<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Cafe Hayek - Latest Comments in Sex ratios</title><link>http://cafehayek.disqus.com/</link><description>Where Orders Emerge</description><atom:link href="https://cafehayek.disqus.com/sex_ratios/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:56:13 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Sex ratios</title><link>http://cafehayek.com/2006/08/sex_ratios.html#comment-13617225</link><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Interesting article. But it makes me wonder, is there an actual problem to be addressed here? Men who aren't competitive in the world of romance need to be more competitive if they wish to find a mate. And/or have less selective tastes. Is this really a new concept?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Women who aren't competitive in the world of hard science (or business) need to be more competitive if they wish to find a postition. And/of have less selective tastes. Is this really a new concept?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Loki on the run</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:56:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sex ratios</title><link>http://cafehayek.com/2006/08/sex_ratios.html#comment-13617224</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sorry, my bad i meant the marriage rate for women with 4+ years college &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dale Gribble</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:16:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sex ratios</title><link>http://cafehayek.com/2006/08/sex_ratios.html#comment-13617223</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I see that for married women the unmarried rate actually fell, Murphy Brown eat your heart out&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dale Gribble</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:15:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sex ratios</title><link>http://cafehayek.com/2006/08/sex_ratios.html#comment-13617222</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Interesting article. But it makes me wonder, is there an actual problem to be addressed here? Men who aren't competitive in the world of romance need to be more competitive if they wish to find a mate. And/or have less selective tastes. Is this really a new concept?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">shecky</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 06 Aug 2006 13:39:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sex ratios</title><link>http://cafehayek.com/2006/08/sex_ratios.html#comment-13617221</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Theoretically, the left leaning media, education, legal and political establishments should be happy, all their years of anti-male and anti-familiy efforts have finally borne fruit.  Oh and what's this, the fruit has a bitter aftertaste. Now there's a shortage of men willing to make the effort to be "suitable" mates for the masses of overachieving women.  Until the media, education, legal and political establishments drop their institutionalized biases against men, women are going to have a problem because many men are deciding that they don't want to play in a crooked game.  Like it or not men and women are biologically linked by some awesomely strong physiological drives and policies that hurt one are eventually going to hurt the other.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Natureboy</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 06 Aug 2006 10:42:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sex ratios</title><link>http://cafehayek.com/2006/08/sex_ratios.html#comment-13617220</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Just speculating here but there could be some non-education reasons in play here:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1. Sex is readily available outside of marriage.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2. Well-paid jobs for less-educated men are rapidly being exported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;3. The cost to raise a family is increasing much faster than the ability to afford those costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;So, the alternative is to:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1. Enjoy sex with a lot of partners.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2. Work only enough to support oneself comfortably.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;3. Have children but let the females and the state take responsibility for the care and costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But, of course, that is only a theoretical alternative because we've never actually seen an increase of that happening.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Bruce Hall</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 06 Aug 2006 08:01:49 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>