Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
DY
but if youve been ordering 2 + 2 pies for years and years and consistently been geting 5 pies. You have proven that the store has a funky policy of sending an extra pie when pizza are ordered in that combination. In other words that may in fact be the norm in that store. As little sense as it may make mathematicly, after all We all know 2+2 doesn’t equal 5. Yet in this case, at that pizza store, in a very real sense it does!
Is it absolute proof? Of course not. ( obviously It is possible that for years and years you have had the same hard of hearing delivery man, but at a certain point you would agree that it isn’t likely). it cant just be ignored as “anecdotal facts”
DY I would also like to point out in regard to point number 1, a few posts earlier you said “As has been amply demonstrated, that’s a false argument.”
you now say “I am not at all uncertain that 1) is false; I just don’t know which of the three parts to the equation changed.” You can hardly call that ample demonstration.
DY
Weve covered that to.
It takes away from the real issue. when i point out to people the two points outlined above as to why the age gap is not the cause. Even after a while spent convinving them that this is true. And that simply “closing the gap” will not, nor can it, help. The best I get is Hmmm lets deal with that later and focus on silly age gaps now.
This is not helpful (and potentially harmful)and certainly draws attention and resources (not just financial) away from addressing the real more fundamental issues at hand
1 has nor been demonstrated, amply or otherwise. (az made a few guesses he wasn’t really sure and you were less certain, is that the ample demonstration you mean)
2 see above.
The numbers if they turn out to be a problem in spite of not having been a problem in the past can be dealt with AFTER the more immediate dating divide is solved
It would even the playing field than in of itself is a worthy maaleh. ESPECIALLY if girls were at a disadvantage already as a result of a “age gap” The girls who say yes may have a leg up on the other girls on boys list.
Again though this is just an idea and not my main point. Feel free to disagree with it, I thik it would help, if id doesn’t nu nu.
This discussion is going in circles and ha gotten off track.
It began with MOP saying we all know the sidduch crises is a result of the “age gap”
I replied that we don’t all know that for two main reasons: 1) The age gap isn’t new and yet the shiduch crises is. and 2) The age gap doesn’t explain the dating divide.
All other discussion as to what should be done or what I think is the real cause are side issues that you have been getting to caught up in.
You believe evening the playing field wont help? Fine lets keep artificially giving boys and unfair advantage. That isn’t my point anyway.
Getting rid of the upperhand we artificially assign boys by insisting only they go first
Mamaleh
There are plenty people available. If the numbers were reversed and 112 girls vied over 100 girls. If we give each guy a list if 10-20 girls like we currently do and prevent girls from initiating, the same silly criteria would be used in picking.in other words regardless of the global statistics, for each boy there are a seemingly endless number of girls. So the total number doesn’t really affect each individual.
DY
I suggested a few ideas, take away the upperhand we unfairly give boys. Provide more venues to date so as to get more dates to more girls. There are others some of which willl meet with more resistance than others, but all of which might actually help
Interjection,
Agreed and that is part of the problem.
Az
Calling it silly doesn’t make it less true. DY provided a nice post by a phd outling the age gap theory. In it the author identified the problem as many girls suffering from infrequent dating. DY (and yourself I thougt) agreed with this but contended that it wasn’t as worth focussing on as the marriage issue or that it to us a result of the age gap. I never saud girls dont get any dates. All I said was there is a dating divide unexplainable by the age gap, that is causing the “shiduch crises”
DY
As to silly criteria here are but a few. Color of father’s shirt (recent yated shiduch forum), the old cliches plastic table cloth etc, yichus, where in Europe the ancestors were from, demanding full support, age (this may be what has been confusing you, age is a factor but not THE cause), grandmother pushing a wagon, premature infant (recent ami column) etc.
This is what has changed in the past 15-20 years and what is causing the “crises” Not demographics that hasn’t changed
DY
A. Of course some boys will marry girls already in shiduchim as they allways have. It is not like their has been a mass shift in age disparity among couples. Make dating less rigid, remove obstacles int he way of girls getting dates and nature will take its course as it has in the past resulting in more girls getting dates and thus married than today.
C. I agree. Though my point is even in a “closed game” where only 112 players are vying over 100 seats. And the doors are locked. It still would be an advantage to make the game as fair as possible (giving the deaf players hearing aids, the slower players boosters so they can run the same speed. Sure 12 players will be left standing, though I think its making the game fair is a worthy goal. (again though I dont think this is comparable since in real life the doors arent closed)
DY.
