How sexual equality increases the gap between rich and poor households

HeadingRed · 2014-05-04T04:10:51+00:00

True sexual equality would mean there would be millions of women working full time jobs while their husbands were unemployed homemakers. Obviously this has not happened, and successful women continue to desire to marry successful men, preferably men who are even more successful. So I don't think the title of this article is accurate: sexual equality would lead to a lower gini constant, but sexual equality has not been achieved and will not be achieved until women start desiring fundamentally different things, which will probably happen never.

Sbijsoda · 2014-05-03T20:12:49+00:00

I think the most interesting part of the article is this part:

A woman with a graduate degree whose husband dropped out of high school in 1960 could still enjoy household income 40% above the national average; by 2005, such a couple would earn 8% below it. In 1960 a household composed of two people with graduate degrees earned 76% above the average; by 2005, they earned 119% more.

It shows how ludicrous society has gotten with what jobs pay out a lot. It used to be that you could drop out of high school and still have a decent paying job in manufacturing or something else that didn't require a lot of experience but now-a-days you need someone with a degree in a high paying sector just to make a decent amount.

RPSavant · 2014-05-03T17:48:38+00:00

Assortative mating is hardly mysterious. People with similar education tend to work in similar places and often find each other attractive. On top of this, the economic incentive to marry your peers has increased. A woman with a graduate degree whose husband dropped out of high school in 1960 could still enjoy household income 40% above the national average; by 2005, such a couple would earn 8% below it. In 1960 a household composed of two people with graduate degrees earned 76% above the average; by 2005, they earned 119% more. Women have far more choices than before, and that is one reason why inequality will be hard to reverse.

not sure how the economist got sexual equality from this.

[deleted] · 2014-05-04T03:40:27+00:00

How sexual equality increases the gap between rich and poor households

It's great how the author stops just one step short of completely spelling the idea out. Feminism sought to "free women." That very action lead to wealth inequality between households. Of course, it would never be stated in the Economist that creating gender equality would lead to inequality somewhere else, only implied.

Emperor_Quintana · 2014-05-04T00:33:53+00:00

Too bad they made no mention of entrepreneurial couples, regardless of their educational background.

HeadingRed · 2014-05-06T16:10:25+00:00

Keep in mind this is a pretty recent trend. Historically the rich married the rich and the poor married the poor. Then we started moving away from the caste system and you saw more marriages between different social and economic circles.

Now I see economics as one of the most common factors for those doing well, and race\religion\ethnicity is for the lower classes.

AnotherLostCause · 2014-05-04T03:53:36+00:00

Pretty basic a man will marry a less wealthy less educated woman if she is beautiful,but women want wealthier more educated men. Icing on cake, women think their degrees in worthless subjects have value.

Title	How sexual equality increases the gap between rich and poor households
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	31
Comments	26
Date	May 3, 2014 4:26 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/24mnot/how_sexual_equality_increases_the_gap_between/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/how-sexual-equality-increases-the-gap-between-rich.230098 https://theredarchive.com/post/230098

Comments