New observation: Men now want high earning women

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just that, really “Type A” women tend to stay more fit.

It’s this

In Italy, where being fit and thin has way less to do with socioeconomics, no one cares if you are “high earning”.

Being a hot sahm is the dream/goal.

In anglo countries, due to body weight being linked to socio-economic status, interest in professional women is greater because professional women are less sloppy

Of course a ‘hot sahm’ is the dream/goal in Italy. It’s one of the least egalitarian countries in Europe. You need to look at the Scandinavian countries for gender equality. There are not looking for hot SAHMs over there.

the working class in northern and central Italy are prettier than working class in Scandinavia.

If you actually lived in Europe, you know that the whole “hot Swedish blonde” thing is not as common as you think and it is far more linked to sócio-economic status (not as much as it is in anglo countries) but the looks distribution in Scandinavia is not as equal with respect to ses level as it is in Italy or Spain.

Norway and Denmark is not really attractive. So the whole “hot scandi” thing is really a subset of Swedes.

Also, if you leave scandi and stay in Northern Europe, NL is considered “gender equal” by lot of foreigners but NL women loathe to be gunners at work. It’s all about part time jobs and relaxing/enjoying life.

Something tells me you haven’t lived in Europe

Not that PP but I lived in northern Italy for years and you have clearly never stepped foot in the place.

[Anonymous]

This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

[Anonymous]

I’m in a dual-career household and my husband and I are elder millennials. I think it’s split: some couples in our circles are high-earning men with SAHMs, with a slight majority being dual earners (and earning about the same). We live in a very HHI neighborhood and there’s a similar split.

TLDR: Different things work for different people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a much younger sister in her early thirties and she and nearly all of her friends are SAHM’s to men working good professional jobs. Looking at the housing turnover in my neighborhood this seems to be the case there too. So I’m not sure if your theory is accurate.

I think it also depends where you live but ultimately, the high earning lawyer plus high earning cardiologist will do better overall financially and have the most resources of their kids. In the end, I can see this being the ideal set up.

You think a kid being raised by a big law partner and a busy specialist doctor is the ideal set up? Those people are going to need a backup nanny for the main nanny, so we are gonna have to agree to disagree there.

Maybe to you its not ideal but not everyone has the same priorities as you. These kids will have infinite resources and also the ability to spring into careers that they'd like. I have plenty of people in medical school class who had parents with exact these careers and they are doing well, close with their parents, and have also these career ambitions. They also felt that their parents were able to have flexibility in their schedules as high earners. I think the idea that these careers never see their kids is outdated.

To me infinite resources plus a total lack of parental oversight is just as likely to result in a coke problem as a high achieving kid

Naw. There’s too much peer pressure in their social group for them to end up as a Coke head. Unless of course they experienced some trauma (rape, abuse) growing up.

NP -the peer pressure is out there…to hush up your kid’s problems. The naïveté of thinking that big money equates to fewer problems runs contrary to my experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just that, really “Type A” women tend to stay more fit.

It’s this

In Italy, where being fit and thin has way less to do with socioeconomics, no one cares if you are “high earning”.

Being a hot sahm is the dream/goal.

In anglo countries, due to body weight being linked to socio-economic status, interest in professional women is greater because professional women are less sloppy

Of course a ‘hot sahm’ is the dream/goal in Italy. It’s one of the least egalitarian countries in Europe. You need to look at the Scandinavian countries for gender equality. There are not looking for hot SAHMs over there.

the working class in northern and central Italy are prettier than working class in Scandinavia.

If you actually lived in Europe, you know that the whole “hot Swedish blonde” thing is not as common as you think and it is far more linked to sócio-economic status (not as much as it is in anglo countries) but the looks distribution in Scandinavia is not as equal with respect to ses level as it is in Italy or Spain.

Norway and Denmark is not really attractive. So the whole “hot scandi” thing is really a subset of Swedes.

Also, if you leave scandi and stay in Northern Europe, NL is considered “gender equal” by lot of foreigners but NL women loathe to be gunners at work. It’s all about part time jobs and relaxing/enjoying life.

