 pm at 1:10 pm #956875
1. So who is now picking and choosing which part of mamales observations re: the chassidishe community they are following??? I agree will all of mamales observations except her interpretation as tho what the underlying cause is. You conveniently only pick the pieces of her observations that “fit” with what you decided is the cause.
2. The part you refer to as incomprehensible gibberish is simply a quote from golfer. Please direct your comments to him.
3. The reason why one year won’t make a problem is because there are approx 4% more males than females born in North America each year. This is documented information.
(this is very possible a significant contributing factor to why by the chassdim -where the boys and girls begin dating at the same age- find themselves with more boys dating than girls though not to the extent that the non chassidim have in reverse.)
Ubi: here’s a rule of thumbs
1. When trying to solve a problem make sure to understand the cause correctly. If you don’t properly identify the cause, you won’t be able to properly address the cause and thus won’t properly address the problem. I can’t help if you fail to understand why and how the imbalance of the numbers is so crucial to the shidduch crisis INCLUDING what you refer to as the “halacha” that the shadchan goes to the boy first. Similar to that very same “halacha” being reversed by the chassidim.
That being said, I wish you best of luck in your attempts to change the dating system.May 22, 2013 2:59 pm at 2:59 pm #956876apushatayidParticipant
I didn’t put those words in your mouth.
“How can it be that a majority of girls don’t get dates?”May 22, 2013 5:14 pm at 5:14 pm #956877
Which part Of her observation do you think I am disregarding. I am happy to explain how it fits with the truth.
I cant change the system because misguided people have come up with a cutesy mathematical sounding explanation and have successfully terrified many into believing it that any attempt to point out how the “explanation” doesn’t fit with the reality (ie doesn’t explain the DATING DISCREPENCY, and why it hasn’t always existed) is met with hostility
(I’m not complaining about the hostility if you think you are right, by all means defend the truth,)May 22, 2013 7:20 pm at 7:20 pm #956878
you seem to continue to disregard the following (obvious) point form her observation.
“since generally the girls have the upper hand, they are usually first.”
you seem to reverse that idea and insist on saying that the ones who are first will thus have the upper hand…
This btw is also why by the non chassidim the boys are first. BECAUSE they have the upper hand.
As for your explanation why you can’t change the system. Please don’t give up so easily. NASI is only a few years old. Emes will always win. If you are convinced that changing the system will alleviate the crisis- go for it!!
If you think the system is this way because of NASI-then you are simply not being honest.
If you feel that NASI has made it harder for you to change the system (by erroneously suggesting that now the boys know they have the upper hand, and prior to NASI they didn’t) then know that your schar for changing the system will be all that much more.
For whatever it’s worth- I would suggest that the most effective and efficient way to change the dating system (if that’s what you are looking to accomplish) is to adjust the numbers.
but that’s just my two cents.
(my offer to explain what changed is still open, but I’ll only explain it if there is a clear understanding of the critical role that the imbalance of numbers plays in the shidduch scene.
When you are ready let me know.
By the way, Why do you think by the chassidim generally the shadhcan goes to the girls first and by the non chassidim to the boy first. And once you are at, what’s your pshat why this (i guess you believe) changed and it’s a recent invention to go to the boys first. This is simply because I’d like to understand your (erroneous) position completely.May 22, 2013 8:11 pm at 8:11 pm #956879
doesn’t explain the DATING DISCREPENCY
why it hasn’t always existed
If the same demographics were in place, it would. I don’t know if the demographics were the same, and whether or not the disparity was the same, but I don’t think you do either, yet you want to prove something based on assumed facts.May 22, 2013 10:43 pm at 10:43 pm #956880
youre funny, youre (deliberetly?) taking her quote out of context. Her point isn’t cause and effect, rather she first emntions “Most shadchanim by Chasidim suggest the shidduch first to the party regardless of gender. It just happens to be that girls are asked first in their current dynamic.
don’t have the money and advertising clout NASI has, and anyway they wont be successful anyway (Thank God since it wouldn’t help the “crises” and would create new problems).
No I don’t think the system is this way because of NASI, I do think NASI worsens the problem by causing people to not consider other possibilities.
