Hacker News Reader

Comment by erikb | Hacker News Reader

Why do people believe that women have the upper hand now?

They might have in the slight time frame between high school graduation and marriage (~25 years for Chinese women). Before they have not much say because their fathers are the boss. Afterwards they have husbands who don't do anything but work and sleep (and maybe care for their mistresses). It's true that in that short slice of time their power over each single men who wants them is nearly unlimited. But would you trade your whole life for 5 years of power over guys you don't care about?

And it's not really true that they have power in a global sense, it's only in each of these 1-on-1 encounters with potential marriage partners. On the global scale requirements like beauty and social standards are higher and the push to marriage is also stronger than for men.

So this "has backfired on men" should be read as "has decreased the huge advantage of men to become only a big advantage for men".

View on HN

In my experience many men overestimate the power of women's sexual choices, and underestimate the power of social structures and habits that prefer men.

I think this is because men experience the power of female sexual choice first-hand during adolescence. It's a time of crazy emotions in general, and none crazier than those related to love and sex. It can seem like your entire happiness is dependent on whether a particular girl likes you back. That is memorable.

(Of course, women experience the same things during adolescence. Very few feel powerful during that time...they feel vulnerable just like the guys.)

Meanwhile, men do not directly experience the power of social structures that prefer them. Instead what they experience is a relative absence of barriers that present themselves to women. And how easy is it to notice the absence of something you've never experienced? Not easy at all.

It's very difficult in general for humans to empathize with experiences that they've never had themselves. David Foster Wallace discussed this memorably in his "this is water" speech.

Good argumentation. Yes, the advantage you have had your whole life (and previous generations before) is something you don't experience as such. But if that advantage is decreased just the slightest bit, then suddenly you feel very disadvantaged, while you are actually still "ahead".

Also in a society were sexism isn't considered a topic it's also hard for women to see their disadvantages. They feel a lot of pressure from society and family, but it's the same for their friends and (female) colleagues. Failing to fulfil them while other women around you struggle to achieve them makes you look like a loser. So Chinese women also support the status quo, which makes it even harder for Chinese men to see the point.

Except that the article actually says the opposite.

> Consider Cai Li (who asked her real name not be used in this article), a 34-year-old marketing executive in Shanghai: she is smart, engaging, hip and attractive. She is also the divorced mother of an 8-year-old girl. When she caught her husband, a Taiwanese businessman, philandering five years ago, she didn't hesitate. "I divorced him as soon as I could," she says. "He was shocked. He thought I wasn't serious, that I wouldn't do it because of our daughter. I said, 'You'll see'. And within a week I had filed the papers [for divorce]. And why wouldn't I? Why should I put up with that? I have parents here in Shanghai who help take care of my daughter, I had a good job. Plus, if I want to get remarried, it's not as if there's a shortage of men, even at my age, who would be interested. [My ex] was crazy to think I was going to stick around."

> The only problem for Cai was that her parents sided with her ex. "They had a typical Chinese reaction. They said, 'Oh come on, he probably won't do it again. It's not that big a deal anyway'," she says. "It was a generational attitude. When they were young, people put up with it, I guess. But I told them, not now. I was really angry. I put my foot down. Things are different now."

Is this one woman an exception?

Huh? Are you arguing against my point or for my point? At first you say "the article actually says the opposite", which makes me think you want to argue for women having a better position. Then you show an example of a women getting pressured by her parents to not divorce beside being in an unacceptable position.

I'm a little confused but I assume that you argue against my post based on your first sentence.

Maybe it's not clear how much influence Chinese parents have on their children. As a woman it might even happen that your husbands parents have more power over your life than your own parents. So there is often no chance to divorce. In fact many Chinese women wouldn't even attempt that, because of fear to lose their job, any chance to remarry, losing both party's parents' favour. The husband does not have to accept any punishment for having a lover on the side, not doing their part at home, or for not taking care of the child(ren).

A typical situation in China is the wife fighting the younger girlfriend of the husband, both fighting to gain the man's favour. This only happens out of fear, not out of respect for oneself.

So to answer your question: She's an exception for actually divorcing her husband, but she's not an exception for getting punished for the divorce more than the husband who is actually the one who caused the divorce.

The pressure was there, but the increased power let her do the divorce anyway, even though she wasn't in that "five year period".

Even if I'd agree with that point it would still just be "she's better off than her mother's generation" not "she's better off than the husband", right?

Sure. They have the advantage in some areas and it's closer to equality, though men still have most positions of power. The article didn't try to say that women had taken over.

Then I have misunderstood it, seriously. To me it said Chinese men are in such a poor situation now, which to me implies that the Chinese women have the upper hand. Maybe I've read too much into it.

The dating world is complicated.

The fact that she can marry up and divorce with a child, and still be in demand in the dating world is a privilege men do not enjoy. As shown earlier in the article, single man of similar socioeconomic status without all the baggage are not considered serious suitors.

On the other hand, it is more socially acceptable for successful men to have mistress as opposed to successful woman to have, hmm, 'misters'.

In extremely simple words, rich men enjoy more privileges than rich women, average men fair worse than average women, poor men die alone.

A Shanghai marketing executive who was married to a Taiwanese Businessman is not exactly representative of women across the country. Not all demographics in China will feel the same empowerment that she might feel.

While its true the women who were born have a slight advantage when it comes to hetero pairing off, the main premise ignores the fact that many never made it out of the womb and they are the real disadvantaged ones. That is, there are men alive because their parents forwent a daughter via physician intervention. Now, this has nothing to do with being pro choice or not, but one can't ignore the undercurrent which gives rise to this.

Now, with regard to men in cities, if they could only subject themselves to the injustice of marrying a mate from the countryside, they would not have a problem, but for whatever reason, a city reared mate it must be, so cry me a river.

I think to your first point, the assumption here is that the unborn don't have rhetorical standing. In this context I'm not sure I see a downside to that (at least in this context).

My point is that this occurs because parents have a preference for male heirs who, presumably, are obligated to provide parents with some support when they become infirm, while girls become part of the other family once they marry and their allegiance is to the other family.

This setup is what disfavors the female gender in that society.

That is clearly not what the article was claiming, either you have information the author does not or you have an agenda you're not being truthful about.

Which is it?

it's clearly the latter, he just wrapped 3 or 4 feminist talking points into a comment and posted it out of context in response to an article about something else entirely.

What is "that"? The article claims women have the upper hand when it comes to dating in China. I argue that a) it's not as much the case as it looks like on and b) to evaluate one has to look at many different aspects and women in China having the disadvantage in so many aspects that one would rather be a Chinese man than Chinese woman.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com