I’ll address your points in order:
A. No but chairs (and players) are constantly added so as long as we try to level the playing field and keep the game fair most players will end up with a seat eventually. True sine never will but sadly this was allways the case, but the current “crises” will be gone.
B. See above. Plus addressing fairness is better than nothing. I don’t think the age gap will get more girls married since it cannot explain the “dating divide” tm.
C. No gaurantee, just a way to even things. The hope is when a guy has a list of girls that “look the same on paper” some can stand out by saying yes first.
Brony
You’ve misunderstood. Im not saying to let the girls go first, merely to level the playing field to let either side go first. We have to try to level the field as much as possible removing the unfair advantage one group has.
Even if the numbers were strictly true and 112 girls were being matched up with 100 boys. And these numbers would not change, ie no more players or chairs added to the mix. It STILL would be right to let each side go first to at least give all 112 girls a fighting chance (although in that fake scenario 12 girls would still be left standing, at least the game is fair) This has been addressed before think of it as 12 girls who are hard of hearing, the game of musical chairs will not be fair no matter how many chairs are added unless the issue of their hearing is addressed as well. Granted if ONLY the hearing is addressed 12 girls will still be left standing, but at least the game is fair.
Granted this may be complicated, but it has been addressed at length already.
I don’t hink this will end the crises. I do know that the “age gap” alone is not the cause (nor can it be) thus dealing with it alone can not possibly solve anything.
DY
” theoretically be true “
whohoo progress!!!
PBA
I would add a few kneitches. Think of it as some less comfortable chairs in the mix. These chairs do not stand a chance. Unless the chairs can call out and say “Hey I’m right here and available, don’t bother dancing around all the chairs trying to find an available one just sit here” Then at least all the chairs have a chance.
(I know it is a silly mashal, but I wasn’t the first to bring in musical chairs, which is silly to begin with as has been discussed)
DY both. Plus It will get people married quicker
Brony,
I’ve been explaining at leangth, the shiduech crises us often described as many women suffer from “infrequent dating” in other words there is a dating disparity this can not be explained by a age gap since even if 100 guys are dating 112 girls, each guy goes out with more than one girl. Thus there is an excess of dates available not a shortage! Yet many girls are not getting dates. Granted not all girls can get married if those numvers were rigid and stagnant, but they should all get dates.” The “dating divide” tm can’t be explained by the “age gap”. And leveling the playing field between guys and girls MAY help those girls who suffer from “infrequent dating” (in spite if their being enough dates available) by helping them avoid just having to sit there waiting/davening to get picked.
DY,
” I’m not sure what you want with the rest of your post. Will these things create more boys, hence more demand?”
No they will create more dates hence more weddings.
You can call it a mantra or whatever you like that doesn’t make it less true.
There are enough dates for all girls please understand this crucial point. Dating us not done 1:1.
Brony,
Don’t get caught up on specifics. Evening the yes playing field is but one idea.
I’m curious though, how do you think you debunked it?
DY
It was you who first mentioned supply and demand. There is no shortage of dates available and yet many girls suffer from “infrequent dating” despite their being a mire than adeqyete supply.
As to what can be done to end the crises, pretty much anything that takes away the upperhand we currently give guys (example let women say yes first instead of limitibg it to men, stop perpetuating the idea that 10% of girls are doomed not to get married). These are simpler ideas.
More complex ideas that would meet more resistance but would get more girls dates, and thus more girls married are increasing venues to allow nous and girls to meet. For example encouraging meals with similar boys and girls thus in effect granting each girl at the meal a “date” with several compatable guys at once.
DY,
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.
DY
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 you
DY
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 place
Also DY,
On your imaginary planet it us a mathematical truism that the dating demographics changed?
DY
why would I when that is clearly false.
I agree with the rigidity/conformity issue
AZ
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 yidden
AZ
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.
DY
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?
DY
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?
DY
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”?
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.
DY,
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 horse
AZ
Finally!
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!
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 again
AZ
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?
DY
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 is
Az
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,)
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 problem
Az
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)
AZ
I agree there is no need to learn up what an anonymous poster said. You however are sticking a lot into his/her post. The takeaway is that the dating process among chasisim is not as rigid as amongst us. The casue effect you lay out and the one you attribute to me may or may not be true but it doesn’t change anything. The truth is it would be hard to ascertain which came first unles we can trace back to when one of the two began. (hmmm in which population CAN we trace back a new rigid dating process in which the guy goes first, and the start of a shiduch crises, never mind I know and Im pretty sure you do to).
