4 ms·

One trait where opposites attract is money. I noticed often in couples, there is one with money and one without. I guess this is out of necessity and it satisfi

One trait where opposites attract is money. I noticed often in couples, there is one with money and one without. I guess this is out of necessity and it satisfies both the poorer person's need for sustenance and the richer person's need for control over the relationship. In general, in many relationships, one is controlling and the other is controllable. Relationships with two tigers often don't last because they can't stop fighting and few people tolerate that kind of constant emotional discomfort. For relationships, it's probably best if both people are moderate.

makeworld 3y ago
Statistically, economic status is highly correlated between couples.
- jongjong 3y ago
  Often, it becomes correlated over time due to social factors. It's a lot easier to make money when you're married to someone with money.
  - chaxor 3y ago
    Or people choose partners that are more similar to their socioeconomic status from the start. See how you can make up any story and make it sound plausible? This is why so many people don't trust studies in psychology or economics.
    - Qwertious 3y ago
      Making up a story and fitting the data around it only happens in psychology or economics. It doesn't happen in the hard sciences, whose papers are always completely trustworthy.
      - TheSpiceIsLife 3y ago
        That's the sort of thing a British person would say.
      - chaxor 3y ago
        (\ _/) (o_o ) < "/s" < \ There ya go, you forgot that
  - HEmanZ 3y ago
    Do you have evidence for this happening after marriage? The only case I have literal evidence against your case is Physicians in the US. About a quarter of physicians marry other physicians, and this has been trending up for a long time: https://www.ama-assn.org/medical-residents/medical-resident-wellness/why-doctors-marry-doctors-exploring-medical-marriages https://www.ama-assn.org/medical-residents/medical-resident-... You can’t claim this is connections after marriage. I strongly suspect the social factor is that high earning professionals (doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc) are already on the same professional tracks when they get married. They have social circles consist mostly of other professionals. When the meet someone to marry, odds are high that person is part of their professional circles.
- jrflowers 3y ago
  While this may be true and borne out by data, I believe jongjong is trying to delicately illustrate something along the lines of the “women be shopping” phenomenon illustrated by the 1996 economics treatise “The Nutty Professor”
awb 3y ago
There’s always an imbalance between any two people, wether it’s earning power, kindness, productivity, strength, cleanliness, etc. If you’re comparing yourself to your partner in any capacity there will likely be tension.
groby_b 3y ago
"I noticed often in couples" Whenever you appeal to anecdata, you might want to pause a moment and check for actual data. Turns out that no, wealth alignment is likely one of the largest factors for finding a partner[1] and the number of couples with similar wealth is increasing [2]. "Relationships with two tigers often don't last because they can't stop fighting and few people tolerate that kind of constant emotional discomfort." And no, most relationships aren't divided in "controlling" and "controllable" either. In fact, that's a pretty good predictor for partner violence. [3] [1] https://academic.oup.com/sf/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/sf/soad064/7165260?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://academic.oup.com/sf/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.... [2] https://www.niussp.org/family-and-households/homogamy-among-high-income-partners-drives-up-family-income-inequality/ https://www.niussp.org/family-and-households/homogamy-among-... [3] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260519884681?journalCode=jiva https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/088626051988468...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
edgarvaldes 3y ago
Out of curiosity: Let's say the poor person is sexualy attractive. Is sex appeal vs money always in favor of the later? I know couples where the sexy one is the controller even against a person with more financial leverage.
- artursapek 3y ago
  it depends on who has more of a scarcity mindset. sexy women can find a well-off man pretty easily.
  - jongjong 3y ago
    Wow. That's a really good way to frame it. Scarcity mindset as a trait.
  - lo_zamoyski 3y ago
    It's not that simple. A women who has looks, but no class, no education, is ill-mannered, etc., is not going to find much interest among men who are well off, educated, well-mannered, etc. She may attract the attention of new money, yes, but this proves the point, namely, that there exists a segmentation by SOCIOeconomic class. The nouveau riche men in question belong approximately to the same social class. He isn't offended by this lass's cursing, press-on nails, vinyl pants, and high esteem of trash TV. It's what he grew up around. And look at the wives of many of the richest men. The beauty of wives is not strongly correlated with husband earning, certainly not beyond middle/upper middle class and upward where each additional dollar earned means less. Other factors are at work. This should be obvious. And it's not as if mating takes place at some grand event where every person is a potential candidate for everyone else of the opposite sex. We're distributed, we are embedded in social and kinship networks in time and place. We are exposed to an exceedingly small number of people in life, certainly before the typical age at which we tend to marry. No idea where all these boneheaded ideas about mating comes from that defy basic reason and experience.
    - gregjor 3y ago
      Clearly you haven’t seen Pretty Woman. QED.
lo_zamoyski 3y ago
Are you describing not an opposite, but a difference? Obviously, given any two randomly selected persons, it is much more likely that they will earn different salaries than that they will earn the same. Men tend to make more than women, largely because of differences between what men and women prioritize in life and career, because women often leave their jobs for extended periods of time to raise children, etc. Ergo, you can expect that for any married couple, the husband is more likely to earn more than the wife. This is desired by many women, because someone has to earn a living when they are on maternity leave. > I noticed often in couples, there is one with money and one without. Where did you "notice" this exactly? Because this is false. People tend to mate according to similarity of socioeconomic class. That means similarity of economic class. Cultural factors (the "socio" in "socioeconomic") are also important and correlate with economic factors. Greater similarly of cultural factors and economic factors creates greater opportunity and affordances for pairing. There's a greater common ground to work with. You're not going to find many classically educated billionaires married to barely literate burger flippers. > I guess this is out of necessity and it satisfies both the poorer person's need for sustenance and the richer person's need for control over the relationship. I don't know what bizarro world you live in, but this is not the general case. Again, people tend to mate according to socioeconomic similarity. That means both are earning within a similar-ish range or some from families with similar socioeconomic characteristics. The only way you can conceivably control someone in this manner is not to out-earn them, but the one earning less must earn less than needed to survive, have no realistic prospect of providing for themselves, and have no family or friends he or she can rely on. Telling someone you'll take away their Birkin bag isn't much of a threat to a poor person; starvation is. Your view of what most marriages are like is, frankly, delusional and dark, like something from an incel forum.
- lossolo 3y ago
  > I don't know what bizarro world you live in, but this is not the general case. So called "west" is not the whole world, it's actually minority of the world. What you describe as "general case" is probably accurate in case of many western countries but not in many countries in Asia, Africa and South America.
  - 3y ago
lossolo 3y ago
> richer person's need for control over the relationship Sometimes, it's not necessarily about control, as a sexually attractive female alpha may not be controlled by a male beta, the dynamics can be the other way around. However, it still works because a wealthy male can have a trophy wife/gf that can show off around, get satisfied sexually, while female gain control and access to resources.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
User23 3y ago
It was many years ago, but I recall seeing some kind of study with a considerably large n and it basically boiled down to male doctors marry secretaries, schoolteachers, and nurses and female doctors marry other doctors and CEOs. There is definitely some kind of sex-related factor controlling for how important partner income is viewed to be. What I haven't seen is any data on same sex relationships. Are men as indifferent to a male partner's earning potential as they are to a female partner's? How about for women, do same sex attracted female doctors also prefer other female doctors, or do they pair with female nurses and secretaries?

