I'm still not convinced! The official stats just don't make sense!

[Admin]

Looks like you missed what I was saying in my post.

When FSU girls have the opinion that there are too few men to go around, they are eager to find their man.  This opinion they hold changes the numbers, resulting in more girls seeking men than men seeking girls.

Wish you could see this.

I get it. And I got it. I just don't happen to agree with it.

Did you get my point?

- Dan

[Simoni]

I get it. And I got it. I just don't happen to agree with it.

You don't agree that when girls are more interested in men than men are in girls that it alters the stat? I am talking interested and available.
More girls.  Less guys.  Not one-to-one.

[Simoni]

I am not talking apples to oranges and will not go there.  Because that is mindless and deceptive stat.

I am saying, and my observations bear it out, that there are more women than men interested in relationships in the fsu.  Far greater than one-to-one.  Resulting in more girls for fewer serious guys.  And an FSU girl wants a serious man when she is ready for marriage.  And the lack of men make her afraid to wait too long for marriage.

And when girls BELIEVE this shortage of men to be true, it becomes reality to them.  Making more girls seeking men than men seeking girls.

[Admin]

You don't agree that when girls are more interested in men than men are in girls that it is not one-to-one?  Amazing.

You are, again, citing facts not in evidence. You appear to want to draw this into a debate (a mindless one) in which it becomes a contest of your opinion versus mine. Sorry. I ain't going there.

I dispute your premise as stated above. There is no objective substantiation to support your premise.

- Dan

[Simoni]

You are, again, citing facts not in evidence. You appear to want to draw this into a debate (a mindless one) in which it becomes a contest of your opinion versus mine. Sorry. I ain't going there.

I dispute your premise as stated above. There is no objective substantiation to support your premise.

- Dan

No, I hate debates. They are a waste of time.

I just objected to your statements that anyone who disputes your opinion that the numbers of dating age girls in the FSU are one-to-one are off-base and are trying to mislead others.  It was a big putdown to the opinions that others hold. 

I thought, obviously  incorrectly, that if I could show you the demographic workings in marriage minded women, that you would see that the stats you quote, while they may or may not be true to the entire population, are NOT accurate when discussing interested women ages 21-35.

I think we will just have to disagree on this issue.

[Admin]

No, I hate debates. They are a waste of time.

I just objected to your statements that anyone who disputes your opinion that the numbers of dating age girls in the FSU are one-to-one are off-base and are trying to mislead others.  It was a big putdown to the opinions that others hold. 

I thought, obviously  incorrectly, that if I could show you the demographic workings in marriage minded women, that you would see that the stats you quote, while they may or may not be true to the entire population, are NOT accurate when discussing interested women ages 21-35.

I think we will just have to disagree on this issue.

Boy oh boy. Where to start.

Once again - it was your friend Eduard, who decided to once again tweak in my direction over the fact that HE made an outrageous claim, and that claim was shown to be totally false.

Since then, I have merely continued to point out the objective FACTS that exist, in spite of the stated opinion of a few, some of whom (including Eduard) have a self-serving interest in perpetuating the myths.

How you can conclude stating those FACTS, and responding ONLY when tweaked, amounts to a "big putdown" is more than a little suspicious - but whatever.

- Dan

[Misha]

Soooo . . . if the argument is that RW have problems finding mates in Russia because there are too many drug-abusing criminals - guess what? The odds are NOT better, and in fact, are a bit worse, right here in the good 'ol USA.

Dan, here are some more facts:

Incarceration rates according to age and race:

White men ages 10 or older in jail in the United States: 1 in 106;
All men ages 18 or older: 1 in 54;
Hispanic men ages 18 or older 1 in 36;
Black men ages 18 or older: 1 in 15;
Black men ages 20-34 1 in 9.

So, I agree with you. If you are an African-American woman looking to date or marry an African-American man aged 20-34 who has never been in jail or does not risk being incarcerated in the future, you would likely be saying (like RW) that there are not good single men out there.

