• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do Degreed women have a harder time finding a Husband?

Do Degreed women have a harder time finding a Husband?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 27.3%
  • No

    Votes: 24 72.7%

  • Total voters
    33
I wouldn't think that the fact of a degree in itself would have nearly the effect with regards to marriage as some of the things that are taught in higher education.

Some women seem to lose respect for their fathers in college, actually lose respect and develop anger and ridicule for men in general, some become firm believers that they are in fact victims of oppression by men and they put home and family in the oppression category, some have "causes" that they demand male companions support. Some find that the care and maintenance of their circle of girlfriends becomes their most important life pursuit. In the last election, it was found that the one white demographic that remained solidly in support of Barack Obama were college educated white women, but NOT white men.

The above is only a partial listing, but these sorts of things tend to drive men away, anti-male attitudes and unsympathetic, cold behavior count for much more than degrees although both the degree and the attitude seem to arrive at the same time.
 
Last edited:
You're comparing polls that PREDICT an event to polls that REPORT a reality. That's a false comparison. Your question has been answered. Deal with it.



Na. If anything this poll demonstrates just how true this phenomena actually is.


If we removed (or had a way) to prevent all the forums women, homosexuals, disenfranchised angry leftists that will obscure any poll, and other malcontents, and only had straight men voting, which are the only ones that truly need be polled on this for accuracy, then I believe that it would be different. That said, I think the fact that the idea and problem exists to such an extent in the real world that it is discussed at all levels of Western society AND even among other, non Western societies, indicates just how real it is.


For if it was not a phenomena, this thread could not exist. The vitriolic denial attempts and social leftist rants of conspiratorial gibberish could not occur. If something has to be constantly defended against and or denied by its own subjects, it's pretty obvious to all that it is a real phenomena for otherwise the 8 votes could not exist. The thread could not exist. The very discussion should not exist.

But.


It does.




That in and of itself is extremely problematic for those who claim this is not a legitimate phenomena.
 
I wouldn't deny that is likely true. But that fact doesn't negate at all the equally true fact that yes, when a 50k a year female paralegal marries a 100k a year male banker and then quits her 50k job to raise kids, forever leaving the workforce, while that scenario does lead to a stable marriage, that scenario is also the grand exception for degreed women

On the contrary, degreed women tend to marry degreed men, who have higher earning potential. That, for example, is why among degreed women, those who attended prestigious universities are actually more likely to quit to become stay-at-home moms than those who did not.

Nobody is denying it's a great story. It is. What I am saying it is not possible for most degreed women. There are only so many degreed men earning more than degreed women and those small numbers in the future based on graduating rates will be even smaller, meaning that nice story will become rarer and rarer. The future is one of depressed female incomes, less high earning men, and less marriages. Companies will simply pay these women less, they will not meet the past mens high incomes to the future womens. We are already seeing this. The global market does not pay a woman as much as a man. So in the end, feminist based societies will simply decline to the face of still patriarchal societies.

That said. The entire point is, the vast majority of degreed women will NEVER find Mr. 75-100k because they were NEVER going to. He didn't, doesn't exist on enough of a numerical level to be found. So what will, are degreed women making 50-70k a year doing? They're waiting for a 75-100k man that doesn't exist to pop up. Well. That's going to be a long wait, primarily because he isn't coming and wasn't. Equally important to this phenomena is the fact that these women cannot marry down.

Actually when it comes to education they can and do. Whereas (as of 2011) 78% of degreed men married degreed women, only 65% of degreed women married degreed men.

cohen_womenmarry-thumb-570x494-117953.jpg


You are speaking to a trend that is nowhere near absolute.

Consider. A degreed woman making 50-75k cannot feasibly marry and culturally integrate with a man making 40-60k for life. It isn't going to happen. The class structures are too different. Her whole life has been geared towards someone of even a higher class than her own. Not merely that, but no lower class, lower income man would actually marry her. Men marry down in class and income, not up.

You are creating a false direct correlation with education and income that does not necessarily exist. For example, (above link) of the 35% of degreed women who married non-degreed men, 46% still married men with incomes higher than their own. Meaning that 84% of degreed women are still marrying either their fellow degree-holders, or higher earners.

The men that she was demographically meant for will now not marry her, nor are they even willing to consider her for the above reasons, hence she has no options. Her own naturally available men will not marry her and the ultra high income sets of men she was geared for in life don't exist numerically speaking. The result we are seeing in the West is obvious and clear. These women have nowhere to go other than to keep on working. The irony of which makes them even less and less marriageable.