Something tells me you haven’t lived in Europe

Not that PP but I lived in northern Italy for years and you have clearly never stepped foot in the place.

Where? I live in verbania part time and in the past lived in torino, Bergamo in the north (and arona but that was for a short period).

[Anonymous]

Just make sure to have conversations in advance about how you are going to handle it when kids come. In my experience, men are not very realistic about how much work and care is required for children, and are often significantly less willing to do what is necessary to make it work. Whether that's vetting and hiring and then working with a nanny who can cover all the hours needed, or adjusting work schedules to accommodate drop off and pick up, or giving up aspects of their social life. Maybe these men think if they marry a high-earning spouse, money will help to resolve all these issues by itself. In my experience that is not the case because, for instance, even high earning women often think it's important for children to spend plenty of time with their parents. Or understand that you can hire the best nanny in the world, but if she gets Covid and can't come to work, you're going to need back up plans. And I would also observe that higher earning women who wind up doing the bulk of the childcare/household management on top of their high-paying job seem to develop an understandable resentment of a partner who seems to think it is enough for him to just go make money. Maybe that would fly with a SAHM or someone in a low-paid, flexible position, but a woman who makes a great salary and is well-respected in her field is not going to be impressed or appreciate that you are doing the same thing but without contributing at home.

So by all means, marry the high earning woman. But be ready to operate at her level. Otherwise you're just dead weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Men don’t want failure to launch kids with executive functioning issues, so they are getting more careful with who they pick as mothers of their kids. Life is getting more complicated, so hot is not enough anymore.

And to think you have your finger on the pulse of half the world's population and you are willing to share your insights here for free!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

Assortative dating/mating. It's been around for awhile and isn't going anywhere. The people on DCUM who bring up these baristas (why always baristas?) With cute smiles as male preference are not with the times. Those are real outlier situations now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

Assortative dating/mating. It's been around for awhile and isn't going anywhere. The people on DCUM who bring up these baristas (why always baristas?) With cute smiles as male preference are not with the times. Those are real outlier situations now.

Assortative mating is real but there are still plenty of rich guys who marry women with high earning *potential* who then leave the workforce and SAH. I know dozens of dual-lawyer couples like this - they're both partner track, she shifts to an NGO or trade association after the first kid and stays home for good after the second. He makes partner because she takes the bulk of house stuff off his shoulders. Their kids are trilingual by Kindergarten because the mom with 7+ years of higher education funnels all that mental energy into them instead of a job. It's still assortative mating but it's not actually searching for another paycheck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

Assortative dating/mating. It's been around for awhile and isn't going anywhere. The people on DCUM who bring up these baristas (why always baristas?) With cute smiles as male preference are not with the times. Those are real outlier situations now.

Right.

The rate of assortative dating is very variable depending on country tho

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

Assortative dating/mating. It's been around for awhile and isn't going anywhere. The people on DCUM who bring up these baristas (why always baristas?) With cute smiles as male preference are not with the times. Those are real outlier situations now.

Assortative mating is real but there are still plenty of rich guys who marry women with high earning *potential* who then leave the workforce and SAH. I know dozens of dual-lawyer couples like this - they're both partner track, she shifts to an NGO or trade association after the first kid and stays home for good after the second. He makes partner because she takes the bulk of house stuff off his shoulders. Their kids are trilingual by Kindergarten because the mom with 7+ years of higher education funnels all that mental energy into them instead of a job. It's still assortative mating but it's not actually searching for another paycheck.

Sounds great. What’s wrong with this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

Assortative dating/mating. It's been around for awhile and isn't going anywhere. The people on DCUM who bring up these baristas (why always baristas?) With cute smiles as male preference are not with the times. Those are real outlier situations now.

