> Thanks for the link, but it is specifically comparing _education_ levels, which has been strongly leaning towards more women, for various factors: such as, me

> Thanks for the link, but it is specifically comparing _education_ levels, which has been strongly leaning towards more women, for various factors: such as, men are more interested in trades (partly economic, but also instinctual) and STEM, and most "education" now has been diluted to appeal to women; there are more creative, feminine studies now than 50 years ago. The study is illustrating the groups in which women broadly have more educational attainment than men, women are more likely to marry down. Including highlighting several subgroups where the majority of women are marrying down, and thus implying that the majority of men are marrying up. Your arguments here try to diminish the meaningfulness of this metric. Which I think is dumb because it's clearly at least a good proxy measurement for women gaining some form of social power, but suppose you were correct and it's a meaningless metric. Then what's driving the high prevalence of women marrying down? Because they are. This is observed data. Women in these groups are marrying down. The idea that hypergamy is instinctive female behavior does not hold up to scrutiny against sociological studies.