Search Results: single men and married women

Came across this comment:

"My first observations on the alpha-beta-delta-gamma-omega hierarchy was in college. Around 13yrs to 16 years the girls start to date and settle with the high-value men. Looking back it's clear that back then it was primary about looks, secondary about social status. The hottest girls got together with the best looking males. The dominant male (the jock) got the sluts.

The same observations kept on returning in every social group I participated. Good looks are the main attractor. Now, once the hierarchy is set, it's pretty fixed. Most jocks and good looking men married their highschool/college sweetheart, have a family and some are now in debt/divorced with alimony settlements. They became "beta" very fast.

A few years before the girls go on the job-market, the dimension of "money" becomes more and more important. But only slightly. The longer they wait with settling down, the more important it becomes.
The delta males married the average girls.

The gamma males from back then, married the unattractive warpigs.

The omega males are single.

In fact, the whole system is a cascade, and because the social environment changes so fast and so often, you have the illusion that hypergamy is rampant. When in fact it's the social environment that is changing so fast. The females are merely catching up. You have to look at a closed social system to see what is really going on."

Summarize:
In highschool/college the one her friends approved of and what was considered most important was looks and popularity for most girls. As a woman finds herself in the working world (parents are less likely to support her), money becomes more important and increases the longer she waits to settle down. what is considered a catch and approved by her friends is a male who is financially secure, has a well paying, high status job. Approval from her friends shift more from looks/popularity to wealth and job status and this is the men show now prefers.

Would you support a government policy that encouraged relational education prior to getting married or having the 1st offspring? The idea would be to improve the quality of relationships in your country and thus reduce social burden and improve livelihood of people. The reward would be a tax benefit for the married couple.

Example policy would provide educational support courses [at a certain age], training on relationships, and professional counseling for the woman and man. A certification test would be required and approval from a counseling board. Certification is required and standards would have to be upheld. Approved counselors would need to provide approval they are ready for marriage. They could get married without approval, but would not get the tax benefit if they failed. Followup counseling sessions would also be required as part of the plan.

If a child is on the way or within some period of time, they have to attend a variety of training classes on nutrition, relationships, parenting skills, counseling. Counseling could lead to other required treatments for mental health. Certification is required and if they are not approved, they don't get the benefit (see below) and have to continue

Reward for the work would be a deduction on taxes. The deduction on taxes would be an immediate loss to tax payers with the idea being would reduce social costs in crime and improve social well being.

There is a net gain in jobs, so some benefit in economic activity... although the money comes from social taxation... cost to tax payers in short term.


Note: Flaws: at some point if enough people are married... single people are paying for married people and there aren't enough of them... yea... nothing is perfect... details...