makeworld 3y ago

Statistically, economic status is highly correlated between couples.

jongjong 3y ago
Often, it becomes correlated over time due to social factors. It's a lot easier to make money when you're married to someone with money.
- chaxor 3y ago
  Or people choose partners that are more similar to their socioeconomic status from the start. See how you can make up any story and make it sound plausible? This is why so many people don't trust studies in psychology or economics.
  - Qwertious 3y ago
    Making up a story and fitting the data around it only happens in psychology or economics. It doesn't happen in the hard sciences, whose papers are always completely trustworthy.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 3y ago
      That's the sort of thing a British person would say.
    - chaxor 3y ago
      (\ _/) (o_o ) < "/s" < \ There ya go, you forgot that
- HEmanZ 3y ago
  Do you have evidence for this happening after marriage? The only case I have literal evidence against your case is Physicians in the US. About a quarter of physicians marry other physicians, and this has been trending up for a long time: https://www.ama-assn.org/medical-residents/medical-resident-wellness/why-doctors-marry-doctors-exploring-medical-marriages https://www.ama-assn.org/medical-residents/medical-resident-... You can’t claim this is connections after marriage. I strongly suspect the social factor is that high earning professionals (doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc) are already on the same professional tracks when they get married. They have social circles consist mostly of other professionals. When the meet someone to marry, odds are high that person is part of their professional circles.
jrflowers 3y ago
While this may be true and borne out by data, I believe jongjong is trying to delicately illustrate something along the lines of the “women be shopping” phenomenon illustrated by the 1996 economics treatise “The Nutty Professor”

awb 3y ago

There’s always an imbalance between any two people, wether it’s earning power, kindness, productivity, strength, cleanliness, etc. If you’re comparing yourself to your partner in any capacity there will likely be tension.

groby_b 3y ago

"I noticed often in couples" Whenever you appeal to anecdata, you might want to pause a moment and check for actual data. Turns out that no, wealth alignment is likely one of the largest factors for finding a partner[1] and the number of couples with similar wealth is increasing [2]. "Relationships with two tigers often don't last because they can't stop fighting and few people tolerate that kind of constant emotional discomfort." And no, most relationships aren't divided in "controlling" and "controllable" either. In fact, that's a pretty good predictor for partner violence. [3] [1] https://academic.oup.com/sf/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/sf/soad064/7165260?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://academic.oup.com/sf/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.... [2] https://www.niussp.org/family-and-households/homogamy-among-high-income-partners-drives-up-family-income-inequality/ https://www.niussp.org/family-and-households/homogamy-among-... [3] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260519884681?journalCode=jiva https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/088626051988468...