I don’t know why the chasisim go to both sides at the same time or to either side first. Anyway it doesn’t need an explanation since it is the more logical way to do it. As to why we do it this crazy way, It is to protect the feelings of girls since they now get rejected when their name is just on a guy’ list which is obviously less hurtful than when they put themselves out there by agreeing to go out with a guy already and then getting rejected.
Incidentally I love your funny approach to arguing, you only reply to my argument that pokes a hole in your “theory” once I agree your “theory” is correct. Strange but amusing.
I don’t get your “I guess you believe” line, do you think it was this way 15-20 years ago that the guy had to give the yes before the girl?
No it doesn’t we have been through this. 300 dates should be enough dates for all 112 girls. (Again though not enough for 112 weddings) It does not explain why many “suffer from infrequent dating”
No demographics have not changed, yet the disparity was not the same. I’m curious though which component do you think changed was the population increase less? or were couples the same age?
I get that you don’t know, but you must have a hunch that is misguiding you, Im just curious which one it isMay 22, 2013 10:56 pm at 10:56 pm #956881
It’s kind of funny watching you guys “interpret” my words while I’m no navi or anything and am B”H alive. I’ll try to help you out a little…
I wrote “Now here’s the monkey wrench: since generally the girls have the upper hand, they’re usually first. It’s not just a numbers game, but a quality issue…” In retrospect I should have written “but ALSO a quality issue”. It’s not one or the other. Meaning that even if there are the same number of boys and girls entering the market, a shadchan will hesitate to suggest a shidduch that’s imbalanced, so she’ll go to the better party first. Since there are more quality girls, the girl gets to answer first. (as an aside a confident shadchan will sometimes suggest to both parties at the same time). There is always a breaking point of a totally unacceptable shidduch, which these guys stay behind in cumulative numbers, as the girls take younger, better guys instead. That’s where quality comes into play. Even if the numbers at every age group are equal (and I honestly don’t know) some guys (more so than girls, not exclusively) are unacceptable to most and they get left behind. Because of the stragglers there are now more boys on the market, so the girls have the upper hand even more than before. In the same way the age disparity is likely causing an imbalance by the non chasidim favoring the guys, the quality imbalance is causing a reverse age disparity by the chasidim, with the girls gaining the upper hand. In the past a girl taking a younger boy was almost unheard of, not anymore. Just my two cents.May 23, 2013 12:01 am at 12:01 am #956882
Scratch my comment about what’s likely causing a discrepancy by non Chasidim. Although I personally believe the age gap theory to an extent, it doesn’t have to be the only, or even primary cause. Rigid requirements by bochurim such as demanding financial support (if not they can date younger, which by chasidim Nadan is only a minority issue) can also play a role. The thing in common is that once the numbers are out of whack for whatever reason, it becomes a vicious cycle. I’m not taking a stand, so you guys can keep on fighting if you so desire…May 23, 2013 1:51 am at 1:51 am #956883
Thank you Mamaleh,
now my previous comment which hasn’t yet gone up seems silly because I patiently explain to AZ what you meant. Well no matter, since obviously you can do a better job.
Thanks againMay 23, 2013 1:54 am at 1:54 am #956884
Mods, please, the second post is kind of irrelevant without the first. It’s not THAT long.
you don’t have any other posts in the queue. Are you using a different username?May 23, 2013 2:13 am at 2:13 am #956885
I canceled my request, sorry about that, it’s been approved. Thanks.May 23, 2013 2:25 am at 2:25 am #956886skyfallMember
The reason why there are hundreds if not thousands of broken engagements is quite simple. Before i start lecturing for those who had one it no big deal its not a divorce!(its much better earlier than later and i know that sounded cliche). Among the hundred of reason here are the most essential reasons in my eyes why the shidduchim system is a bit ironic . First young adults from the ages of 18 to 22 feel like they must get married peer pressure. Its what there mother and father want sometimes or its the girl watching all her friends getting engaged and just feels like jumping into it her self. Second Most guys and girls this generation are not getting profession how do you expect to pay bills people(not my problem) but for this reasons people back out of relashionships MONSEY$$$$$. How can people commit withought having a financial plan and im not talking about relying on the rich controlling father-in law. Third people rush into relashioships withought getting to know the other person emotionally. Many relashionships are superficial out there exspecially with high maintence girls (they always want to be center of attention japs they think there hollywood actress stay far away from such girls there trouble you will be divorced in time in most cases unless you spoil them to death of course). Forth you cant blame shatchanim eventhough majority of times its all bout the cash. When a stranger sets you up on a date, you have to date for a really long time you cant know someone in a few days even months. I hope my infomation was infomitive eventohough its ovious!May 23, 2013 2:35 am at 2:35 am #956887
we can keep on going around in circles, though now mamales position is far more vague (because she tries to explain why the girls have the upper hand by the chassidim and the boys by the non chassidim and she doesn’t present a strong argument for her underlying explanation(s), more good girls, easier to be a good girl, etc. a smorgasbord of unsubstantiated sevaros..)
