But as more and more young women (born after 80s and 90s) are married, this kind of issue may be mitigating. Because young women tend to be much well-educated and wealthy
But cultural norms warp things a little more. The cultural tendency is for a man to marry down, and a women marry up in social level terms.
Which means there's a layer of women near the top who can't find a husband. Particularly in professional careers. And the lowest social rung of men have no women to marry down.
This asymmetry means there's a band of powerful and successful women who don't normally find husbands. They become China's "leftover women", who have basically given up on the idea of marriage beyond the age of 27. One recent solution here is these women look abroad for suitable husbands. Despite being negged annually, the social stigma of not marrying up takes many options away from women.
I get that norms are strong. But in tech, we are constantly asked to question norms all the time and at times, deliberately counterbalance them. Surely we should also question social norms that inform our thinking in finding a mate? Especially if the person is having trouble finding someone suitable.
If I were to say to you I had trouble finding a woman, I don't think people here would say, "hey you should look at dating someone overseas." I think people might suggest opening my scope to other ethnicities/body types/meeting opportunities.
The problem has been named and created, whereas the initial reality was different.
For most people, political correctness flies right out the window when it comes to sexual attraction and mate selection.
In contrast, men in the US get custody as much as women when they pursue it. And while I won't argue about the exact proportion of money that is kept by the man and the woman, neither party is left homeless and jobless.
So your comment seems like a false equivalence to me. Furthermore, even if the Western situation is biased against men, that doesn't make China's system any more acceptable. Two wrongs don't make a right, after all.
There is a reason many woman want the apartment in their name as a co owner before they get married: otherwise they'll have no recourse on divorce. Even if they helped pay for it, they need their name there or they have no rights. This is how it is in China, relatively simple. As for parental rights, lots of moms never see their kids again as they go to live with the husband's family, same problems, different victims!
I should have stated that better. Historically, in America, from the late 19th Century until the present, women have filed the majority of divorces; approximately two thirds, regardless of prevalent economic circumstances.
"One response to marital infidelity is divorce. But divorce can be costly, especially for women. Aside from the social stigma that falls more heavily on women, family property and finances in China tend to be registered in the husband's name. A divorced woman can find herself homeless, adding to the pressure of taking measures to save the marriage."
Reducing that number to 0 percent and getting people to want income responsibility and property shared between man and wife in a 50/50 way would help towards making divorce outcomes equal.
It's only agrarian societies that manage to make husband and wife dependent enough on each other that divorce is a bad option for everybody.
This only applies if earning potential between women and men is wildly disparate. When women can and do earn as much as men, the "cashing in" factor largely goes away.
Didn't stop them in the end though.
If your mate is with you for your money and you are with them for their youth and looks, then assuming you stay with them long enough that after a divorce much of their youth and good looks are gone, why shouldn't they get some of your money? You got their most valuable assets.
But that's not true. Under United States laws, all women will take half your money when they divorce you. Doesn't matter that they're gold diggers or not.
And also, most women marries up (marry a guy who makes more than her), not down.
This whining about women taking "your money" in a divorce is absurd. Get a prenup or marry someone with as much or more money. If you marry someone with less money (i.e. someone "marrying up") then you are knowingly "marrying down". Don't whine about fairness. This isn't a problem with the courts being "unfair" so much as a problem with people being petty.
Always a pleasant conversation to start... ;)
> or marry someone with as much or more money.
This strategy works around an artificial limitation imposed by the law which limits your dating pool quite a bit, and overly penalizes the successful. Of 20-odd women I've dated, exactly one made more money than me.
> This whining about women taking "your money" in a divorce is absurd
In medicine, when we evaluate treatments, we base it on statistical efficacy. In law, when we evaluate guilt, we base it on evidence. When determining safe traffic laws (such as requiring seatbelts, we look at accident statistics. But for some reason, in marriage, a high failure rate is always "someone else's problem with commitment". (Along the same lines, I suppose fatality rates from accidents where seat belts weren't used are "someone else's problem with driving"!) No one stops to think "ok so maybe marriage itself may be the problem that needs some tweaking", and evaluates marriage changes/expectations based on empirical efficacy (lasting marriages). In the meantime, women profit off the pains of sorry men in failed relationships. Why is that?
She doesn't have to be a gold digger to take half your money because the laws still applies regardless of her gold-digging status.
The proper way to handle this is to marry some who makes the same or more than you.
I make more than my wife. If we got divorced, her getting half the assets would not be the biggest problem.
This may seem horrifying but it is often a result when women are brought up to be good obeying wives, be great mothers and religiously do household duties.
China female/male ratio is heavily unbalanced. There is a LOT men on market for women to choose. Also almost no foreign woman marry chinese man, on the contrary to the chinese women marrying a lot of foreigners.
