- This topic has 283 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Popa, you should stick to arguing that boys getting married earlier will decrease learning. It’s the only reasonable point you have. The rest just makes you look like you have an agenda.
The being mature point is also highly reasonable.
And I think that the failure of the NASI side to recognize these points makes them look like they have an agenda. What’s my agenda? What’s theirs?
If someone came up with a medication for long fingernails which was never tested, would you suggest taking it? Until anyone can prove how the long fingernails in this situation is a problem and that the cure (with unknown side effects) will help, there’s really nothing to discuss. And I’m not sure how anyone can defend this with a clear conscience without that info.
So far I simply stated that fact that their are more children (boys and girls) in younger grades than their are (boys and girls) in the older grades. And it seems like no one disagrees with that.
(there are school studies which show this to be evident).
If there is agreement on this issue, I will go to the next step.
if there isn’t then I won’t.
I haven’t even begun to discuss proposed solutions, nor have I explained age gap, I am simply asking Kapusta to either agree or disagree with my statement of fact regarding class sizes/school enrollments.
Kapusta
Agree or disagree
Please advise
It’s not a poor analogy, age gappers are advocating unknown medicine for a questionable condition. We have no proof that the situation is any worse than its been in the past.
GIR, I’m pretty sure I answered already. If there are more apples than there were 20 years ago, does that also mean there is a crisis? You can discuss class sizes however much you like, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s only one factor in the number of singles today, and no one has looked at the situation in its entirety.
The number of young women who have dated 5-10 years and are still single is far far greater than the number of young men who have dated 5-10 years and are still single.
================================================================
Lets assume this is true. Has anyone ever looked into why they are dating for 5-10 years and still single? Perhaps they are edit, stupid or looking for something in a spouse that doesnt exist in the modern world. Why assume that it is because there is a shortage of males?
Kapusta,
please answer
Agree or disagree to the point I made earlier, and then we can discuss further. You have no idea what my next step is.
Lets do this one step at a time.
I agree. I am not NASI’s spokesperson, and I think they have made some marketing errors. I do think they have reasonably addressed the maturity issue, but the learning issue, although not without answers, is more complex.
They have “addressed” the maturity issue, but by disagreeing.
They have not even “addressed” the learning issue.
GIR, kapusta agrees that overall younger classes are larger than older classes.
2 questions:
1) I haven’t see AZ in years. Is DY AZ?
2) NASI thinking goes like this: 100 22 year old guys and 110 20 year old girls. The 100 guys marry 100 of the girls. 10 girls don’t get married.
However, even if I were to agree with that premise, and even if I agree that there are more single older girls, that still doesn’t negate the fact that there are a whole lot of older single guys.
The question is: Where did they come from?
Are we just closing our eyes and pretending we don’t see them? Or, as an actual (yes, actual) person suggested to me, are they all defective or not normal so they’re not part of the equation?
(And if they are part of the equation, is anybody at all addressing the issue?)
for those in shidduchim today we need to be looking at class size 20 years ago, and for those still single after dating 5-10 years we need to be looking at class size in 1990 or earlier. are we?
whatever numbers are brought to the table the year(s) for that data must also be brought to the table.
They’re not ALL defective. I used to be one of them, so I guess some are. But I know some who aren’t.
But, we clearly need to acknowledge that some boys and some girls are defective and there are reasons they won’t get married for a while until they work some stuff out, or maybe until they find someone who can work for them, or maybe never.
I personally think there are more boys than girls who are like that. I call it the creepy guy theory of the shidduch crisis.
1) True
2) Uhuh
The classic theory of the “shidduch crisis” is that this year’s “class” has 100 girls and 90 boys, so 10 girls will be left out.
But we need to add defective people into the equation. So let’s make that 95 girls and 85 boyss, so same 10 girls left out. But popa_bar_abba says that more boys are defective than girls so it is really 95 girls and 80 boys so we just made the problem worse. There are now 15 girls left out.
So the obvious solution is to invent defects in the girls…
Joseph:
I’ll let Kapusta speak for herself.
when we get clarity we can go to the next step.
You’re definitely wrong about it being a questionable condition,
Prove that its worse than its been in the past, and that there are more single girls than boys. And prove that the unknown side effects are better than the problems we are aware of currently.
I haven’t see AZ in years. Is DY AZ?
I’ve been wondering that myself.
GIR, I agree that younger classes are likely larger than older classes, but again, I’m not sure how that determines numbers of singles today.
If this years graduating high school class has more girls than boys, that means 13-14 years ago in kindergarten there were more girls than boys, and for those who are dating 5-10 years already to means that in their kindergarten class in 1988 there were 10 more girls than boys. Has this been a trend for the last almost 30 years that the non chassidish yeshivish community in the us has had such a disparity in births between males and females? Is it possible the numbers are closer to 50/50 and we have a different problem altogether, too many boys have “problems”, as PBA so eloquently put it, that they dont make it to their graduating class (or, they graduate from a place that they are not considered for shidduch island as NASI likes to call it)?
APY: Sigh…
What’s so complicated? No one said more girls than boys are born every year. More CHILDREN OF BOTH GENDERS are born every subsequent year than the previous year because our population is growing B”H.