But her general idea is the same, the one with the upper hand is the one that gets the name first, and you insist it’s the other way around. You insist that the one who gets the name first thus has the upper hand. and you insist that’s what she is saying.
It is actually kind of funny, but either way, i’m happy to drop the discussion as to what she said/means etc.
As for how shidduchim were redd 15/20 years ago. Honestly- i don’t have a good read on that. I’m not really sure if they went to the boys side first or not. It does seem that you are firmly convinced that it wasn’t. I’d be curious as to your proof to this statement, as well as to the explanation why the “halacha” changed. After all, you explain the reason for this “halacha” is protect the feelings of the girls (you may be right)and for some reason this is a new phenomena that shadchanim began to be sensitive to the feelings of the girls, as opposed to 15/20 years ago they didn’t mind hurting their feelings.
This is all in the spirit of understanding your erroneous position.
As for your comments about NASI- Please don’t see yourself short. Anyone can do what they did and are doing. They started off (and still are) a tiny tiny operation. Please don’t be afraid- Emes always wins out.
As for my debate style- that’s okay. But do realize that your “question” doesn’t poke a hole in “the theory”.
I’m not even sure what “theory” you are referring to.
Are you referring to
a. The observation that you yourself agreed to?
B. The statement that the observation of the imbalance of numbers causes havoc in the shidduch scene?
C. The explanation as to WHY there is a imbalance in the numbers. I assume it’s not point C- since in this thread i have purposely not even begun to address point C
So i guess you are “poking a hole” in point B. That a severe imbalance in numbers causes havoc in the shidduch scene. (by the way that statement should be self evident due to the simple law of supply and demand, but i guess it’s not self evident to you) And your proof that the theory is wrong is because
1. You assume 15/20 years ago there was also the same imbalance of numbers.
2. 15/20 years ago despite the same imbalance of numbers there was no shidduch crisis.
Am I understanding your “pircha on the theory” correctly?
If your answer to this question is yes- I’ll show you why your alleged “pircha” is simply based on a obvious error you are making.
Let me knowMay 23, 2013 3:44 am at 3:44 am #956888
Yes to both 1 & 2
Not sure if you know this but there are people who were alive 15-20 years ago who can be asked about dating practices then.
The “Theory” I was referring to is B though I’d stick in main factor. It may play a minor role but hardly the main cause.
I am very excited to hear the pircha, since if it is good would knock of one of my two holes in the “age gap theory”
The other being the fact that the age-gap doesn’t explain “infrequent dating” Though this point has sort of been addressed. My other question as to how unchanged demographics can explain a new problem, was one you were afraid to tackle… until now?
I am really excited, good luck!May 23, 2013 4:13 am at 4:13 am #956889
In fairness to AZ, regardless of what’s causing a gender imbalance, anything done to reverse the tide is a positive thing. You don’t necessarily have to find the cause, as long as the numbers start shifting, it can build on its own momentum.
So the question really should be can project Nasi empower YOUNG girls in general to be less desperate as there’s hope for a level playing field? Or will it sow more panic and prove to them that getting older is costlier and riskier, so they better marry ASAP? That’s the unspoken argument here IMHO. AZ thinks he’s started a new thread with a blank slate, it’s kind of impossible when the players aren’t new.May 23, 2013 5:02 am at 5:02 am #956890mopMember
How can there be any justification for “the freezer” if it aggravates the age gap?May 23, 2013 5:32 am at 5:32 am #956891
Sorry, AZ didn’t start this thread. My mistake.May 23, 2013 11:58 am at 11:58 am #956892
Mop, what justifies the freezer without an age gap?May 23, 2013 12:01 pm at 12:01 pm #956893
Ubi, I’m confused. How could there be an imbalance in the numbers, yet all the girls got married? Evenly dating?May 23, 2013 1:13 pm at 1:13 pm #956894
The short response (i don’t call it a answer, because there is no question):
15/20 years ago (and certainly going back a bit farther) the numbers were not imbalanced like they are today.