Source: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/report_detail.aspx?id=35904

[Eduard]

OK, I'll go ahead and translate this post from the Russian forum I supplied the link for in my earlier post. I think it's eye-opening: http://forum.moya-semya.ru/index.php?showtopic=15973&hl=äîáðîòà
Now I'm not going to spend a lot of time on little figure of speach and fillers - it's a long post, I'll just translate the main facts presented in this post:
According to the last Russian sensus of 2002 there were 67.6 million men and 77.6 million women (at the present time the entire population of Russia is about 143 million)
Even at the first look there is a deficit of men, about 10 million. So then it looks like 10 million women are "extra"? There is not a man for them neither good or bad! He doesn't exist! He hasn't been born.
Russian military consists of 1,134,800 people. Out of which 200,000 are women (to make it easier let's count in millions) This means that another 1 million of young men are out of the game...When they leave service the next million will be drafted and this process doesn't stop.  
There are 875,000 men in prison, so basically another million is out of the dating game. Statistically There are about 6 million alcaholics in Russia, women comprise 850,000. Another 5 million men are not in demand by marriage minded women.
Statistically there are 4 million drug adicts in Russia today. Let's say 3 million are men and 1 million women, although there are a lot fewer women adicts than 1 million, but let's just leave it ay that.
There are 3 million bums (street people with no address). Let's say 1 million are women. There are 6 million invalids, 1 million of them are women.
As in any sosciety (Russia is not an exception there are homosexuals. As a rule about 4% of male population is gay. They don't need a woman! Not any woman! He is himself a gal and his dream is to meet a handsome man. In our case 4% of 67.6 million is 2,704,000 men. We also have psychiatricly ill people, unemployed, morally challehged and other underground. Let's say there is a million of those even though there are a lot more of them, but we agreed to even it down to a smaller number.
So what do we have? ( 10+1+1+5+3+2+5+2,704+1) =30,704 million men are missing in Russia! Let's again even it down to 30 million that means 30 million women are EXTRA!!!

Now Dan, before you accuse me of manufacturing this, there is a link to this forum provided. And by the way I was made aware of this post by another RWD member. I didn't translate the whole article, just the numbers presented in it which make perfect sense and support my point of view.
Simoni is saying basically the same thing that I am. You haven't attacked him for saying the same thing. Why do you choose to attack, accuse and insult me over this issue?
I explained that Russia is facing a huge demographic problem that it is trying to address. They have large $$$ insentives in place for people to intice them to have children. It is very dangerous for Russia to lose so many young women to the West. It is quite reasonable to suggest that they might be cooking the stats numbers in order to convince RW that they have a good chance of finding their mate in Russia.
Why are you so unwilling to even accept that possibility? Do you actually trust the Russian government with everything they say or print???
I would like you to address Simoni's posts if you please. Is he also misrepresenting facts?

[Admin]

OK, I'll go ahead and translate this post from the Russian forum I supplied the link for in my earlier post. I think it's eye-opening: http://forum.moya-semya.ru/index.php?showtopic=15973&hl=äîáðîòà
Now I'm not going to spend a lot of time on little figure of speach and fillers - it's a long post, I'll just translate the main facts presented in this post:
According to the last Russian sensus of 2002 there were 67.6 million men and 77.6 million women (at the present time the entire population of Russia is about 143 million)
Even at the first look there is a deficit of men, about 10 million. So then it looks like 10 million women are "extra"? There is not a man for them neither good or bad! He doesn't exist! He hasn't been born.
Russian military consists of 1,134,800 people. Out of which 200,000 are women (to make it easier let's count in millions) This means that another 1 million of young men are out of the game...When they leave service the next million will be drafted and this process doesn't stop. 
There are 875,000 men in prison, so basically another million is out of the dating game. Statistically There are about 6 million alcaholics in Russia, women comprise 850,000. Another 5 million men are not in demand by marriage minded women.
Statistically there are 4 million drug adicts in Russia today. Let's say 3 million are men and 1 million women, although there are a lot fewer women adicts than 1 million, but let's just leave it ay that.
There are 3 million bums (street people with no address). Let's say 1 million are women. There are 6 million invalids, 1 million of them are women.
As in any sosciety (Russia is not an exception there are homosexuals. As a rule about 4% of male population is gay. They don't need a woman! Not any woman! He is himself a gal and his dream is to meet a handsome man. In our case 4% of 67.6 million is 2,704,000 men. We also have psychiatricly ill people, unemployed, morally challehged and other underground. Let's say there is a million of those even though there are a lot more of them, but we agreed to even it down to a smaller number.
So what do we have? ( 10+1+1+5+3+2+5+2,704+1) =30,704 million men are missing in Russia! Let's again even it down to 30 million that means 30 million women are EXTRA!!!