1+2 means china is a market where men are at bad position and women has plenty of fish to choose from. Opposite situation which would create such services as described in the article.
According to 2012 figures from the National Bureau of Statistics, China’s sex ratio at birth (the number of boys born for every 100 girls) was as high as 118.
All you said in regards to male/female ratio is true, and single women have lots potential mates to choose from.
Unfortunately, the mistress situation is still common, due to a variety of issues around limited supply of wealthy men, divorce laws favouring the wealthy, societal stigma against divorced people, social norm of judging men by success and women by look, etc, etc.
Not all those issues are female-centric, but combined, they make it acceptable (while still looked down upon, if advertised) for some women to be a mistress of some powerful man, and powerful men to have mistresses.
This is because of the "stake" people are seeking when looking for a marriage between genders. Women are seeking wealth, social status, personality and whatever it may take to maintain a stable marriage ( family).
While men, in most cases, are looking for prettiness, good-looking or whatever superficial. This kind of value lifespan and marriage purpose mismatch is the whole problem of marriage issues in China.
A divorced, less pretty (compare to those in 20s), mid-aged woman is very hard to find another marriage. Even if they did not even marry before, it is still hard for them.
A lot of women in China who are well-educated, well-paid, in their 30s still have problems in finding partners (This is what Chinese society called sheng nu, or "women that left behind":https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheng_nu).
Statistically speaking, women are indeed more than men, but the mating process is not statistic.
Now it would be fascinating if people could generate probability distributions that accurately describe social-economic systems/relationships like what I would say that you accurately describe quantitatively.
Besides, it's not like this is for the general population. Mistresses are a common trait in the upper classes -- which, in a huge place like China, are still in the tens of millions...
The services in the article cost upwards of $10k which means the woman in this case might be married to a rich high status man, which is arguably difficult to come by.
If you are a women age 28 married to a high status man for say six years, you probably want to keep that man instead of trying to find another one.
The woman does not get a copy of the man's status.
She gets high status by marrying a high status man.
The wife of Donald Trump does not have to achieve anything to gain status. She gains status simply by being Trump's wife.
The ratio of females to males that women actually want is balanced the other way. And it's that way pretty much everywhere in the world.
A f/m << 1 just means there are more men to settle for, not really to choose.
By the way what is that movie's actual name? I haven't been able to find it on imdb, rotten tomatoes, etc.
Granted, this often breaks down such as with the last mortgage crash but no abstraction is actually true.
And when you buy beef in bulk, that doesn't mean that they'll send you whatever meat they have on hand, nor is that what 'fungible' even means.
Electronic money, Stock etc are defined as Fungible because two people can exchange tokens of ownership in the same thing without impacting anything. The same is 'said' about crude oil and other physical thing even though they are not actually identical they are treated as such.
However, the same effect happens when company's own huge set's of IP. That IP is treated as an income stream and money does not care about it's origin. The reverse even happens with money. Coins as collectors items are independent from there nominal value.
For a back and forth example. Two Kids might trade 1's because the Serial Numbers of one of the bills contain 666 which lowers the value to one and increases it to another. Later if the bill is spent it could go though a hundred transactions where nobody cares about the SN.
I mean they do not resolve the problems in the marriage that led to the situation. Do these women believe it's a one time thing? or that that specific mistress is special?
This is different from sleeping with escorts and other transactional women, which a lot of wives are comfortable with and attribute it to the way business works (taking clients out drinking, etc.).
This makes me sad because the issue is not "fixed", it's just lost one of its symptoms.
If you speak to enough people who have been married for a "long time" you realize they have been through some really hard stuff. It takes an extreme amount of work and forgiveness from both sides. I can't picture success with just one party being interested in staying together.
The stigma isn't as strong here as it is in China, either. And he ended up paying for the divorce.
On the other hand, she's not as well off financially as she had been. It was emotionally difficult for her as well, but the root of that problem was deeper than the symptom.
Not sure that this service would work here.
Here's the last 15 years, but can't find the full data set right now: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/marriage_divorce_tables.htm
Also false dichotomy. We do not know the percentage of successful marriages with undiscovered affairs.
For it to be cheating you need to be married (or in an exclusive relationship) in the first place. If the other party is not, then they're not cheating anyone themselves.
So, if it mostly happens between married men and unmarried women, for example, cheaters don't have to be "roughly equal".
As for cheating with married women, in China woman's infidelity is much lower than that of married men infidelity.
"In a representative sample of urban Chinese – 3.9% of married women and 20.6% of married men reported to have the experience of extramarital sex in the past year".
So just because each dick needs a corresponding vagina (and vice versa) doesn't mean that infidelity between sexes is equal. There are other factors in play too.
What if he already has several? Do you hire three counsellors with three strategies to dispel all of them? That's going to get really expensive, fast.