In other words, the observation I stated above – that you agree exists today- simply didn’t exist back then.
(or perhaps more accurately put, much much smaller imbalance, much much smaller crisis, to the point that people didn’t notice it)
If you can just humor me, how can you write with a straight face (I assume you post in all seriousness) that a significant numbers imbalance doesn’t create a major problem in the shidduch scene?
It should be self evident that it would absolutely do so.
Simple laws of supply and demand.
I guess your (incorrect) response is: “I can’t explain why it wouldn’t, but hey, years ago the numbers were also a problem and then it didn’t create a major problem, so whatever the explanation then was, would be true now as well.”
Am I correct in understanding you?
If you want to argue, that the numbers aren’t imbalanced- fine
That is a incorrect position as you yourself agree, but at lest the argument is not self contradictory)
If you want to debate/discuss WHY the numbers are imbalanced- fine
If you want to debate how to alleviate or should any efforts be made to alleviate the imbalance-fine
But to say the numbers ARE imbalanced but that doesn’t make a mega difference.
Honestly- it’s hard for me to grasp that argument.
(btw not that this is empirical evidence, but I and my friends were in the shidduch scene 15/20 years ago…. I happen to think – contrary to what you claim- that then the style was also to go to the boys first but i don’t want to harp on this point as it’s really not our core discussion ).
UBI: for the sake of clarity, I’m assuming your response to this post will to request to explain why the numbers are imbalanced now and they weren’t then. I haven’t touched that.May 23, 2013 9:48 pm at 9:48 pm #956895
Az, I’m sorry was there a question there for me to answer? Id be happy to explain any point to you. I don’t run from challenging questions nor do I shrug them off as “not questions” without actualy replying.
This has been going in for four pages, I am eagerly awaiting a (adequete?) Reply to my question what exactly according to your age gap theory changed that we now have a crises? Or did we always have a crises?
Part of my point is the numbers have been imbalanced in the past (if you disagree, well what exactly changed) and yet no crises. We can discuss how it us possible, but it clearly is.
A few points,
1. I don’t know, but it worked in the past
2. First let’s get all girls dates THEN marriage. Focusing on marriage while ignoring the “infequent dating” won’t help and us putting the cart before the horseMay 23, 2013 10:13 pm at 10:13 pm #956896
Ubi, you CAN’T know, because unless some other factor balances the numbers, we’re in trouble. If there are a lot more girls than boys, there MUST be girls left over.
Obviously, your set of facts, that there were 1) a gap 2) large families (population growth) and, 3) no surplus of girls, is wrong because it’s not mathematically correct.
Once you get the right set of facts, you might realize which is the cart and which is the horse.May 23, 2013 10:31 pm at 10:31 pm #956897
first of all you’ve broken it down wonderfully, kudos!
Now I have two questions (short ones)if you so please
1)which of the three facts do you think is wrong? (I suppose could be more than one)
2)Hypothetically If all 3 facts magically turn out to be correct, would you accept that the age gap is not THE fundamental cause of the “crises”?May 23, 2013 11:04 pm at 11:04 pm #956898squeakParticipant
Page 4 already? Time for another. This supposed shidduch crisis is very confined to a lone demographic. So even assuming that the reason for the crisis is a shortage within the community, why wouldn’t the extras spill over and be absorbed into the next closest in ideals community? Certainly a shortage of prospects is a good reason to broaden one’s search. If you are thinking because of refusal to compromise on frumkeit, let me point out that frumkeit is a sliding scale, with ideologies varying slightly from person to person even within each community, and certainly the end of the spectrum of one commjnity lines up closely enough to the top of the spectrum in the next. The shortage would thin itself out as the spillover was shared through multiple communities and probably would resolve itself naturally. Unless there is such an enormous gap between the spectrums that no mobility is possible.