Now Dan, before you accuse me of manufacturing this, there is a link to this forum provided. And by the way I was made aware of this post by another RWD member. I didn't translate the whole article, just the numbers presented in it which make perfect sense and support my point of view.
Simoni is saying basically the same thing that I am. You haven't attacked him for saying the same thing. Why do you choose to attack, accuse and insult me over this issue?
I explained that Russia is facing a huge demographic problem that it is trying to address. They have large $$$ insentives in place for people to intice them to have children. It is very dangerous for Russia to lose so many young women to the West. It is quite reasonable to suggest that they might be cooking the stats numbers in order to convince RW that they have a good chance of finding their mate in Russia.
Why are you so unwilling to even accept that possibility? Do you actually trust the Russian government with everything they say or print???
I would like you to address Simoni's posts if you please. Is he also misrepresenting facts?

Eduard,

>>Why do you choose to attack, accuse and insult me over this issue?<<

Ed, I did not "attack, accuse and insult" you. I merely stated the obvious. That you have a self-interest is intuitively obvious.

>>It is quite reasonable to suggest that they might be cooking the stats numbers<<

Is it?!? I find it rather UNreasonable - as would most anyone who has reviewed the genesis of this debate. What they will find is there are several sources, all citing the same thing. Moreover, nobody - and I do mean NOBODY with a shred of a logical and analytical mind, is going to believe a gender disparity anything close to the outrageous claims you have made - and are making.

I further find it UNreasonable that you would promote as "facts" a forum post from an "unregistered" person (presumably), rather than accept the numerous reliable sources that have been cited, repeatedly, in the past. For those who want to read the post using a machine translation, here is a link through the Google translation service -- http://tinyurl.com/4h5llc

As I stated earlier Ed, keep railing against the facts (the REAL ones). Whatever floats your boat.

- Dan

[wxman]

Of the initial 10 million difference that you quoted, I would venture to say it is because of life span. The 10 million surplus in the population is likely women over the age of 50. So we really need to throw that 10 million out, as most of these 10 million women are probably not looking for a man, much less a WM.

You mention the gay population namely the homosexuals. It's pretty much an equal percent for lesbians, so you need to take about 3 million women off the list.

1 million men more men than women in the military. I won't doubt that stat. That doesn't mean they don't have girlfriends or wives. The military is not the same as a monastery. So lets not remove those 1 million men.

Alcoholics and drug addicts. Not the most desirable and probably attract the same type of the opposite sex.

So the difference based on the above numbers could be about 15 million off your number. So 15 million men are missing not 30. 

[Blues Fairy]

The 10 million surplus in the population is likely women over the age of 50.
an equal percent for lesbians, so you need to take about 2 million women off the list.
1 million men more men than women in the military. I won't doubt that stat. That doesn't mean they don't have girlfriends or wives.

Good points.  Plus 6 mln invalids are not automatically disqualified; lots of women enjoy taking care of their disabled husbands.

