Shortage of "economically attractive" men reason for marriage decline according to new study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man here, this is a real issue. I have lots of single, reasonably attractive single female friends who are stable and financially somewhat successful. They ask me if I have any single friends I can set them up with and the answer is no. None. I literally do not know one man who is still single in his mid-30s on who I consider eligible. I do know some divorced dads but even those ones that have their act together have zero problems finding a date.

Someone said it best upthread: Men are still prized for their money and women for their looks. If a woman makes a good salary, than the man she prizes has to be at least equal if not financially better. There aren't that many men statistically who earn good paychecks and the ones that do are married, the ones who are still single in their 30s totally run the dating scene.

Note that everyone in my neighborhood who paired off did so by mostly meeting their spouse in college or grad school or immediately after.

If you want to know who your financially successful married handsome husbands are sleeping/cheating with, these are them. They rule the conference scene as single men in their 30s rule the dating market.

And no girl, he is never leaving his wife for you.

Yeah, I'd believe that if this city wasn't a hotbed for second marriages started by affairs.

Ilhan Omar and her lover just being the latest. I believe the lover and spouse have already filed for divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2019/09/09/marriage-rate-study-economically-unattractive-mxp-vpx.hln


This story discusses a Cornell study that says the reason that US marriage rates are at an all time low is because there is a shortage of economically attractive men. They are labeling economically unattractive as lacking a bachelors degree or making less than $40,000 a year. Apparently women are reluctant to "marry down" so are remaining single instead. Assuming this study is valid, why do you think there is such a shortage of men who are "economically attractive" to women?

Because some women think they are deserving of a Kardashian existence -- too much reality television.

Unmarried woman here. I make much more than 100K a year, own my home, and have a degree. I'm not at all uncommon in this area.

Why should I marry a guy who makes less than me? Doesn't own a home? And can't provide me a higher standard of living than I can for myself?

Especially considering the childbearing years and work would effectively halve my own income.

I'm genuinely curious.

Men do it all the time. Why not? If you meet somebody you love?

Female here who has NEVER thought of it this way, but now realize I should have. However, the man-child + childbearing thing still holds.

The men who have historically married a woman with no income/assets/earning potential did so with the expectation they'd get some amalgam of a domestic servant out of the deal: definitely all childcare, likely most if not all cooking and cleaning. Women who marry "down" economically cannot expect the same. It's not the same calculus.

This. A woman who marries down will have a hard road ahead of her and likely end up unhappy, overworked, and resentful. Don’t believe anything The Notebook says.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2019/09/09/marriage-rate-study-economically-unattractive-mxp-vpx.hln


This story discusses a Cornell study that says the reason that US marriage rates are at an all time low is because there is a shortage of economically attractive men. They are labeling economically unattractive as lacking a bachelors degree or making less than $40,000 a year. Apparently women are reluctant to "marry down" so are remaining single instead. Assuming this study is valid, why do you think there is such a shortage of men who are "economically attractive" to women?

Alternatively you could call them ManChild, regardless of income or not. Not marriage or partnership material. Just check out their role model father, if he’s even in the picture:

[Anonymous]

This is just the latest version of women not accepting responsibility for their own decisions. Yawn...

[Anonymous]

Men marry women with lesser education and lower earnings precisely because they expect to gain the unpaid labor of that person to raise children and in general free them from all the administrative tasks of home and life so that they can focus their time on income generation.

No. I married a woman with lesser education and lower earnings because a, education past a certain minimum is irrelevant in a relationship, b, I earned my own way through life, and mostly c: she showed up! 80% of success is showing up, she did, and we started something. “Administrative tasks at home” didn’t factor into it.

Don’t try to make it complicated when it isn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is something very sad about a woman who
is too snooty to date a male teacher.

Signed....... a woman who works with a lot of
high school male athletic directors, a lot
of high school male coaches, and
a lot of high male teachers.

I wanna date a high male teacher.

[Anonymous]

Yes, many many males just do not have their $hit together. Many many women do. There’s an imbalance in the marriage department for this very reason.
I would never pressure a friend or daughter to get married just to get married or just to have children.

Who you marry is THE biggest decision and choice you have.

[Anonymous]

My friends have a club called GYST.
We discuss this topic a bit here and there.
It’s short for Get Your Sht Together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2019/09/09/marriage-rate-study-economically-unattractive-mxp-vpx.hln


This story discusses a Cornell study that says the reason that US marriage rates are at an all time low is because there is a shortage of economically attractive men. They are labeling economically unattractive as lacking a bachelors degree or making less than $40,000 a year. Apparently women are reluctant to "marry down" so are remaining single instead. Assuming this study is valid, why do you think there is such a shortage of men who are "economically attractive" to women?

Because some women think they are deserving of a Kardashian existence -- too much reality television.

Unmarried woman here. I make much more than 100K a year, own my home, and have a degree. I'm not at all uncommon in this area.