:shrug: as women graduates continue to outnumber males, it is possible what you say may come to pass. I tend to doubt it for the simple enough reason that many degreed women are in fact after their M.R.S., and that many others, having gotten the degrees, then choose to put their careers on hold in order to raise children.

But the fact does remain that women who graduate college get and stay married more often than women who only graduate high school.

They are more likely to get married in the first place:

pew-marital-status-education-nov-2010.JPG


and they are more than twice as likely to stay married once they are married:

divorce-rates-in-college-grads-vs-non-18205-1252503970-3.jpg
 
Well, why don't we look at statistics?

According to Pew Research, 69% of women with a college degree are married compared to 56% of women without a college degree. This means that women with degrees are more likely to be married than women without them.

Answer: no.

Great! Now lets shift the subject to talk about why women who have extramarital kids are less likely to finish a college degree or get married.
 
Dear sweet lord. Some of the posts in this thread sound like they were made by these guys:

Only-if-the-cavemen-knew....jpg
 
I question the bias of those studies. Since half of all marriages end in divorce, and 95% of all women benefit financially from divorce, it stands to reason that marriage would have positive aspects on women and negative aspects on men.

I know I get giddy at the idea that a woman can take half my crap away for little to no reason.

I guess you would have to look at the studies and what they are measuring. The ones I have seen are, as I said, from the nineties - and a lot of things have changed in the last 15 - 20 years. I understand there was international research looking at this - but if you consider that globally, women have a one in three chance of being in a relationship with an abusive partner, then high levels of depression and anxiety may well be quite common.

often mental health issues are associated with a sense of powerlessness and not having control over your own life.

Re women taking half of what you've got - I guess it also depends what laws you have. My daughter owned her house outright when she met her partner, but if they split up, he would legally be entitled to make a claim against her assets - here the law doesn't differentiate on the basis of sex, and as far as I know has not done for some time. I have known a few women who have lost assets because they dismissed the idea that an ex husband/boyfriend could legally be entitled to something they believed was theirs alone.

Still, they are better off than what they would have been prior to some 19th century legislation (such as the married women's property act - or whatever your country/state's equivalent is) when on marriage, a woman's property/inheritance would pass into the control of her husband, to do with whatever he wished.
 
I find if you earn more than your partner..you somehow emasculate them..

a partner who feel emasculated because his partner earns more than he does has a problem - and it is not her.
 
I would feel really odd if I made more money than my husband.

I am more interested in earning what I am worth rather than pretending that I am worth less than my partner.
 
People have strange beliefs about what "Housewife" is...and that not being employed outside the home...somehow means that they don't earn their way. It's damn hard work...and if women charged for the work that they do in the home...it would run in the neighborhood of $50K a year.

Those that believe income defines who is the leader of the family...very lacking in understanding marital relationships.

And those who believe that women who earn more than their husbands...damage their self-esteem...is a trip back to the 1950's thinking.

Times have changed...but apparently a lot of people live in a very stagnated delusion about what's going on in the here and now.

yeah, you know what? back in the 70's I was familiar with all those arguments - but I have been a stay at home Mum as well, and I don't agree.

Sure, when you are a "housewife" you have to be everything - but very few of those roles are performed at anywhere near a professional level. and lets face it - if "housewives" work was so demanding, the rise of the day time soaps and chat show would never have happened.

It CAN BE full on, and being a full time parent can be demanding - especially if you are committed to engaging with your kids, but I know for a fact that time at home IS NOT HARDER (workwise) than working full time and being there for kids when you get home, and being at home with the kids at school most of the day is certainly NOT HARDER than working full time and doing what used to be called "the double shift".
 
Then why do more women graduate from college than men? This seems like a observation made from bias and stereotypes (unless it is an observation from many decades ago). There are fewer men in college than women, especially nowdays, and most women/girls entering college know this. But there aren't just more entering college, but also graduating from college. And young girls entering college research colleges more on their academics and programs than young men do.

Young Women Are More Likely Than Men to Aspire to College, and to Graduate - Students - The Chronicle of Higher Education

What you describe sounds like gender stereotyping that is very outdated. It is from a past time when young women very well may have went to college to earn their "MRS", instead of an actual degree. That is not the case anymore.

absolutely true - and maybe the question that should be discussed is why men are less attracted to education.
 
.....

That said. The entire point is, the vast majority of degreed women will NEVER find Mr. 75-100k because they were NEVER going to. He didn't, doesn't exist on enough of a numerical level to be found. So what will, are degreed women making 50-70k a year doing? They're waiting for a 75-100k man that doesn't exist to pop up. Well. That's going to be a long wait, primarily because he isn't coming and wasn't. Equally important to this phenomena is the fact that these women cannot marry down.
......