And Eduard, out of the rest of those "extra" women, how many are really qualified to be wives and mothers?  How many would be "psychiatricly ill, morally challehged" or simply too overwhelmingly stupid to be even considered by the opposite sex?    Or do you think all single RW are angels with wings?

[Simoni]

Boy oh boy. Where to start.

Once again - it was your friend Eduard, who decided to once again tweak in my direction over the fact that HE made an outrageous claim, and that claim was shown to be totally false.

Since then, I have merely continued to point out the objective FACTS that exist, in spite of the stated opinion of a few, some of whom (including Eduard) have a self-serving interest in perpetuating the myths.

How you can conclude stating those FACTS, and responding ONLY when tweaked, amounts to a "big putdown" is more than a little suspicious - but whatever.

- Dan

I suppose I could repost the insults made.  But why bother?

Yes, the putdowns seemed to be aimed at Ed.  But by default they are also hitting anyone who agrees with Ed (that there are more available women in the fsu as the ratio is not one to one in the target demographic).

And when I try to make a rationale argument to why I believe that is true, I get attacked?  

I happen to disagree with Ed in a number of matters.  But it is dangerous ground around here to agree with anything he says, even when he is clearly correct, as in these numbers.  I wish he were not in this thread and we could cleanly debate, without prejudice, the ratio issue.  I think I am correct.

I don't get your "more than a little suspicious" comment? What the heck?   Why this attack on me and what does it mean?

I firmly believe that because girls in the FSU believe there are more girls than guys, then that nuance transfers over to the reality of more girls than guys.  But I have said that three times already.

Dan, just as you feel the need to "correct", I feel a need to "correct" your correction.

You have your opinion, and I have mine.  Numbers are just numbers and we both can argue them for eternity.   I'd just like to see more respect for different interpretations.  

I think most guys here agree that the odds are better for finding a good woman in the FSU than here.  And one reason they go there is the favorable female to male ratio in the target age group.

I concluded my post with a suggestion that we agree to disagree.  I'll repeat it now.

[Admin]

I suppose I could repost the insults made.  But why bother?

Yes, the putdowns seemed to be aimed at Ed.  But by default they are also hitting anyone who agrees with Ed (that there are more available women in the fsu as the ratio is not one to one in the target demographic).

And when I try to make a rationale argument to why I believe that is true, you attack me? 

I happen to disagree with Ed in a number of matters.  But it is dangerous ground around here to agree with anything he says, even when he is clearly correct, as in these numbers.  I wish he were not in this thread and we could cleanly debate, without prejudice, the ratio issue.  I think I am correct.

I don't get your "more than a little suspicious" comment? What the heck?   Why this attack on me and what does it mean?

I firmly believe that because girls in the FSU believe there are more girls than guys, then that nuance transfers over to the reality of more girls than guys.  But I have said that three times already.

Dan, just as you feel the need to "correct", I feel a need to "correct" your correction.

You have your opinion, and I have mine.  Numbers are just numbers and we both can argue them for eternity.   I'd just like to see more respect for different interpretations.   

I think most guys here agree that the odds are better for finding a good woman in the FSU than here.  And one reason they go there is the favorable female to male ratio in the target age group.

I concluded my post with a suggestion that we agree to disagree.  I'll repeat it now.

>>putdowns<<

Odd. Like I wrote earlier, it was your buddy that made the overt effort to draw me into a debate in a topic I was not following. I cite facts, in reply to supposition, but those are somehow "putdowns"  :noidea:

>>you attack me<<

I guess you need to define "attack" cause I sure don't see it. Wasn't my intent, and as I review the topic, I see you making some sarcastic comments (then editing your post to remove it - revisionist history?), but none from me.

>>clearly correct, as in these numbers<<

You gotta be kidding me (he says in exasperated disbelief) !?! You accept a translated forum post from an anonymous source as being "correct" ?

Sorry, but I do not.

>>we agree to disagree<<

OK.

