Marital Concepts from the 1950s

[xxoo]

Read more: Women have it all but are less happy than forty years ago... | Daily Mail Online

 

 

The original paper

The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness

 

That's a fascinating paper! I lost an hour reading it.

 

What do you think about the reported rates of men's happiness over these periods? It sounds like things aren't as bad for men now than some report

 

I think this point from the discussion may explain some of the change in subjective reports of happiness in women:

 

It has been recognized that an individual’s assessment of their well-being may reflect the social desirability of responses and Kahneman (1999) argues that people in good circumstances may be hedonically better off than people in worse circumstances, yet they may require more to declare themselves happy. In the context of the findings presented in this paper, women may now feel more comfortable being honest about their true happiness and have thus deflated their previously inflated responses. Or, as in Kahneman’s example, the increased opportunities available to women may have increased what women require to declare themselves happy. And indeed, Figure 7 shows that contrary to the subjective well-being trends we document, female suicide rates have been falling, even as male suicide rates have remained roughly constant through most of our sample. As such, from the early 1970s to the mid-1990s the ratio of female-to-male suicide declined.

 

In other words, women are increasingly evaluating more areas of their lives for happiness, raising their standard of "happy", but meanwhile suicide rates (an objective measure) are down.

[toolforgrowth]

That's a fascinating paper! I lost an hour reading it.

 

What do you think about the reported rates of men's happiness over these periods? It sounds like things aren't as bad for men now than some report

 

I think this point from the discussion may explain some of the change in subjective reports of happiness in women:

 

It has been recognized that an individual’s assessment of their well-being may reflect the social desirability of responses and Kahneman (1999) argues that people in good circumstances may be hedonically better off than people in worse circumstances, yet they may require more to declare themselves happy. In the context of the findings presented in this paper, women may now feel more comfortable being honest about their true happiness and have thus deflated their previously inflated responses. Or, as in Kahneman’s example, the increased opportunities available to women may have increased what women require to declare themselves happy. And indeed, Figure 7 shows that contrary to the subjective well-being trends we document, female suicide rates have been falling, even as male suicide rates have remained roughly constant through most of our sample. As such, from the early 1970s to the mid-1990s the ratio of female-to-male suicide declined.

 

In other words, women are increasingly evaluating more areas of their lives for happiness, raising their standard of "happy", but meanwhile suicide rates (an objective measure) are down.

 

Interesting point of view. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but I think it's an interesting conclusion.

 

The next point of assessment would be "what does it mean to raise the standard of happiness, and what is the outcome?"

 

This conjecture implies that happiness is something that can be quantifiably measured. In other words, (criterion 1 + criterion 2 + criterion 3, etc.) = happiness. If women are raising their standard of happiness, that would imply the number of criteria is increasing in order for the equation to balance. In other words, women have more criteria that must be met in order to qualify as "happy".

 

As such, as their access to a greater number if criteria has increased, their overall happiness has continued to decrease.

 

Will this trend continue? If it does, does that lend credence to the argument that "women are never happy and can never be satisfied"?

 

As a man, I refuse responsibility for any criterion on the left hand side of the equation.

[xxoo]

Interesting point of view. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but I think it's an interesting conclusion.

 

The next point of assessment would be "what does it mean to raise the standard of happiness, and what is the outcome?"

 

This conjecture implies that happiness is something that can be quantifiably measured. In other words, (criterion 1 + criterion 2 + criterion 3, etc.) = happiness. If women are raising their standard of happiness, that would imply the number of criteria is increasing in order for the equation to balance. In other words, women have more criteria that must be met in order to qualify as "happy".

 

As such, as their access to a greater number if criteria has increased, their overall happiness has continued to decrease.

 

Will this trend continue? If it does, does that lend credence to the argument that "women are never happy and can never be satisfied"?

 

As a man, I refuse responsibility for any criterion on the left hand side of the equation.

 

Take man/woman out of it, and I think the theory makes sense.

 

For example, someone who grows up poor may be happy with small luxuries.

If they manage to go to college, get a good job, get our of the poor neighborhood and into a middle class neighborhood, their standard of happy may increase. Keeping up with the Joneses, so to speak.

 

I'm quite happy

[toolforgrowth]

Take man/woman out of it, and I think the theory makes sense.

 

For example, someone who grows up poor may be happy with small luxuries.

If they manage to go to college, get a good job, get our of the poor neighborhood and into a middle class neighborhood, their standard of happy may increase. Keeping up with the Joneses, so to speak.