The point is by chasidim it is not always the boy who picks girls from a seemingly endless list. This is what Ive been saying all along and mamaleh’s anonymous comment supports and you agreed (though Im ready for you to change your mind when you realize this point)
DY, that wasn’t mentioned in the comment you said I made up, and I never ever said that. I said age gap not significant, even a 1 yr gap should produce a crises.
Don’t hold your breath for a response from Az
AZ
not to worry. I already know why it is new and have been explaining it to you since the start of this discussion, and from the fact that you are afraid to discuss it makes it pretty clear that you do to, though you don’t want to acknowledge it since it throws a wrench in your “Theory”
Also you do realize mamale supports what I have been saying. That among chasidim the initial picking is not exclusively in the guys hands
Did you not get what (s)he said? Or have you not understood what I have been saying
You seem to agree with Mamale or now will you change your mind since his/her statement further dents your “theory”?
DY,
Now you’ve really confused me . Which fact did I make up? That chasidim don’t have a crises? Or That we didn’t 15 – 20 years ago?
DY it is becasue that is how our shiduch is set up. It is crazy and must be changed. It was not always this way and among chasidim it isnt this way either. This is why the “shidduch crises” is a recent phenomena and why it doesnt exist by chasidim
I have been saying this since the get go.
Az,
Regarding your “just wondering” question its mostly because the guy is the one who does the picking, if he gets a no he picks another and another. While the girl sits there waiting to be picked.
Furthermore because some misguided people have terrified girls into believing that there are 10% more guys than girls (true or not, many are under this impression) thus just the possubilty of a yes is jumped on more than guys who have been told they can be as picky as they want since hey you have a list.
Mostly the first point though
MOP
The question is what to do. The “solution” of having boys date younger will not help the current “crises” at all. And I believe would introduce a new “divorce crises” TM
DY
You keep repeating that nonsense, A prerequisite to get married is dating. If girls can’t get dates, they wont get married no matter how many boys are available. If girls are having trouble getting dates when there are more than enough available, there is no way anything will change unless the problem of uneven dating is addressed (as much as possible).
The “solutions” offered by having people date closer in age wont solve that.
Unless you are suggesting strictly having everybody date ONLY theri age. Kind of like making it so there are 100 girls vying over 100 chairs after which the room is locked and nobody leaves until everybody gets a seat. I suppose in that imaginary situation the fact that 12 of the girl are hard of hearing wouldnt matter since they dont have any competition and have enough seats.
Is that your suggestion?
AZ I ignore it because it is demonstrably wrong.
There are more than enough dates for all 112 girls. ALL!! Every last one. There is even more than enough dates for every last girl to get more than one date!
(Granted there may not be enough for all to marry.)
The age gap Can not possibly explain why many girls “suffer from infrequent dating” thus there is something else that is preventing these girls from getting dates.
Adding more boys to the mix wont help solve whatever that other issue is
DY
They cant, nor did I ever say they can.
Im still waiting for an explanation as to how adding more boys who won’t date the 12 girls who aren’t getting dates will help all 112 get married.
DY
I agree, though that is all the “age gap” is a maaiseh.
And, one with kashas at that
Juboy613, I was asked
If I feel comfortable answering I answer If it is above my pay grade I’d pass it on.
This one was easy
Depends on the bachur
No
Yes
Its fine
hope this helps
AZ
The reason I’m having this conversation is that I dont think the numbers are THE issue. I think it is a cute chap that some well-meaning people have latched on to as the panacea to all shidduch related issues. This deprives us from having real converstions about deper falws in our dating process that I and others believe are the real source of the disparity.
As Ive expalined multiple times the reason the Age-gap can not possibly be THE cause of the crises is primarily two fold:
1) It does not at all explain the dating discrepecny that exists. There are enough dates for every girl yet many arent getting dates. Please understand this point dating is NOT done 1:1.
2) The age gap has always existed, yet the crises is new. Old demographic issues can not explain new crises.
Because of these two reasons (DY has attempted to explain why 1 was incorrect though unsuccessfully, nobody has attempted to explain why 2 is incorrect)Many dont view the age gap as a plausible.
Because of this I think it is important to oppose efforts to label the shiduch crises as the “age gap” because it detracts from what I and others beleive is the real issue. And thta is to get more girls more dates by coming up with ways to level the playing field. Adding more boys to date the girls who already have dates will hardly help at all,
The key is to get the girls who have trouble getting dates more dates.
(Plus i think convincing immature boys to date is a terrible terrible idea, though I do concede that, there is room to disagree on that issue, so I have not brought it up until now, though it is another underlying reason why I oppose the “solution” focusing on the “age gap” issue though again I do believe reasonable people can disagree on this point).