Why should I marry a guy who makes less than me? Doesn't own a home? And can't provide me a higher standard of living than I can for myself?

Especially considering the childbearing years and work would effectively halve my own income.

I'm genuinely curious.

Men do it all the time. Why not? If you meet somebody you love?

Men never do this. The woman they marry is the one who takes care of the child. From conception to birth the woman carries the full burden of childcare in pregnancy. After birth the woman continues to bear primary responsibility for childcare, especially in the newborn phase. For most couples, the woman continues to be the default parent throughout childhood.

If the man can’t even bring home a paycheck why would any sane woman take on all the family responsibilities? A man who loves you would not want his partner bear all the financial AND care taking responsibilities in the family.

Agree, many males fall into the 1950s, I’m a Great Provider (of a paycheck) definition of husband or wife. Many get divorced and/or never have a real relationship or connection with their children.

[Anonymous]

IMO this only works if the man is willing to be “point person” with the house and kids. We know three families like this- WOHM breadwinner + dad who works very part time and is the primary parent for the day to day kids/household responsibilities. They all seem to function extremely well. We are neighbors with one of these families and honestly I think she is one of the happiest women I know! She loves her job, makes plenty of $, and comes home to dinner on the table and everything handled. They do have no-weekly cleaning I think. Their kids are in elementary and be spends his days on a “hobby related” part time gig, exercises a lot, and handles the house/kids/cooking etc. He seems super happy too.

But: I don’t think there are many men who would want to do this, or are even capable. My own DH would hate it.

The thing is : if a woman is the point person for house/kids (which is nearly always the case), AND the breadwinner by a lot...then what is the DH bringing to the table, logistically? Yes there is love, and yes he is the kids’ father, and those are important things. But for the woman- she would likely be better off being divorced or never marrying him- things will likely run more smoothly if he isn’t there at all...

[Anonymous]

It’s as simple as women having more choices now and not having to settle for a man, because a woman can provide for herself and get a spend donor if she wants a kid.

There are several million unmarried men in China who are looking for brides LOL they can join the club with the “loser” husband material category in the US.

Women don’t have to settle anymore because we have our own property.

There are a ton of exceptions to the norm, though, on these rules. I am an outlier. Was breadwinner in first marriage to man child, divorced him on good terms. In my 30s with several kids I remarried a handsome-high-earner man in his 40s who had been used to having all women chase hi except ME. He had to pursue me, because I was self sufficient and Lready had kids and my own $400k paycheck. I think my confidence and “don’t need you for your money” attitude made him chase me and propos quickly. Women need to own their value and should not feel like they can’t meet a quality man just because they are single mom in their 30s.

[Anonymous]

Back in the day they were called scrubs.

No Scrubs by TLC

A scrub is a guy that thinks he's fly
And is also known as a buster
Always talkin' about what he wants
And just sits on his broke ass
So, no

I don't want no scrub
A scrub is a guy that can't get no love from me
Hanging out the passenger side
Of his best friend's ride
Tryin' to holler at me

[Anonymous]

This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone

Look at asia more and more college educated women aren't getting married there is no financial incentive/need and there are less male college graduates proportionally every year. Women don't want to sit at home and be domestic servants either.

The only reason we aren't losing population is because of lower educated immigrants who are having kids at a higher rate

[Anonymous]

Men marry women who make less money because they value sexual attraction and looks so highly.

For some reason, it works less well in the reverse. Maybe because women are less visual?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2019/09/09/marriage-rate-study-economically-unattractive-mxp-vpx.hln


This story discusses a Cornell study that says the reason that US marriage rates are at an all time low is because there is a shortage of economically attractive men. They are labeling economically unattractive as lacking a bachelors degree or making less than $40,000 a year. Apparently women are reluctant to "marry down" so are remaining single instead. Assuming this study is valid, why do you think there is such a shortage of men who are "economically attractive" to women?

Because some women think they are deserving of a Kardashian existence -- too much reality television.

Unmarried woman here. I make much more than 100K a year, own my home, and have a degree. I'm not at all uncommon in this area.

Why should I marry a guy who makes less than me? Doesn't own a home? And can't provide me a higher standard of living than I can for myself?

Especially considering the childbearing years and work would effectively halve my own income.

I'm genuinely curious.

+1. It’s not a class issue, i.e. it’s not marrying down. It’s marrying someone who does not bring equal value to the table. Value can be measured many ways. Men marry women with lesser education and lower earnings precisely because they expect to gain the unpaid labor of that person to raise children and in general free them from all the administrative tasks of home and life so that they can focus their time on income generation.

Women, however, generally can’t expect ANY unpaid labor from a man. Why should a woman marry a man of lower education (and presumably lower income earning power) and lower present income AND also expect to take on increase unpaid labor in the home and as a result probably have to diminish her income potential over time.

No thanks.

DING DING DING! I like that quote a lot. "Women, however, generally can’t expect ANY unpaid labor from a man. " It's so true