Assortative mating is real but there are still plenty of rich guys who marry women with high earning *potential* who then leave the workforce and SAH. I know dozens of dual-lawyer couples like this - they're both partner track, she shifts to an NGO or trade association after the first kid and stays home for good after the second. He makes partner because she takes the bulk of house stuff off his shoulders. Their kids are trilingual by Kindergarten because the mom with 7+ years of higher education funnels all that mental energy into them instead of a job. It's still assortative mating but it's not actually searching for another paycheck.

Sounds great. What’s wrong with this?

Nothing at all. But it's not about wanting a high earning woman, which is the OP's premise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

Assortative dating/mating. It's been around for awhile and isn't going anywhere. The people on DCUM who bring up these baristas (why always baristas?) With cute smiles as male preference are not with the times. Those are real outlier situations now.

Assortative mating is real but there are still plenty of rich guys who marry women with high earning *potential* who then leave the workforce and SAH. I know dozens of dual-lawyer couples like this - they're both partner track, she shifts to an NGO or trade association after the first kid and stays home for good after the second. He makes partner because she takes the bulk of house stuff off his shoulders. Their kids are trilingual by Kindergarten because the mom with 7+ years of higher education funnels all that mental energy into them instead of a job. It's still assortative mating but it's not actually searching for another paycheck.

Sounds great. What’s wrong with this?

Nothing at all. But it's not about wanting a high earning woman, which is the OP's premise.

Correct. Op is wrong, especially when zoomed out and looking at a country-wide phenomenon.

The value is the signal to earn a lot, not necessarily in actually earning a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just that, really “Type A” women tend to stay more fit.

It’s this

In Italy, where being fit and thin has way less to do with socioeconomics, no one cares if you are “high earning”.

Being a hot sahm is the dream/goal.

In anglo countries, due to body weight being linked to socio-economic status, interest in professional women is greater because professional women are less sloppy

Of course a ‘hot sahm’ is the dream/goal in Italy. It’s one of the least egalitarian countries in Europe. You need to look at the Scandinavian countries for gender equality. There are not looking for hot SAHMs over there.

the working class in northern and central Italy are prettier than working class in Scandinavia.

If you actually lived in Europe, you know that the whole “hot Swedish blonde” thing is not as common as you think and it is far more linked to sócio-economic status (not as much as it is in anglo countries) but the looks distribution in Scandinavia is not as equal with respect to ses level as it is in Italy or Spain.

Norway and Denmark is not really attractive. So the whole “hot scandi” thing is really a subset of Swedes.

Also, if you leave scandi and stay in Northern Europe, NL is considered “gender equal” by lot of foreigners but NL women loathe to be gunners at work. It’s all about part time jobs and relaxing/enjoying life.

Something tells me you haven’t lived in Europe

Not that PP but I lived in northern Italy for years and you have clearly never stepped foot in the place.

Where? I live in verbania part time and in the past lived in torino, Bergamo in the north (and arona but that was for a short period).

I lived primarily in Bologna. And I do not believe you’ve ever lived in northern Italy. Or perhaps you lived there, but don’t speak Italian and have never had a conversation with an Italian woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been known for awhile now, especially to those in these circles already. But people on here, seemingly outside the circle, want to delude themselves into some fantasy that the rich successful guy is going to pick the broke barista because she's kind and cute. No, like marries like.

Assortative dating/mating. It's been around for awhile and isn't going anywhere. The people on DCUM who bring up these baristas (why always baristas?) With cute smiles as male preference are not with the times. Those are real outlier situations now.

Assortative mating is real but there are still plenty of rich guys who marry women with high earning *potential* who then leave the workforce and SAH. I know dozens of dual-lawyer couples like this - they're both partner track, she shifts to an NGO or trade association after the first kid and stays home for good after the second. He makes partner because she takes the bulk of house stuff off his shoulders. Their kids are trilingual by Kindergarten because the mom with 7+ years of higher education funnels all that mental energy into them instead of a job. It's still assortative mating but it's not actually searching for another paycheck.

Sounds great. What’s wrong with this?

NP. Hothouse flower children with mental health problems result. It’s not healthy to make one’s own self-worth and value dependent on how much one’s child achieves.