If that were the case, I’d be more worried about the ideals gap than anything else. Because if somehow a retaining wall is holding everyone in the same spot, against the natural tendency for people to be varied and complex, then I would bet dollars to donuts that the shidduch crisis far from the only crisis that this community is facing.May 23, 2013 11:08 pm at 11:08 pm #956899
1) Probably a combination. My anecdotal observation is that there are more upper 30’s single women than men, so if you’re referring to shidduchim from 15 – 20 years ago, I lean towards saying that the main “difference” is the problem being noticed. I have been aware of the age gap cause, IIRC, for at least 12 years (before I ever heard of NASI). As an aside, my recollection matches AZ’s that shidduchim were first suggested to the boys in those days as well.
2) I would scratch my head and wonder if HKB’H had made a nes, perhaps in the form of a higher male birth rate than in the general population.May 23, 2013 11:28 pm at 11:28 pm #956900
1.Things weren’t as rigid, don’t get too hung up on who gets to pick first, that is but one example.
2. Even if (and again, this is hypothetical) there were recent changes in place that made getting a date a much more complicated process than in the past. Im not sure what you mean by higher birth rate than the population, how would that change anything if (hypotheticly) It was the same male birth rate as in the past but now with a crises?May 24, 2013 12:16 am at 12:16 am #956901
1) I’m not hung up on it, it was an aside. I have issues with the way some people act in shidduchim (as well as in other pursuits). Not everyone lives throw lives in every aspect according to Orchos Tzaddikim. I think if girls were in the driver’s seat, we’d have problems the other way. Evening the playing field would be a positive even aside from getting more girls married. I stilk think that evenly distributing dates (how would that be done?) would merely be treating a symptom.
2) If there were, say, 12% more boys born than girls (currently it’s about 4%), the numbers would be roughly even. If hypothetically, I were presented as fact your three assertions, I would sooner assume that there were, 20 years ago, 12% more boys than girls born, than assume that the laws if math were suspended. Either way, I wouldn’t close my eyes to the current reality.May 24, 2013 2:01 am at 2:01 am #956902
I did respond very clearly and very succintly.
15/20 years ago (and certainly going back farther) the numbers were not imbalanced like they are today.
In other words, the observation I stated above – that you agree exists today- simply didn’t exist back then.
Which sentence did you not understand.
We can discuss why this is true, and why now there is a imbalance. But first lets agree on the facts.
Do you agree that it’s relatively new that there is such a gross imbalance.
If you do good- we can go to the next step.
If you don’t- then we can’t go to the next step.
How we explain why there is a imbalance now as opposed to yesteryear won’t change the fact that either is or isn’t true.
I will stick with my statement.
This is a new phenomana because it’s relatively new that the numbers are so out of balance.
we can try to give different reasons why the numbers are out of balance. (seems like squeak has been suggesting some ideas) but the WHY of the imbalance doesn’t change the WHAT of the imbalance.May 24, 2013 2:41 am at 2:41 am #956903
Truth is 15/20 years ago is not even far enough because as DY accurately point out the numbers of singles in the upper 30’s (started dating 15/20 years ago) male/female is out of wack. It wasn’t as bad then as it has been more recently, but we should really talk 20/25 years back to a time when the numbers were far more aligned.May 24, 2013 2:53 am at 2:53 am #956904
Okay- this is it. Having responded below to the one point that UBI wanted me to respond to, I’m retiring from this thread…
It we can add more boys to the dating pool
Or we can hold girls off from entering the dating pool
Or a combination of both
These efforts would facilitate easing the imbalance
Boys can be added by having boys begin dating younger
Boys can be added by encouraging the chassidishe boys to be welcomed into the non chassidishe dating environment
Boys can be added by efforts to make more male ballei Teshuva
Boys can be added by efforts to make more male geirim (look at china as a huge supply)
Boys can be added by efforts to have fewer boys go completely off the derech (i.e. marrying non religious girls)
Girls can be held off by encouraging them to not begin dating as young as they currently do
this could be accomplished in a variety of ways such as encouraging boys/shadchanim to consider close in age shidduchim therby fewer shidduchim for 18/19 year olds, or by having girls enter kindergarten 6 months later than currently so they will end their schooling 6 months later then currently, or some other ideas)
I could go on and on, but I think you get my drift
If the numbers are imbalanced because of the ages at which the non chassidishe girls and boys begin dating, then having the boys begin a bit earlier and the girls a bit later helps AND addresses the root cause of the imbalance. And our leaders have encouraged such efforts.