I guess most women I know don't set out to find a guy who earns less than them.

Some end up with guys who earn less, but that's not their reason for being with him.
 
If a question and phenomena leading to that question has to be asked, it is likely the case.


All the polls said Bush would lose his second term. So much for those polls. Considering that was an easily measurable thing, I'd say social phenomena polls are even less accurate, especially considering half the editors/authors are likely single degreed women (lol).

conspiracy?
 
I guess you would have to look at the studies and what they are measuring. The ones I have seen are, as I said, from the nineties - and a lot of things have changed in the last 15 - 20 years. I understand there was international research looking at this - but if you consider that globally, women have a one in three chance of being in a relationship with an abusive partner, then high levels of depression and anxiety may well be quite common.

often mental health issues are associated with a sense of powerlessness and not having control over your own life.

I'm a businessman by nature. I tend to see the world through green-tinted glasses. Also it never arose in my brain like that, because I don't rely on someone else to make me happy. It's my vice to be 99% left-brained.

Re women taking half of what you've got - I guess it also depends what laws you have. My daughter owned her house outright when she met her partner, but if they split up, he would legally be entitled to make a claim against her assets - here the law doesn't differentiate on the basis of sex, and as far as I know has not done for some time. I have known a few women who have lost assets because they dismissed the idea that an ex husband/boyfriend could legally be entitled to something they believed was theirs alone.

Still, they are better off than what they would have been prior to some 19th century legislation (such as the married women's property act - or whatever your country/state's equivalent is) when on marriage, a woman's property/inheritance would pass into the control of her husband, to do with whatever he wished.

Well yeah, back then women were essentially chattel. I imagine today would be better. And, yes, I imagine there are plenty of cases where the woman is financially "better off" than the newly-divorced husband and has to take a purse-hit to finalize it. However, I imagine that the percentage of situations where that's true is probably low. You hear all the time about high-profile marriages going kaput and the man getting taken to the cleaners. Situations where the ultra-rich woman getting robbed through divorce is low.

Other than the fact that I don't see too many rich women "marrying down", I think the biggest reason is that wealthy women are more likely to enter a marriage with a pre-nup (which is a completely intelligent and logical move). Men don't do that as much - due to a mixture of the fact that many women will throw a fit and start guilting them with things like "you clearly don't trust me" and "I can take care of myself", and men lacking in testicular fortitude to stick to their guns.
 
Yes - I don't support alimony . . .the only time I recall a woman paying alimony was Madonna. It's not like the spouse in those high-dollar marriages are poor themselves. Alimony should only be a factor if being divorced would throw either one into poverty - and then, only if the receiver of alimony didn't spur on the divorce (like cheat)
 
Yes - I don't support alimony . . .the only time I recall a woman paying alimony was Madonna. It's not like the spouse in those high-dollar marriages are poor themselves. Alimony should only be a factor if being divorced would throw either one into poverty - and then, only if the receiver of alimony didn't spur on the divorce (like cheat)

I'm guessing it was the new husband (wasn't sure if she was divorced from him), because I think Penn had more money than she did when they were together.
 
I'm a businessman by nature. I tend to see the world through green-tinted glasses. Also it never arose in my brain like that, because I don't rely on someone else to make me happy. It's my vice to be 99% left-brained.



Well yeah, back then women were essentially chattel. I imagine today would be better. And, yes, I imagine there are plenty of cases where the woman is financially "better off" than the newly-divorced husband and has to take a purse-hit to finalize it. However, I imagine that the percentage of situations where that's true is probably low. You hear all the time about high-profile marriages going kaput and the man getting taken to the cleaners. Situations where the ultra-rich woman getting robbed through divorce is low.

not sure what you are saying here. many women earn as much as men and/or are motivated op make sensible, long term economic decisions.

Other than the fact that I don't see too many rich women "marrying down", I think the biggest reason is that wealthy women are more likely to enter a marriage with a pre-nup (which is a completely intelligent and logical move). Men don't do that as much - due to a mixture of the fact that many women will throw a fit and start guilting them with things like "you clearly don't trust me" and "I can take care of myself", and men lacking in testicular fortitude to stick to their guns.

I think it is important to recognize that the situation is changing, and both men and women can't rely on outdated stereotypes.
 
yes ,because many of them are more self confident
 
Yes - I don't support alimony . . .the only time I recall a woman paying alimony was Madonna. It's not like the spouse in those high-dollar marriages are poor themselves. Alimony should only be a factor if being divorced would throw either one into poverty - and then, only if the receiver of alimony didn't spur on the divorce (like cheat)

Many women are now having to pay alimony to their husbands.