It’s YEAR x that doesn’t match up to YEAR y in terms of the number of available singles. Whichever gender belongs to the younger year will bederech hateva have more unmatched members.
I haven’t see AZ in years. Is DY AZ?
I’m also wondering if GIR is one or both as well.
I have one question for anyone who would like to answer and with that, I will leave others to continue the (non) discussion.
Rabbi A has 25 boys in his class. For snack, the school provides a case of 20 apples. Rabbi B gets the same case of 20 apples, but he has 15 boys in his class, so after he hands out 15 apples, he takes the remaining 5 apples over to Rabbi A’s class.
10 years later: the grade is now divided between Rabbis A, B, C with a total of 50 students. The school provides a total of 55 apples for all the classes to share. Two boys are allergic to apples so there are now 48 boys to feed, and 7 extra apples. 3 apples are inedible for whatever reason. Rabbis A, B, C each take an apple for themselves and the secretary comes by, notices the last apple and takes it.
In both scenarios, the number of boys and apples did not match up, but when other factors were taken into account (the extra apples from the other class, the inedible apples etc) the numbers did, allowing for a match between apples and hungry people. Can anyone prove that there are more single boys/apples today than there have been in the past and can anyone prove the amount of hungry people/apples there are today? When you have that info, let me know.
Not both.
Interesting how you know that.
There are also people who are allergic to apples and people who dont like apples, but of course, we don’t know how many. You have proven nothing and expect people to buy into it because you say so. I’m more bothered by the problems this will likely cause but it is actually offensive that you (age gappers) think so little of the frum public. I keep asking the same questions and I havent gotten any answers so I will let other people waste their breath at this point, but I can only wonder if there is any personal gain involved because continuing to promote this with no numbers defies any common sense.
Kapusta, you should have started your own thread: Apple theory of the shidduch crisis.
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/bread-theory-of-the-shidduch-crisis
Your analogy is flawed, because the factors taking singles out of the field are if anything going to take more boys out than girls. See popa’s point about “defective” boys.
Lav davka. There are many psulim in girls that don’t affect boys much. For example, a boy can be OTD for a few years in high school and still be a “catch. “
And by stipulating that it’s only for boys who are ready, with the consent of their rebbeim.
As I said. “Addressed” by disagreeing.
You think no boys are ready at 21?
Certainly some are. But the kol korei was not phrased “We encourage boys to start dating whenever they decide they are ready in consultation with their rebbeim (and hopefully therapists), and particularly if they are ready at 21 it would be great.”
Mostly because that’s already the reality.
the factors taking singles out of the field are if anything going to take more boys out than girls.
Your opinion.
Torah, I’ve spent too much time on this discussion already. But if you like, we can always do a shidduch theory cookbook.
DY, why do you think that re: OTD, BT, MO, etc.?
No it isn’t, it’s a rarity. They are trying to make it mainstream, but not mandatory.
What’s a rarity? You think it’s rare that boys who decide they are ready to get married start dating?
Yes I definitely know women who would call themselves yeshivish but hardly qualify. And I’d certainly say there are more men becoming baalei teshuva than women. Opinion is a good way to decide people’s lives, right?
Kapusta:
“GIR, I agree that younger classes are likely larger than older classes, but again, I’m not sure how that determines numbers of singles today.”
Well done.
We can now move one, in time you’ll decide if what I’m presenting determines the original observation I made regarding the number of “older” singles today. But lets not jump ahead of ourselves.
Next step: following the same train of thought, that the younger classes are far larger than the older classes,
So to
Do you agree with that
there are more 19 year olds (boys and girls)- lets call that 12th grade plus 2)
than their are 23 year olds (boys and girls) (lets call that 12th grade plus 5)
Agree or disagree?
Please advise.
(for this stage it is not relevant whether these 19 and 23 year olds are single or married. The point simply is that the total number of 19 year olds far exceeds the total number of 23 year olds)
Popa, it’s a rarity that a boy would do what’s not so socially acceptable. They are trying to make it socially acceptable.
I guess the question is whether its a good idea to promote something being socially acceptable if its generally harmful.
Which goes back to whether it is generally harmful.
Which goes back to they addressed it by saying we disagree.
To which they bring a pretty good raya that it isn’t from every chareidi community in the world besides the American yeshivish.
Ok, fair point, they do bring a rayah.
To which we bring a counter-rayah that there is obviously some reason we don’t.
I also don’t agree that even if it were “generally” (I guess that means for the majority) harmful, it should remain socially unacceptable for those it would benefit.
But maybe it does mean you shouldn’t make kol koreis about it every week in the yated, which aren’t quite as nuanced as you are being.
The reason we don’t is because we don’t, but if we did, we would.
That’s how liberals see the world. Start everything from first principles and if you don’t know why something is, just destroy it.
It’s now how I see the world. Sometimes we don’t know why we started doing something, but the fact that it’s widely accepted indicates there must have been a good reason it was started in the first place.
I’m not all that familiar with the ads, but 1) I probably see nuance where others don’t. 2) PR is PR. If the ad were worded the way you wanted, it would probably be humorously weak, and wouldn’t accomplish anything.
Yes, that’s right. Because the nuanced argument actually is humorously weak.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.