UBI- HERE GOES- for the sake of your being able to sleep: The reason why according to the age gap explanation of why the numbers were more balanced years ago is
a. Family sizes were smaller then (30 years ago, how many families had 10 kids?) and thus the year to year difference was not as significant then as it is now.
Ubi: I hope this satisfies you.
DY: i’ll leave you to carry it from here…. I think I’m done…May 24, 2013 3:06 am at 3:06 am #956905
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.
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?May 24, 2013 3:16 am at 3:16 am #956906
I wrote my previous reply before yours went up.
Thank you for your reply
B. Is EXACTLY what I have been saying all along. Boy am I glad we can agree. My only question would be why not try to undo the changes you mention in B> This is what I have been suggesting.
Thanks again for replying though, your put up a good fight but it is nice to see we agree.
id wish you good luck in your efforts but I think they would have a terrible effect so I cant do that, but I do wish you best of luck in having the outcome we both desire materialize , namely more simchos by yiddenMay 24, 2013 3:37 am at 3:37 am #956907
Though I wouldn’t consider a 12% gender discrepancy anything remotely resembling reality)
For birth rates? Of course not. For numbers entering shidduchim? It’s probably in the ballpark.
It seems you missed AZ’s post, in which he claims that 1) and 2) are both true. That my hunch as well; Dr. Halpert assumes that the gap is wider than in the past, but I didn’t notice if he addresses population.
I keep on evading your hypothetical question because it denies a mathematical truism. If I told you that 2+2 does not equal 4, would you consider that it equals 5? That’s kind of how I view your question.
Could changes in the way we date improve the shidduch system? That’s a better question, and I think the answer is yes. If people would make better choices, there would be more marriages; the imbalance doesn’t explain the single older men. But making better choices (not age related) can’t address the imbalance of having more females in shidduchim than males.May 24, 2013 4:24 am at 4:24 am #956908BronyParticipant
whoa whoa whoa….what?May 24, 2013 4:37 am at 4:37 am #956909
Ubiquitin, you agree with AZ that what changed is that the average age of boys getting married has gone up?May 24, 2013 1:35 pm at 1:35 pm #956910
why would I when that is clearly false.
I agree with the rigidity/conformity issueMay 24, 2013 1:38 pm at 1:38 pm #956911
On your imaginary planet it us a mathematical truism that the dating demographics changed?May 24, 2013 2:15 pm at 2:15 pm #956912apushatayidParticipant
It is noble and praiseworthy that NASI is promoting what they believe is the answer to this dilemma. If others see the problem differently with a different set of required actions, they can also seek approval of Roshei Yeshiva and Rabbonim and promote their proposals in forums such as YWN, Yated and Hamodia. I dont think they are married to NASI, nor will they discriminate against anyones advertising dollars.
Instead of attacking NASI, can this thread take a new turn, with those who maintain the NASI course of action is wrong, misguided or even harmful (the opinions seem to run the gamut) offer their own insight into the problem and their own proposed course of action? I notice the title of this thread is called “Shidduch Crisis Solutions”, in the plural. Nobody, not even NASI, claims there is a SOLUTION, rather they propose a solution based on how they see the problem. If you see the problem differently, please share it and if you have a recommended course of action, please also share that. I agree, it is way easier to knock NASI, but is that productive? Does it help anyone?May 24, 2013 2:18 pm at 2:18 pm #956913nfgo3Member
Anybody want to try polygamy? I think it worked for our 2000 years.May 24, 2013 2:19 pm at 2:19 pm #956914
I guess you didn’t know what you were agreeing to (or were agreeing to semantics, not substance). Anyhow, it’s not a mathematical truism, it’s an anecdotally observed phenomenon.
Your theory is mathematically incorrect, so it simply can’t be true.
