I’m a little confused by what this implies. Are you observing that it’s easier for women to initiate dating activities (plausible), or that women go on more dates than men (but while some women date each other, most don’t)?
Of course, women (and men) dating each other aside, women as a whole go on the same number of dates as men; however, this does not imply that the same number of women go on a nonzero (or non-low) number of dates as men. This would imply that a small fraction of men are dating a large fraction of women.
If it’s because the “small fraction of men” is just really talented at getting dates, the effect would diminish, because they just don’t have the time to be in ten times as many long-term committed relationships as anyone else.
But the same effect occurs, as an earlier post points out, in any subgroup in which there is a majority of men and a minority of women. Then, if all the women are out on a date, only a fraction of the men are, by virtue of the pigeonhole principle. In this case, I don’t think anything changes if we look at longer-term relationships.
Empirically, it is generally easier for women to find potential partners willing to date them than it is for men; this isn’t necessarily useful to them unless their standards are low-ish, but if they’re willing to sacrifice date quality, it’s a tradeoff that’s much easier for them to make.
This is massively exacerbated by the gender imbalance present in most fields that have a significant rationalist following, obviously.
I’m curious about the extent to which rationalists have a strong enough preference for dating within the rationality community that they exclude non-rationalist potential dates.
Or, in another framing, to what extent the preference for a rationalist date outweighs other considerations, to the extent that not dating a non-rationalist is preferable to dating a non-rationalist.
That wasn’t central to my point; I mean that in the fields where most rationalists spend their time, there’s a significant gender imbalance. Even if you’re totally willing to date non-rationalists, by default the people you meet will be heavily imbalanced unless you’re specifically cultivating social circles not related to rationality or your profession.
I’m a little confused by what this implies. Are you observing that it’s easier for women to initiate dating activities (plausible), or that women go on more dates than men (but while some women date each other, most don’t)?
Of course, women (and men) dating each other aside, women as a whole go on the same number of dates as men; however, this does not imply that the same number of women go on a nonzero (or non-low) number of dates as men. This would imply that a small fraction of men are dating a large fraction of women.
Hmm. It’d be my guess that this effect diminishes as the number of dates/length of relationship increases; what do you think?
Depends on the cause.
If it’s because the “small fraction of men” is just really talented at getting dates, the effect would diminish, because they just don’t have the time to be in ten times as many long-term committed relationships as anyone else.
But the same effect occurs, as an earlier post points out, in any subgroup in which there is a majority of men and a minority of women. Then, if all the women are out on a date, only a fraction of the men are, by virtue of the pigeonhole principle. In this case, I don’t think anything changes if we look at longer-term relationships.
Empirically, it is generally easier for women to find potential partners willing to date them than it is for men; this isn’t necessarily useful to them unless their standards are low-ish, but if they’re willing to sacrifice date quality, it’s a tradeoff that’s much easier for them to make.
This is massively exacerbated by the gender imbalance present in most fields that have a significant rationalist following, obviously.
I’m curious about the extent to which rationalists have a strong enough preference for dating within the rationality community that they exclude non-rationalist potential dates.
Or, in another framing, to what extent the preference for a rationalist date outweighs other considerations, to the extent that not dating a non-rationalist is preferable to dating a non-rationalist.
That wasn’t central to my point; I mean that in the fields where most rationalists spend their time, there’s a significant gender imbalance. Even if you’re totally willing to date non-rationalists, by default the people you meet will be heavily imbalanced unless you’re specifically cultivating social circles not related to rationality or your profession.
That may depend heavily on what one means by “rationalist” in this context.