 

I'm quite happy

 

In other words, your argument is that society's overall level of happiness decreases as their access to the number of criteria that can generate happiness increases?

 

That seems completely backward and counter-intuitive.

[123321]

For example, someone who grows up poor may be happy with small luxuries.

If they manage to go to college, get a good job, get our of the poor neighborhood and into a middle class neighborhood, their standard of happy may increase. Keeping up with the Joneses, so to speak.

 

Keeping man/woman out of it, we call those sort of people IDIOTS.

[toolforgrowth]

Keeping man/woman out of it, we call those sort of people IDIOTS.

 

Those are the people who are never satisfied with what they have. They always want more and more. My xWW was like that...nothing was ever good enough. Finally, I just stopped trying. There's no sense in fighting a continually losing battle.

 

This study suggests that the majority of women demonstrate that same behavior.

[jay1983]

In other words, your argument is that society's overall level of happiness decreases as their access to the number of criteria that can generate happiness increases?

 

That seems completely backward and counter-intuitive.

 

I get what she's saying. People always want more, it's like when you buy a car, you want the best and everything cost more. V8 motor $3000+ leather seats $2000+ rims, sound system etc. Your always gonna want something better. It's human nature.

[toolforgrowth]

I get what she's saying. People always want more, it's like when you buy a car, you want the best and everything cost more. V8 motor $3000+ leather seats $2000+ rims, sound system etc. Your always gonna want something better. It's human nature.

 

The reality is that while you may want more, you can't have it ALL. Does that mean you choose to be perpetually unhappy as a result?

[jay1983]

Those are the people who are never satisfied with what they have. They always want more and more. My xWW was like that...nothing was ever good enough. Finally, I just stopped trying. There's no sense in fighting a continually losing battle.

 

This study suggests that the majority of women demonstrate that same behavior.

 

Sadly that's what I believe it is too. In general Women are more materialistic than men. I understand not all women are like that, but I can't help but notice the overwhelming majority of attractive women are. It's weird, it's like the more attractive they are, the more materialistic they are as well.

[jay1983]

The reality is that while you may want more, you can't have it ALL. Does that mean you choose to be perpetually unhappy as a result?

 

No absolutely not, I make due with what I have.

 

Another thing I wanna throw out, is this isn't so much the case in other countries, where people who are dirt poor are much happier than over here.

[toolforgrowth]

Sadly that's what I believe it is too. In general Women are more materialistic than men. I understand not all women are like that, but I can't help but notice the overwhelming majority of attractive women are. It's weird, it's like the more attractive they are, the more materialistic they are as well.

 

If we accept xxoo's premise to be true, then this is the conclusion I can draw based on the information at hand.

 

xxoo, I am in no way suggesting that you yourself are like this. You don't come across like you are, so please don't believe I am attempting to insult you. I'm truly not.

 

But the implications regarding the general female populace are staggering.

[xxoo]

I don't necessarily see it as "unhappy"....just more ambitious. People who strive and achieve the most do so because they weren't satisfied with less. They are driven to achieve more.

 

I know a lot of "never happy" people, who just keep striving and achieving. Men may have conventionally been more like this all along, and women are catching up and possibly have surpassed.

 

Yes, I am forever the optimist! I am not one of these never satisfied people. That's more my husband's thing. He's always got a goal, itching to do more. I don't see it as a bad thing.

[jay1983]

Come to think about it, I've never met an attractive women who's husband had a low income, or a mid wage job. The further upscale you go, the better the women look. On my side of town, the women look horrible. Take it to midtown or one of the nice suburbs and the 50 yr old with 3 kids are hot. I don't even wanna think about pro athlete and famous people's wives.

[123321]

Come to think about it, I've never met an attractive women who's husband had a low income, or a mid wage job. The further upscale you go, the better the women look. On my side of town, the women look horrible. Take it to midtown or one of the nice suburbs and the 50 yr old with 3 kids are hot. I don't even wanna think about pro athlete and famous people's wives.

 

Science says this is a fact. Women will almost without exception wave their hands and say it's not how THEY are, but it has to be someone ...

[123321]

I don't necessarily see it as "unhappy"....just more ambitious.

 

So why did they report themselves as unhappy?

[elaine567]

The more upscale you go the better everyone looks, because whatever the original genetic material involved, they always look better with the trappings of wealth.

They tend to look after themselves well, have jobs that are not physically taxing, go on frequent holidays, wear flattering clothes made of expensive cloth, beautiful accessories, drive fantastic cars, live in lovely houses, are well groomed, good haircuts, manicured nails, speak nicely, and have good manners.

