Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Hypergamy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Extent of sexual inequality
| Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 56 percent of women and 59 percent of men have had sex by the time they finish high school.<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/2017_tables/sexual_behaviors.htm#t133_down</ref> If access to sexual intercourse in real life followed an "80/20 rule", then we would expect less people having sex by the time they left high school. At the same time, more people are online dating, and the real-life dating sphere will become more unequal over time as online dating becomes even more popular. --> | According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 56 percent of women and 59 percent of men have had sex by the time they finish high school.<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/2017_tables/sexual_behaviors.htm#t133_down</ref> If access to sexual intercourse in real life followed an "80/20 rule", then we would expect less people having sex by the time they left high school. At the same time, more people are online dating, and the real-life dating sphere will become more unequal over time as online dating becomes even more popular. --> | ||
=== | === A bit less unequal than 80/20 === | ||
[[File:tinder.jpg|thumb|550px|right|<center></center>]] | [[File:tinder.jpg|thumb|550px|right|<center></center>]] | ||
A study analyzing GINI coefficients in human [[relationship|relationships]] found that “single men have a higher Gini coefficient (.536) than single women (.470). Thus, female sexual partners are more unequally distributed among single men than male sexual partners are among single women”<ref>https://contexts.org/blog/who-has-how-many-sexual-partners/</ref>. This roughly corresponds to the top 20% men having 60% of the sex, so 60/20, and 56/20 for women (i.e. less extreme than 80/20, in the general population at least).<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution#Lorenz_curve_and_Gini_coefficient</ref> | A study analyzing GINI coefficients in human [[relationship|relationships]] found that “single men have a higher Gini coefficient (.536) than single women (.470). Thus, female sexual partners are more unequally distributed among single men than male sexual partners are among single women”<ref>https://contexts.org/blog/who-has-how-many-sexual-partners/</ref>. This roughly corresponds to the top 20% men having 60% of the sex, so 60/20, and 56/20 for women (i.e. less extreme than 80/20, in the general population at least).<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution#Lorenz_curve_and_Gini_coefficient</ref> | ||
Mark Regnerus estimated the distribution to be 20/70 for men older than 25.<ref>https://books.google.de/books?id=928uDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86&dq=%22Pareto+would+be+proud,+or+nearly+so%22&source=bl&ots=jErxDCkmJ4&hl=en&sa=X#v=onepage&q=%22Pareto%20would%20be%20proud%2C%20or%20nearly%20so%22&f=false</ref> Data from GSS also suggests it is around 20/68 for men and a bit less unequal, 20/59 for women.{{citation needed}} | |||
A separate study of Tinder found that Tinder's GINI coefficient between the genders was on scale with the income inequality of third-world countries (see chart below).<ref>https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guys-unless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wasting-your-2ddf370a6e9a</ref> | |||
A data scientist for Hinge reported on the Gini coefficients he had found in his company’s abundant data, treating “likes” as the equivalent of income. He reported that heterosexual females faced a Gini coefficient of 0.324, while heterosexual males faced a much higher Gini coefficient of 0.542. While the situation for women is something like an economy with some poor, some middle class, and some millionaires, the situation for men is closer to a world with a small number of super-billionaires surrounded by huge masses who possess almost nothing. According to the Hinge analyst: | A data scientist for Hinge reported on the Gini coefficients he had found in his company’s abundant data, treating “likes” as the equivalent of income. He reported that heterosexual females faced a Gini coefficient of 0.324, while heterosexual males faced a much higher Gini coefficient of 0.542. While the situation for women is something like an economy with some poor, some middle class, and some millionaires, the situation for men is closer to a world with a small number of super-billionaires surrounded by huge masses who possess almost nothing. According to the Hinge analyst: | ||
| Line 129: | Line 130: | ||
|On a list of 149 countries’ Gini indices provided by the CIA World Factbook, this would place the female dating economy as 75th most unequal (average—think Western Europe) and the male dating economy as the 8th most unequal (kleptocracy, apartheid, perpetual civil war—think South Africa.<ref>https://quillette.com/2019/03/12/attraction-inequality-and-the-dating-economy/</ref>}} | |On a list of 149 countries’ Gini indices provided by the CIA World Factbook, this would place the female dating economy as 75th most unequal (average—think Western Europe) and the male dating economy as the 8th most unequal (kleptocracy, apartheid, perpetual civil war—think South Africa.<ref>https://quillette.com/2019/03/12/attraction-inequality-and-the-dating-economy/</ref>}} | ||
Sexologist [[Kristin Spitznogle]] regards the slightly higher inequality among men as evidence of [[Bateman's principle]] in modern western societies.<ref>https://resett.no/2018/06/29/menn-i-ufrivillig-solibati/</ref> In ancient societies, the sexual markets were likely stacked much more against men, with men only reproducing [[reproductive success|half as often as women]] and men outnumbering women 1:10 in the lowest social classes (see the quote by Orwell below). | |||
{{clear}} | {{clear}} | ||