- Dan

[wxman]

Finding an AM does not mean happiness. While the average divorce rate is 50% in the US, it is 40% for first marriage, 60% for second marriages and 73% for third marriages. So if a FSUW wants to have greater than a 50% chance of success with an AM, she needs to marry a man who has never been married. Since many of the AM looking for FSUW are divorced, the odds of success are 4 out of ten at BEST.  Not good odds at all. So why would they even consider an AM?  Are the odds any worse for these women in the FSU with FSUM?  

[Eduard]

I suppose I could repost the insults made.  But why bother?

Yes, the putdowns seemed to be aimed at Ed.  But by default they are also hitting anyone who agrees with Ed (that there are more available women in the fsu as the ratio is not one to one in the target demographic).

And when I try to make a rationale argument to why I believe that is true, I get attacked?  

I happen to disagree with Ed in a number of matters.  But it is dangerous ground around here to agree with anything he says, even when he is clearly correct, as in these numbers.  I wish he were not in this thread and we could cleanly debate, without prejudice, the ratio issue.  I think I am correct.

I don't get your "more than a little suspicious" comment? What the heck?   Why this attack on me and what does it mean?

I firmly believe that because girls in the FSU believe there are more girls than guys, then that nuance transfers over to the reality of more girls than guys.  But I have said that three times already.

Dan, just as you feel the need to "correct", I feel a need to "correct" your correction.

You have your opinion, and I have mine.  Numbers are just numbers and we both can argue them for eternity.   I'd just like to see more respect for different interpretations.  

I think most guys here agree that the odds are better for finding a good woman in the FSU than here.  And one reason they go there is the favorable female to male ratio in the target age group.

I concluded my post with a suggestion that we agree to disagree.  I'll repeat it now.

Simoni, you are the voice of reason

[Simoni]

I guess you need to define "attack" cause I sure don't see it. Wasn't my intent, and as I review the topic, I see you making some sarcastic comments (then editing your post to remove it - revisionist history?), but none from me.

I don't remember revising to remove sarcasm.  I usually rewrite to make points more clearly.   But yes, if I post something I later view as being too harsh, I will revise it.  And it usually occurs within seconds or a minute or two.

>>clearly correct, as in these numbers<<

You gotta be kidding me (he says in exasperated disbelief) !?! You accept a translated forum post from an anonymous source as being "correct" ?

No.  I was not talking about his forum reference. That was posted as I was writing, and I did not see it until after my post.  The  numbers I refer to are the ones I am stating, and in agreement with Ed's idea that the ratio is not one-to-one as you believe-- I do believe that there are many more girls seeking men in the fsu than men seeking girls, and I explained how the data falls out because of socio/psy reasons.

>>we agree to disagree<<

OK.

Excellent.

[Admin]

I don't remember revising to remove sarcasm.  I usually rewrite to make points more clearly.   But yes, if I post something I later view as being too harsh, I will revise it.  And it usually occurs within seconds or a minute or two.

No.  I was not talking about his forum reference. That was posted as I was writing, and I did not see it until after my post.  The  numbers I refer to are the ones I am stating, and in agreement with Ed's idea that the ratio is not one-to-one as you believe-- I do believe that there are many more girls seeking men in the fsu than men seeking girls, and I explained how the data falls out because of socio/psy reasons.

>>ratio is not one-to-one as you believe<<

Just to be clear, the "ratio" you are referencing as the ones *I* "believe," are, in fact, issued by the US CIA, official Russian census, and numerous others. The genesis of all this may be found here -- http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=6401.msg122776#msg122776

- Dan

[Jet]

Well, the point that Eduard is making (and I agree with his point) is that the number of men is pretty much equal to the number of women in Russia (until you hit the older age groups). However, the number of eligible men that Russian women actually want to date and/or marry is usually a lot less than the total number of men.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is NOT the point Eduard was trying to make, this the point I brought up and Lily backed....pages ago.

