http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/divwlth.htm

I'd imagine that a good deal of people have at least seen stories about this paper done by a professor at OSU, but I'm having an issue in an argument with a feminist. He mentions the 77% reduction in wealth, but doesn't seem to break it up between men and women.

My first thoughts were that the 77% is an average, and since men go into marriage with more wealth and more debt (where wealth is cash and assets on hand excluding debt), they have the most to lose, since they'd give half their wealth up and maintain all of the debt. So while the woman might have taken a hit, the man gets screwed much harder on an absolute basis.

Am I reading this right, or is there an angle I'm not considering. Thanks in advance.