Live data from Hacker News

Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

bloomberg.com

161–170 of 328 posts

Re: Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a queer woman, I have to say this doesn't seem like a problem to me and I think you've made some bad assumptions about who this is good news for.

Why as a queer woman? How's that relevant?

Identity politics is how you shut down rational thought in the postmodern era. Very relevant to how people "argue" now.

Re: Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

#163
post #125

Surprisingly many of the comments here have a boorish, misogynistic tone. Please be respectful. This is Hacker News, not r/RedPill

It's not that surprising... it's not that HN is like this, but this story wakes up people that have those opinions.

Re: Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

#164

Business Insider has run several articles of the urban college female "problem". With 30% more females obtaining college degrees currently than males plus that males generally dont marry up, there is a surplus of 20-something college females in all metropolitan areas except San Francisco and Washington DC. Good news for guys then. One silly article tried explain the success of hookup apps is that more desperate femal…

Males generally dont marry up? Couple things come to mind. Throughout my time, I've seen that women have their fair share of not wanting to marry down either. You want to say generalizations generalizations. Sure, but I think the age old stereotypes do have a hint of truth to them and the Bloomberg page here also states, "High-earning women (doctors, lawyers) tend to pair up with their economic equals, while middle-…

perhaps one reason people don't marry up or down often is that they do not tend to frequently interact. In a professional environment how often do you meet up with people not as the same or nearly the same level as you? Do many workers fraternize with their bosses when many are just more likely to complain upper management doesn't understand?

I would put most marry up/down on those who have frequent non professional outside activities. Whether its religious, a particular hobby, or simply a circle of friends whose careers all diverged.

Re: Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

#166
I think it's funny to notice how people are saying "If you want to get married to a (some profession) then you should work as a (other profession)." We shouldn't think that the correlation implies a cause. This data doesn't track what people's professions were before they were married, or how the professions change over time.

It would be interesting to see how people changed their profession as a result of getting married. For example, when people get married they're probably less likely to have jobs that require a lot of travel.

Re: Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

#167
post #15

I find it interesting that many of the IT/Engineering/Tech jobs have a high degree of connectivity to elementary/middle school teachers. So the high salaries are helping to balance out the crap salaries.

That's hilariously spot on for me. I'm a tech guy and my wife is a elementary teacher.

Re: Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

#168
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny you bring this up. I was on a date last Thursday and this girl (29 yrs old) was constantly trying to figure out how she was better than me....IN EVERY FACET OF LIFE. For example, she went on and on about how she is a badass since she went to the Amazon forests to a nice touristy shack with a guide and a bar. She told stories of hammocks, mosquito nets, snakes, insects and other wild stuff. After a long time, sh…

Honestly, you both sound pretty lame.

Easy on the ablism there "balls187".

Re: Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I think now you are touching on the other part of her comment... 1. Sexuality - particularly with women, in my experience - is variable: hetro women can and do consider other women as viable sexual partners, even if they don't consider them long term partners; 2. The implication of a "surplus of hetero females" is flawed given that bi and homo females do, in fact, exist and aren't properly accounted for. Not ever…

I'm not sure how that second point works wrt homo women, what do you mean by 'accounted for'? also, not every single female in the surplus needs to be 'available', since it's a statistical implication. a surplus of hetero females correlates with a surplus of 'available' hetero females.

I think the overall meaning is that saying "Good news for guys then", while not a false statement, isn't a complete one either. "Good news for guys and lesbians" would be more accurate. "Good news for folks in the market for women" even more so.

I don't think she's in any way suggesting you're wrong, (and neither am I) she just wants you to remember that she exists as well and benefits from this too. I can't speak for her but I also see it as a slightly humorous addendum to your point.

Post reply on HN