Liza Mundy: In De-Gendering of Divorce, Women Pay Ex-Husbands Alimony | TIME.com

Now, I agree with ending lifetime alimony and limiting alimony altogether. And I don't think any person who cheats on their spouse should get alimony without mitigating circumstances (such as he/she cheated also, or they had an agreed upon open relationship). It should definitely take into account all evidenced information of both parties and be reasonable.

The most prominent (although fictitious) example that I can't help but get out of my head in this discussion is Doofensmirtz's wife on Phineas and Ferb. He basically tries to make devices that would allow him to rule the world living solely off his wife's alimony payments (which also pay for his apartment). (Yes, I know it's a cartoon, but that concept is interesting to me.)
 
Many women are now having to pay alimony to their husbands.

Liza Mundy: In De-Gendering of Divorce, Women Pay Ex-Husbands Alimony | TIME.com

Now, I agree with ending lifetime alimony and limiting alimony altogether. And I don't think any person who cheats on their spouse should get alimony without mitigating circumstances (such as he/she cheated also, or they had an agreed upon open relationship). It should definitely take into account all evidenced information of both parties and be reasonable.

The most prominent (although fictitious) example that I can't help but get out of my head in this discussion is Doofensmirtz's wife on Phineas and Ferb. He basically tries to make devices that would allow him to rule the world living solely off his wife's alimony payments (which also pay for his apartment). (Yes, I know it's a cartoon, but that concept is interesting to me.)

The fact that there's an article on the subject means that this is a highly rare occurrence. Remember, dog bites man is not news. Man bites dog is.
 
The fact that there's an article on the subject means that this is a highly rare occurrence. Remember, dog bites man is not news. Man bites dog is.

Not a frequent situation, but it is not as "highly rare" as one might imagine. It usually happens when the wife earns a substantial amount more money than the husband though or as a backdoor way for the wife to buy out the husband's interest in the property she is keeping over time when she doesn't have the cash to do it all at once or the ability or desire to refi everything. Wife might agree to pay it as spousal support for a fixed period of time in exchange for him giving up his interest. I have also known it to happen in cases where the wife had something negative that she did not want to come out in open court like a substance abuse issue that could impact her career or multiple affairs she needed to keep under wraps so she agreed to it.
 
in fact the title of this thread gives us a clue about how men still view women as weaker ones who have to find a husband

men dont have to find wife

l will start a thread about it
 
The fact that there's an article on the subject means that this is a highly rare occurrence. Remember, dog bites man is not news. Man bites dog is.

I think it is showing that it is becoming much more common as women start making more than their husbands, in some cases taking care of their husbands rather than being taken care of by their husbands.

Alimony itself seems like something that would be pretty rare compared to the overall divorce rate.
 
I think it is showing that it is becoming much more common as women start making more than their husbands, in some cases taking care of their husbands rather than being taken care of by their husbands.

It should become more common. Last I checked, unemployment amongst men is higher than women...and for the life of me, I can't figure out why. Well, I can figure out why in the public sector, but not the private one.

The wage disparity is also not as evident and sizable as people want to believe.
 
It should become more common. Last I checked, unemployment amongst men is higher than women...and for the life of me, I can't figure out why. Well, I can figure out why in the public sector, but not the private one.

The wage disparity is also not as evident and sizable as people want to believe.

It is becoming more common, but at the same time alimony itself is becoming less common so there is give and take there. And since alimony isn't really tracked overall, then it isn't really known how these compare.

But there are also many more stay at home moms still than there are stay at home dads, which is what alimony was truly for to begin with, to support women who were supported by their husbands while they stayed home and took care of the house and/or children. They were considered to have no marketable skills. Now that more husbands are becoming stay at home dads and house-husbands, this is changing, but there is still a large disparity in that particular stat. I myself am a stay at home mom but it isn't likely that I could legitimately claim that I deserve any sort of longterm alimony due to my education and training should my husband and I divorce. I don't have experience, but I do opportunities and options available to me.
 
Last edited:
It is becoming more common, but at the same time alimony itself is becoming less common so there is give and take there. And since alimony isn't really tracked overall, then it isn't really known how these compare.

Alimony is rather barbaric and should be eliminated anyway. It's just another way to dick men over. Child support has been used as that for a long time, even by the government. For instance, child support payments are neither a deduction for men, nor are a requirement for women to claim as income. Thank God alimony is, and I'm shocked that it's been that way.

If prenups were automatically built-in to marriage licenses, we'd have a much smaller collective headache where divorce is concerned.
 
Back
Top Bottom