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

edgarvaldes 3y ago

Out of curiosity: Let's say the poor person is sexualy attractive. Is sex appeal vs money always in favor of the later? I know couples where the sexy one is the controller even against a person with more financial leverage.

artursapek 3y ago
it depends on who has more of a scarcity mindset. sexy women can find a well-off man pretty easily.
- jongjong 3y ago
  Wow. That's a really good way to frame it. Scarcity mindset as a trait.
- lo_zamoyski 3y ago
  It's not that simple. A women who has looks, but no class, no education, is ill-mannered, etc., is not going to find much interest among men who are well off, educated, well-mannered, etc. She may attract the attention of new money, yes, but this proves the point, namely, that there exists a segmentation by SOCIOeconomic class. The nouveau riche men in question belong approximately to the same social class. He isn't offended by this lass's cursing, press-on nails, vinyl pants, and high esteem of trash TV. It's what he grew up around. And look at the wives of many of the richest men. The beauty of wives is not strongly correlated with husband earning, certainly not beyond middle/upper middle class and upward where each additional dollar earned means less. Other factors are at work. This should be obvious. And it's not as if mating takes place at some grand event where every person is a potential candidate for everyone else of the opposite sex. We're distributed, we are embedded in social and kinship networks in time and place. We are exposed to an exceedingly small number of people in life, certainly before the typical age at which we tend to marry. No idea where all these boneheaded ideas about mating comes from that defy basic reason and experience.
  - gregjor 3y ago
    Clearly you haven’t seen Pretty Woman. QED.

lo_zamoyski 3y ago

Are you describing not an opposite, but a difference? Obviously, given any two randomly selected persons, it is much more likely that they will earn different salaries than that they will earn the same. Men tend to make more than women, largely because of differences between what men and women prioritize in life and career, because women often leave their jobs for extended periods of time to raise children, etc. Ergo, you can expect that for any married couple, the husband is more likely to earn more than the wife. This is desired by many women, because someone has to earn a living when they are on maternity leave. > I noticed often in couples, there is one with money and one without. Where did you "notice" this exactly? Because this is false. People tend to mate according to similarity of socioeconomic class. That means similarity of economic class. Cultural factors (the "socio" in "socioeconomic") are also important and correlate with economic factors. Greater similarly of cultural factors and economic factors creates greater opportunity and affordances for pairing. There's a greater common ground to work with. You're not going to find many classically educated billionaires married to barely literate burger flippers. > I guess this is out of necessity and it satisfies both the poorer person's need for sustenance and the richer person's need for control over the relationship. I don't know what bizarro world you live in, but this is not the general case. Again, people tend to mate according to socioeconomic similarity. That means both are earning within a similar-ish range or some from families with similar socioeconomic characteristics. The only way you can conceivably control someone in this manner is not to out-earn them, but the one earning less must earn less than needed to survive, have no realistic prospect of providing for themselves, and have no family or friends he or she can rely on. Telling someone you'll take away their Birkin bag isn't much of a threat to a poor person; starvation is. Your view of what most marriages are like is, frankly, delusional and dark, like something from an incel forum.

lossolo 3y ago
> I don't know what bizarro world you live in, but this is not the general case. So called "west" is not the whole world, it's actually minority of the world. What you describe as "general case" is probably accurate in case of many western countries but not in many countries in Asia, Africa and South America.
- 3y ago

lossolo 3y ago

> richer person's need for control over the relationship Sometimes, it's not necessarily about control, as a sexually attractive female alpha may not be controlled by a male beta, the dynamics can be the other way around. However, it still works because a wealthy male can have a trophy wife/gf that can show off around, get satisfied sexually, while female gain control and access to resources.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

User23 3y ago

It was many years ago, but I recall seeing some kind of study with a considerably large n and it basically boiled down to male doctors marry secretaries, schoolteachers, and nurses and female doctors marry other doctors and CEOs. There is definitely some kind of sex-related factor controlling for how important partner income is viewed to be. What I haven't seen is any data on same sex relationships. Are men as indifferent to a male partner's earning potential as they are to a female partner's? How about for women, do same sex attracted female doctors also prefer other female doctors, or do they pair with female nurses and secretaries?