You can either accept that your observation, that the gap is the same, is incorrect, and others’ observation that it has risen is correct, or, I guess, you can (continue to?) argue that Hashem made a nes and suspended the laws of math, (as He did in Noach’s teivah), and would continue to do so if only we pooled the dates so that boys are told who to date and all girls get a fair shot. I guess on your (real?) planet, Hashem is punishing us, for not forcing everyone to date who we want them to, by suddenly following normal rules of math.May 24, 2013 8:20 pm at 8:20 pm #956915
I was agreeing to semantics. The substance is hogwash. Even AZ doesnt actually beleive it,
FACT: The demographics were the same. PEriod. And youhave never said otherwise. You didnt know what changed, and asked my question to AZ yourself earlier. Now the question is why is there a “crises” Now and not then.
(Granted My assertion is based on anecdotal evidence, but hey so is the entire NASI project)
It was YOU in your zeal to cover up the truth that brought up a Nes, and you may be right, buit I dont know where you got it from that that was my argument.
I have a rational approach, the style of dating has changed over the past years and with it a “crises” evolved.
Who did those “extra” girls date? I dont know maybe boys their age or younger. Maybe dinasours. Maybe if dating isnt so rigid people find spouses on their own, as long as, and here is the kicker, they have dates!
Throwing more boys into the mix will not help if girls arent getting dates in the first placeMay 24, 2013 11:24 pm at 11:24 pm #956916
It’s kind of hard for me to make observations about an era in which I didn’t live, so yes, it’s guesswork, although if your only talking about 20 years ago, not 30-40, my observation is that you’re wrong about their not being more unmarried girls than boys.
A similar observation to the one you make, that you can’t get married without dates, can also be made that a certainl number of girls cannot get married if there are fewer boys in shidduchim than girls.
While a surplus of girls can certainly explain insufficient dates, the opposite cannot be said, that insufficient dates cause a surplus of girls. Your argument ia, in fact, quite irrational.May 26, 2013 3:20 am at 3:20 am #956917
You are putting the cart before the horse.
Going through the dating process, first girls must get dates. The “age gap” can not explain the “infrequent dating” this has been explained at leangth.
I agree there is a chance that the “age gap” will still prevent some from getting married. (Though I doubt it, don’t forget the number of people “in shiduchim” constantly changes) but solving the “age gap” will do absolutely nothing for those suffering from “infrequent dating.” There aRE ENOUGH DATE SAVAILABLE FOR THEM. Please Please understand this point. There are enough dates for all girls to get almost as many dates as their friends. If some girls suffer from “infrequent dating” This is in no way shape or form due to the “age gap” and thus will not be resolved by focusing on the “age gap”
I really don’t know why this is confusing youMay 26, 2013 5:53 am at 5:53 am #956918
I’m boruch Hashem not confused at all. I understand the issue well. I also understand the laws of supply and demand, and that some girls getting less dates than others is completely expected under any circumstances, and will predictably be more pronounced where supply exceeds demand.
BTW, you probably didn’t notice it, but in your previous post, you agreed with AZ when you postulated that the shroud girls might have dated boys younger than them. You were, in essence, agreeing that the average age gap was less. If currently, more girls would be dating boys the same age or younger, the disparity would be reduced or disappear.May 26, 2013 12:39 pm at 12:39 pm #956919
No you are very confused and your last post highlights your confusion. Do not fret though I am happy to explain.
Supply and demand works both ways in dating. There is an excess of guy dates available. 300 for every 112 girls according to the numbers you provided. According to the laws of supply and demand. unless some artificial factors were in play. All girls should have more than one date. Yet they do not thus there are artificial barriers in place preventing some girls from getting there fair share of dates.
I do agree with AZ that some girls married boys younger than they. Newsflash many still do. Though it is not less common now than in the past So in no way does this explain why the “shiduch crises” is more pronounced now. The “age gap” as an explanation to the “shiduch crises” is hogwash with nothing but anecdotal evidence to back it up. and doesn’t even explain the “dating divide” (TM you heard it here first)
If we come up with ways to remove artificial barriers that prevent gitrls from getting dates, more will get dates. And perforce more will get married.May 26, 2013 2:54 pm at 2:54 pm #956920
Ubiquitin, you talk about supply and demand (using an analogy to products being sold in retail locations) in terms of the availability to test a product. I don’t think that’s how supply and demand is referred to; it’s referred to in terms of the actual product.
Just out of curiosity, what do you think the artificial barriers are to even out the dating, and how would you go about removing them?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.