Together it all creates a great impression.

[ltjg45]

So why did they report themselves as unhappy?

 

Because they hasn't achieved the ultimate goal that they wanted.

 

I feel that way right now not because I am not even close to the goal I aimed for but the fact that I started far later than I should have been. At this point in my life, I should be getting close to being done with college with at least a Bachelor's Degree and almost done with my Master's and yet, at this very point, I am just getting started with college.

 

That would put it in the "never happy" camp until I get there and, even if I do, I would still hate that I lost 6+ years or more that I fail behind on.

[truncated]

I get what she's saying. People always want more, it's like when you buy a car, you want the best and everything cost more. V8 motor $3000+ leather seats $2000+ rims, sound system etc. Your always gonna want something better. It's human nature.

 

 

A relative of mine is like that. Multi million dollar "main house" five or six vacation properties in Europe and down south, boats, luxury cars, etc. etc., etc.

 

He left his first wife saying she and he didn't want the same things in life (she had a decent job and was happy with her life) He married the ow he was seeing on the side. They are divorced now.

 

He has everything that society says should make him happy, yet he is extremely unhappy, always wanting more "things". It's as if he is a bototmless pit that nothing can ever fill.

 

i look at some of what he was and part of me thinks it would be nice to have them, but another part thinks they'd only make me unhappy and unfulfilled.

[123321]

Come to think about it, I've never met an attractive women who's husband had a low income, or a mid wage job. The further upscale you go, the better the women look. On my side of town, the women look horrible. Take it to midtown or one of the nice suburbs and the 50 yr old with 3 kids are hot. I don't even wanna think about pro athlete and famous people's wives.

 

Science says this is a fact. Women will almost without exception wave their hands and say it's not how THEY are, but it has to be someone ...

 

To be clear, there was a strong correlation between how attractive a married woman was and how much her husband earned. I don't recall if they determined causality.

[xxoo]

So why did they report themselves as unhappy?

 

 

Because it's a subjective measure, and they are thinking of things they want to improve and achieve. They dare to dream.

[123321]

Because ....

 

Because ....

 

So they ARE unhappy? Which is it?

[ltjg45]

So they ARE unhappy? Which is it?

 

Yes, they are for the reasons we both have mentioned so far.

 

If I was a part of that study, I would state that I am unhappy.

[toolforgrowth]

The more upscale you go the better everyone looks, because whatever the original genetic material involved, they always look better with the trappings of wealth.

They tend to look after themselves well, have jobs that are not physically taxing, go on frequent holidays, wear flattering clothes made of expensive cloth, beautiful accessories, drive fantastic cars, live in lovely houses, are well groomed, good haircuts, manicured nails, speak nicely, and have good manners.

Together it all creates a great impression.

 

I'm not convinced this the entire reason.

 

I tend to think there's a degree of truth to hypergamy. But I will readily admit there is no direct scientific evidence for it. I tend to look at it like any other psychological behavior: We can observe the behavior and its effects and make educated guesses about it even though we can point out the specific "BPD" gene or "hypergamy" gene.

 

However, I also believe that not every woman behaves hypergamously.

 

But I think there is some truth to your assertion. People with money can be surgically rebuilt to look like whatever they want. Speaking of which, am I the only person who thinks the two women who had surgery to look like Barbie are disgusting?

[jay1983]

Science says this is a fact. Women will almost without exception wave their hands and say it's not how THEY are, but it has to be someone ...

 

Same thing happens when we discuss physical attributes. Guys say all women want the celebrity look (or something close to it) and all the women on here say no that's not true, my 10 is someone else's 4.

 

Then some of the guys on forums start trolling the dating sites. They put up pics of models and start taking screen shots of what happens. We had someone link one while back, it went on for like 50 pages of screen shot after screen shot, all the girls (especially attractive ones) handing out their numbers and arguing to take it up bum, all kinds of sh*t.

[toolforgrowth]

I'm not convinced this the entire reason.

 

I tend to think there's a degree of truth to hypergamy. But I will readily admit there is no direct scientific evidence for it. I tend to look at it like any other psychological behavior: We can observe the behavior and its effects and make educated guesses about it even though we can point out the specific "BPD" gene or "hypergamy" gene.

 

However, I also believe that not every woman behaves hypergamously.

 

But I think there is some truth to your assertion. People with money can be surgically rebuilt to look like whatever they want. Speaking of which, am I the only person who thinks the two women who had surgery to look like Barbie are disgusting?

 

Oops...I meant to say we CAN'T point out the specific genes. Darned phone lol