Jacq

@soblackandblue @dilanesper Okay, I think I've figured out why you, specifically, have a hard time forming and maintaining relationships. Have a good life! I've broken my practice of not engaging willfully obtuse people online too many times for one day.

@JOesterblad @dilanesper You showed me two graphics that show that: 1. Men are more open to dating 2. Women are more likely to say they have trouble finding a partner who meets their standards.

Let's talk about Matt's piece today. His thesis-- that all the discussion about "encouraging women to marry" ignores that men don't want to marry-- is correct as far as it goes. (And he implies, but doesn't quite state, that this has something to do with anti-feminist thought.)

@soblackandblue @dilanesper Yeah, people argue with you because it's not true.

@JOesterblad @dilanesper Numbers for both genders are declining because more young women are OK with being single, because they are less dependent on men. This is obvious but people insist on arguing about it.

@soblackandblue @dilanesper That has been true for all of human history and is, if anything, marginally less true today, when there are more marriages among age peers than ever before. So what relevance does it have to this conversation? You still have yet to make a point.

@JOesterblad @dilanesper By 45 the percentage of men and women who marry is roughly equal. The gap exists at younger ages, because again, men are competing with older men that usually have more wealth/status.

@soblackandblue @dilanesper That has essentially nothing to do with the shrinking number of men who *ever* marry or have kids.

@JOesterblad @dilanesper They partner up at older ages because they're competing with older men for women and women prefer older men.

@soblackandblue @dilanesper My point is: men say they want to be married, but their behavior belies. They don't partner up until late in life and they don't always turn those partnerships into marriages. Women are less likely to say they want to marry, but the ones who *do* are very likely to partner up.

@soblackandblue @dilanesper Literally none of this is relevant? What is your point?

@soblackandblue @dilanesper ...okay, and? young women are much more likely than young men to be in a relationship. pewresearch.org/social-trends/…

@JOesterblad @dilanesper "the final arbiter of whether a specific relationship becomes a marriage still belongs to the man" And the final arbiter or whether a relationship happens at all is still the woman.

@jlrizzoii @ferald_gord But of course, none of those are perfect parallels because that's speech to recommend a concrete physical medical procedure. This was an argument about a situation where the speech *is* the medical procedure. Talk therapy for anorexia would probably be the better example.

@jlrizzoii @ferald_gord If abortion were made illegal, of course the state could condition medical licenses on doctors *not recommending the illegal procedure.* Similarly, if a new credible study came out tomorrow that the morning after pill causes suicidal ideation so severe that the FDA pulled it...

the supreme court's conversion therapy case pretty much rests on the idea that talk therapy is speech, and thus different from other medical treatments (which are not speech). and not gonna lie that distinction feels weak to me

@Terraphant @JoelKatz @dilanesper What about talk therapy for anorexics and telling them that they really are overweight?

@JoelKatz @dilanesper No, I am saying it’s a category error. Talk therapy is not like medical practice. Questioning a client’s assertion that he is really a different sex is not analogous to telling a lung cancer patient it’s ok to smoke.

Justice Jackson: "So, too, may it prohibit a doctor from encouraging a patient to commit suicide, or a dietician from telling an anorexic patient to eat less. Likewise, no one would bat an eye if a State required its doctors to discourage, but not encourage, smoking tobacco."

And the people waging an ideological campaign to make you think she's not a smart judge are hoping you'll be too racist to read her opinion and see that she's making reasonable points.

@georgejone66403 @HumanCynicToday @ProsecutorsPod That's a political basis. It's quite established in federal law that no federal court can interpret a state constitution differently than the state supreme court does.

@HumanCynicToday @ProsecutorsPod Quite frankly, the basis was that State courts can't ignore or overrule their State constitutions.

Personally I think people are completely misreading Jackson. She's not dumb; she's uninterested in following legal principles she doesn't agree with. She's not unlike Scalia in the early days, and I think the future of liberal jurisprudence is much more likely to look like her than Kagan.

77,302,579 more tweets like this and i will be able to move forward.

@soblackandblue @dilanesper Men are more likely to say they want to marry *someday,* but less likely to think that day is today. Despite all the changing gender norms, the final arbiter of whether a specific relationship becomes a marriage still belongs to the man 99% of the time. They aren't asking!

@dilanesper This sort of gender gap is pretty consistent in polling. When it's brought up I either se denial (men are lying!) or some variation of "of COURSE women are less gung-ho about kids, they do all the work!" which would suggest that women are in fact resisting marriage/childbirth.

I don’t think that he was a normal president “until J6” actually. I seem to remember him being very abnormal!!!

@brian_t_muldoon @estherzelda0514 That's the "high initiative" part of the thesis. Women are more likely to take the initiative to pursue a tip-top, fulfilling relationship, where men are willing to tolerate an unhappy marriage as long as they don't believe a happier one is possible/more likely than not.

There’s a lot of research showing men rarely leave a marriage that they rate as average or better. You would be surprised how many women in marriages they themselves rate as average or better decide to leave anyway. I’m telling you as a man, just give us average and some peace and quiet and we’re happy. We are not hard to please.

Here's my theory: A certain amount of infidelity and emotional breakdown is baked into marriage and humanity. What changes between individuals is tolerance for it, and the opportunity costs of leaving a marriage. Opportunity cost of leaving is typically higher for heterosexual couples than same-sex ones, because earning disparities and children are more common. The nuclear family structure has more benefits than just companionship. However, even though children and earning disparities are less common among gay men, they are simply much more tolerant of infidelity than most people, so they're going to stay married. Further, data shows men do not file for divorce at nearly the same rate women do. This initiative doesn't exactly tell you which marriages are bad, it simply tells you that women, for whatever reason, seem to have more initiave to end a marriage than men. That's the reason divorce is high among lesbians. You have two people in the marriage with high initiative when it comes to filing. Further, lesbians are neither tolerant of infidelity or emotional distance. They're less likely to have children or large earning gaps than heterosexual couples, decreasing the opportunity cost of leaving. Most importantly, lesbians are also singularly unconcerned with age and fertility in possible mate selection. Gay men are more image-based, and often fetishize youth. So do heterosexuals. Lesbians are less likely to. That means they don't see re-entering the dating pool at 40 or older as hopeless. Lesbians have the most initiative, least tolerance, and lowest opportunity costs. So they get divorced more.

@bhhdhjdjds86216 @dilanesper ...no, I absolutely would not have? You would??

@JOesterblad @dilanesper idk who "you people" refers to ... but the idea that length of sentence doesn't factor into deterrence is silly. If the sentence for murder was only six months, you're telling me you wouldn't have killed at least one person by now?

This is actually a good jump off point to talk about prison sentencing. Because, honestly, I think the public doesn't understand how awful prison is and thinks that anything short of total cruelty is a slap on the wrist. And prosecutors and the sentencing guidelines cater to that

@bhhdhjdjds86216 @dilanesper How much more research do we have to do before you people admit that sentence length has no effect on deterrence, only certainty of being caught does—and the money we spend on long prison sentences and long trials prevents us from spending money improving clearance rates.

@dilanesper but what about deterrence?

@MarkDee85 @EdrowScape @mpershan I don't know why you're limiting it to pleasure or books. If you include reading for work and reading phones, adults do a heck of a lot more than two hours a day.

@JOesterblad @EdrowScape @mpershan I can see 10 minute chunks working and maybe you get that up to 3 times a day. But anything beyond that seems completely unrealistic. In terms of adults reading for pleasure 2 hours a day = about 100 books per year. 96% of adults in USA read less than 50 books per year.

How is this low hanging fruit