SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
As the number of highly educated women has increased in recent decades, the chances of "marrying up" have increased significantly for men and decreased for women, according to a new study led by a University of Kansas sociologist.
"The pattern of marriage and its economic consequences have changed over time," said lead author ChangHwan Kim, associate professor of sociology. "Now women are more likely to get married to a less-educated man. What is the consequence of this?"
Kim's co-authored the study with Arthur Sakamoto of Texas A&M University, and the journal Demography recently published their findings. They examined gender-specific changes in the total financial return to education among people of prime working ages, 35 to 44 years old, using U.S. Census data from 1990 and 2000 and the 2009-2011 American Community Survey.
Your dreams of finding a Sugar Momma may finally come true.
ChangHwan Kim, Arthur Sakamoto. Women's Progress for Men's Gain? Gender-Specific Changes in the Return to Education as Measured by Family Standard of Living, 1990 to 2009–2011. Demography, 2017; DOI: 10.1007/s13524-017-0601-3
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 30 2017, @07:30PM (3 children)
This explains the south so much better! Inbreeding didn't quite seem to cover it, but throw in some canine DNA and you've got aggressive loyalty to the church mixed with an innate desire to hunt down things that are different.
Thanks, never quite thought of it like that.
Apologies to the non-insane southerners
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 30 2017, @07:40PM (2 children)
Statistical fail fails!
"80% of white American women (generally liberal city-dwelling ones)"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 30 2017, @07:49PM
Oh yes, I forgot about your superior data source: some random person's opinion in a comment thread.
#fakenews #sad #tinytrump
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday August 30 2017, @07:50PM
I'm the one who wrote that, in an entirely unrelated conversation in a different article's discussion.
I wasn't making a comparison with rural and/or conservative women, I was making an observation about the liberal city-dwelling women I generally see when *I* look at dating sites (because I don't look at the conservative rural-dwelling women), and complaining that it seemed that very many of them had big dogs, even though big dogs are a giant PITA to have and care for in a city. (Personally, I think it should be illegal to have big dogs in small apartments; it's cruel.) I never said anything about conservative or rural-dwelling white women. In my limited observations there, I'd say just as many of them, and likely more, also have big dogs. But at least they more frequently have the land for them and having a large dog isn't such a PITA when you have a big yard you can let them run around and shit in.