4 ms·
This is sometimes referred to as "assortive mating". In the 1970s, a male executive was more likely to marry his secretary and a male doctor was more likely to
by nugget 8y ago
This is sometimes referred to as "assortive mating". In the 1970s, a male executive was more likely to marry his secretary and a male doctor was more likely to marry a nurse, and nobody would think that unusual. Culturally we have shifted away from those norms and nowadays the executive marries another executive or white collar professional and the doctor marries another doctor. This reinforces inequality in many ways (income, culture, parental education and involvement.) There don't seem to be any clear answers for how to address the implications of this trend.
- watwut 8y agoSecretary and nurse were pretty high far enough for women and neither could progress much further. Isn't it then still educated men marrying educated women relative to gender possibilities? The different seem to be only that women had lower level of education in general. A men at that time would only rarely marry up.
- gowld 8y agoAssortative mating exacerbates economic inequality, as the rich marry the rich, and the genetic consequences of assortative mating is a major hypothesis for the increase in autism diagnosis rate.
- taysic 8y agoTo be a nurse or secretary in those days were almost equivalent to a female executive today - simply because there were almost no female executives then.
- nojvek 8y agoI couldn’t disagree more. While there weren’t female executives then, a nurse != executive. One yields a lot more decision making power, responsibilities and possibly much higher salaries.