Why do you oppose giving girls equal footing in the shidduch process. I.e. convince shadchanim to supply girls with lists of potential dates have them research etc and approach boys with a girls who already said yes, thus giving that girl a leg up compared to the other grils the boy has on his list?
DY,
no I Think the numbers would resolve themselves as they have in the past. There are many variables that are being simplified for the musical chair model (as you agreed too) In real life chairs and players are constantly being added and the game never really ends. Thus all we have to do is make sure the game stays fair and everybody has a (relatively) equal chance, and over time almost everybody will get married as they have in the past.
What am saying is even if the m=numbers is an issue (like in the limited musical chairs model) just adding chairs STILL wont solve the cirses as long as the games’s lopsidedness isnt addressed.
DY,
granted.
Though getting more chairs wouldn’t help either unless the hearing was addressed as well.
That is essentially my point. The lack of chairs isnt enough to explain why the same group is never getting a seat after multiple rounds, there is something else going on like hearing. (Both becuase the number of chairs hasnt changed recently Though th way the game is played has) Thus getting more chairs wont help them at all, while hearing aids would help THEM ie give them an equal shot. Though overall some players would still be left out.
Focusing on the numeber of chairs when some cant even hear the music stopping is a fruitless exercise.
That is my point
AZ
It just occurred to me not only is the musical chairs analogy simplistic, it is backwards! In musical chairs the players (girls in the analogy) fight over the fewer chairs (boys) each girl has an equal chance! It would be an absurd game if the chairs chose players to sit on them, then the players don’t even have a fair chance the chairs are free to pick based on any arbitrary quality they wish!?!
Give the girls a chance let them play that is All I am saying,
That and be willing to reconsider if something else is going on if the same girls are consistantly left standing
AZ
1. Depends how accurate it is your response about chassidim was not accurate but at least you tried. I’m curious why you wont even try to address why it is a new phenomena.
2. It is simplistic beacuase its not just 110 girls vying for 100 chairs there are many other variables. Chairs and players are constatnly being added. The “game” contiues indefinity. To take a snapshot in time and pretend ALL 100 23 year old boys are ALL vying for 110 20 year old girls. and once the music stops the 10 remaining will never get a chance to play again, is not an accurate model for the shidduch system. Some boys start the game earlier some later, some drop out in middle for whatever reason some go for chairs that have been hanging out a while some prefer new chairs that have just been added etc etc and most importantly the game can keep going and going with new players and chairs constantly being added
If the same group of girls are consistently left standing after every round it is time to check their hearing.
3. They dont chasidim are a year or two older than their spouses. you made up that they enter the dating pool at the same time.
Anyway even taking the disastrous position of having boys dating younger, thus equalizig the playing field what is the plan to help the 3,000 older singles?
DY,
Im saying that the shortage of boys isnt THE problem, the problem is that as the system is set up (currently not in the past). The girls are complelty at the guys mercy and many arent getting (enough) dates in spite of there not being a shortage of dates. getting more boys to not date the group of girls who arent getting dates when there are 300 dates available for every 110 girls, will in no way help the “crises”
The key is to get more girls more dates, not to get more guys to vie for the girls who already have plenty dates
If you arent willing to have discussions about the fallacies of your argument, how can we get anywhere.
My bringing up historical precedent is to demonstrate that your “theroy” is flawed. How can you be unwilling to discuss a giant gaping hole in your theory.
Getting dates will move things along as it has in the past, that is my point. Nothing has changed in demographics (obviously we nay have grown but that would be equal to boys and girls)I can only assume you agree with his since after repeated questioning you wont discuss it I assume because you realize what a gaping hole it blows in your theory). what has changed is our method of dating. Thus by examining our method, and where the backlog is (which you agree to) And then (and this is key!) examining what has CHANGED historically. We can discuss how to correct the problem and undo the change.
The musical chairs isnt a simple game of musical chairs. This is a more complex game with a many variables, chairs being added and removed for a variety of reasons, more importantly the game never stops with one chair left more chairs and peope are constanly added! It keeps going and going. Boiling it down to 100 girls vying over 110 chairs is too simpistic and not accurate. And even in that situation if the same 10 girls are left standing every time the music stops. You would be right to check their hearing or something, and not simply saying well we are 10 seats short so obviously SOME people will be left standing. Sure but why is it so slanted and more importnalty how can we make the game more fair.
Also chasidim dont marry girls their age there is almost always at least 1 -2 year discrepancy.