[FredC]

I'll go ahead and throw in my 2 cents worth. The statistics really don't matter, most stats can be made to say just about anything that the person writing them wants them to say. People's perseption is at least as relevant as it it what they perceive as their reality. That is what this all boils down to. Internet dating world wide generates lord only knows how many billions of dollars exploiting peoples desire to find whatever they are looking for. It is simple supply and demand. There is a market out there for business to provide a means for people to meet other people, regardless of where they live, what the ratio of men to women may be, or any other factors that may come into play.

[Simoni]

>>ratio is not one-to-one as you believe<<

Just to be clear, the "ratio" you are referencing as the ones *I* "believe," are, in fact, issued by the US CIA, official Russian census, and numerous others. The genesis of all this may be found here -- http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=6401.msg122776#msg122776

- Dan

I don't doubt that you believe those numbers.

I'm just saying the reality on the ground is quite different than those numbers.

I see it with my eyes.  I hear it from many sources.

I don't think all those FSU women are wrong when they say there are not enough men to go around.

But as I have stated, because they believe that to be true, it becomes true to them and their behavior changes. Which is a big plus for a western man seeking a serious relationship.

But we are talking apples and oranges again.

I suspect we are both correct here.

[Eduard]

Of the initial 10 million difference that you quoted, I would venture to say it is because of life span. The 10 million surplus in the population is likely women over the age of 50. So we really need to throw that 10 million out, as most of these 10 million women are probably not looking for a man, much less a WM.

You mention the gay population namely the homosexuals. It's pretty much an equal percent for lesbians, so you need to take about 3 million women off the list.

1 million men more men than women in the military. I won't doubt that stat. That doesn't mean they don't have girlfriends or wives. The military is not the same as a monastery. So lets not remove those 1 million men.

Alcoholics and drug addicts. Not the most desirable and probably attract the same type of the opposite sex.

So the difference based on the above numbers could be about 15 million off your number. So 15 million men are missing not 30. 

First I'd like to point out to you that these are not MY numbers. This is from a Russian forum to which I was given the link to by another RDW member. I never knew about this forum until a couple of days ago. I'm not arguing these numbers. I don't know what the true numbers are. All I know is that anyone who spent any reasonable amount of time in Russia will agree that there are many more single available women than men. That's ALL I'm saying here in this thread. Dan's insisting on a 1:1 ratio just doesn't make sense IMO. It's not the reality as I see it. I would have left this issue alone a long time ago, if we simply agreed to disagree without accusations and insults (Yes Dan, I take you calling my point of view "crap" as an insult). But I was accused of being dishonest and of falsifying numbers on purpose, therefore I had to defend my honor and good name. But apparently no matter what other independent sources of information will come up that support my point of view, they are going to be disqualified "just because"
Well... OK 2+2=5 and people, do trust Russian government!!! It's the most honest, the most sincere government in the world that always told and will always tell the truth and nothing but the truth!
Amen

[Jet]

 I do believe that there are many more girls seeking men in the fsu than men seeking girls, and I explained how the data falls out because of socio/psy reasons.Excellent.

It's all in the wording 
I do not believe:
there are many more girls seeking men in the fsu than men seeking girls

But I totally concur with:
the number of eligible men that Russian women actually want to date and/or marry is usually a lot less than the total number of men.

[Misha]

But I totally concur with:
the number of eligible men that Russian women actually want to date and/or marry is usually a lot less than the total number of men.

I agree with this entirely.

[Simoni]

It's all in the wording 

the number of eligible men that Russian women actually want to date and/or marry is usually a lot less than the total number of men.

Yeah, that is what I am saying.  I have said it so many times that maybe I should have just quoted myself instead of saying it a different way.  The RM are there, but the RW don't want them.  Or the RM don't want marriage.  Which still results in a good ratio for AM to work with.

[Jet]

I agree with this entirely.

You should, you wrote it!