marriage market
http://www.economist.com/debate/freeexchange/2006/11/ithas_been_revealed_thatcurren.cfm
Couple things ...
(1) The wedding announcements in the NY Times Wedding section are not representative of the city's population, Only high status folks (Edlund's wealthy) get their announcements in.
(2) The blogger hints that the men market is poor everywhere. In Alaska where there are more of them, they are "odd." In New York City they are not "compatible". (Though the chart indicates that the male/female ratios for the US are dead even). Perhaps this has less to do with the poor market selection and more with ambition, wanting that which may be slightly out of one's reach.
For example, at least 40% of men in New York City have a bachelor's degree (one of the highest rates in the country). If you're a woman seeking to go on a date, isn't a bachelor's degree one of the things you look for? Even if you yourself don't have a bachelor's degree, it would be something sought after in a male date (it's a symbol, a proxy of wealth). If so, the other 60% of the male market has just been excluded and it seems like there are no "good, available" men in the city. If not a bachelor's degree, then an advanced degree, or "doesn't live with parents/roommates" or one of those other Internet dating questions. A mother's "you can do better than him" hangs in one's ears.
(3) With a lower childbirth rate and more fertility technology, a woman's natural fecundity is less valuable on its own. Men still seek some of the symbols of fecundity (youth and beauty) -- if innate, it speaks to how extremely valuable fecundity used to be -- but a woman doesn't need to be able to actually give birth as well as she used to. Hence, there's a shift from looking for reproduction income to looking for economic income in a female mate.
Fewer children (and more childrearing specialists) and improved household technology has made her less valuable in the home as well (society doesn't like free riders, so it kicked women out to go to work).
(4) It's odd that a Scandinavian would take marriage to be the defining characteristic of a male/female bond - how many Scandinavians don't ever get married but are in LTRs nevertheless? Perhaps marriage data was the only data available.
Couple things ...
(1) The wedding announcements in the NY Times Wedding section are not representative of the city's population, Only high status folks (Edlund's wealthy) get their announcements in.
(2) The blogger hints that the men market is poor everywhere. In Alaska where there are more of them, they are "odd." In New York City they are not "compatible". (Though the chart indicates that the male/female ratios for the US are dead even). Perhaps this has less to do with the poor market selection and more with ambition, wanting that which may be slightly out of one's reach.
For example, at least 40% of men in New York City have a bachelor's degree (one of the highest rates in the country). If you're a woman seeking to go on a date, isn't a bachelor's degree one of the things you look for? Even if you yourself don't have a bachelor's degree, it would be something sought after in a male date (it's a symbol, a proxy of wealth). If so, the other 60% of the male market has just been excluded and it seems like there are no "good, available" men in the city. If not a bachelor's degree, then an advanced degree, or "doesn't live with parents/roommates" or one of those other Internet dating questions. A mother's "you can do better than him" hangs in one's ears.
(3) With a lower childbirth rate and more fertility technology, a woman's natural fecundity is less valuable on its own. Men still seek some of the symbols of fecundity (youth and beauty) -- if innate, it speaks to how extremely valuable fecundity used to be -- but a woman doesn't need to be able to actually give birth as well as she used to. Hence, there's a shift from looking for reproduction income to looking for economic income in a female mate.
Fewer children (and more childrearing specialists) and improved household technology has made her less valuable in the home as well (society doesn't like free riders, so it kicked women out to go to work).
(4) It's odd that a Scandinavian would take marriage to be the defining characteristic of a male/female bond - how many Scandinavians don't ever get married but are in LTRs nevertheless? Perhaps marriage data was the only data available.
powered by performancing firefox
No comments:
Post a Comment