> In 1980, a high-income man would be significantly less likely to marry a high income woman, simply because there were fewer of them to marry. By the 1980s, t

> In 1980, a high-income man would be significantly less likely to marry a high income woman, simply because there were fewer of them to marry. By the 1980s, the rate of women participating in the workforce had nearly reached its peak. It certainly wouldn't be a case of fewer women working in general, to any meaningful degree. Although, granted, your implication seems to be that women were limited to menial jobs during that time rather than it being that they weren't working at all. What would have brought on the rise of them moving into professional work since? Additionally, how did the economy manage to create so many menial jobs to absorb the massive influx of women entering the workforce leading up to the 80s, yet jobs that seemingly weren't important enough to retain for more than a few remaining years when women quickly moved into professional work in the following decades? > Online dating certainly offers no explanation The article offers one, but assumes you're familiar with traditional cultural norms around marriage, which, to be fair, may be an assumption too great in a society that is moving away from believing in the institution. The longstanding assumption in marriage is that a good woman is a force multiplier for the man. Hence why in law she is considered a partner and ultimately entitled to half of what the man makes (historically speaking), believing she is the backbone that propels the man to his heights. The suggestion is that online dating is allowing men with the most potential to meet the women who are the greatest multipliers. In other words, historically, high potential men would have been limited to who was within a figurative x mile radius limiting the multipler effect, but now can search the world over for those who offer the greatest multiple, producing a greater product. For what it is worth, an explanation I've heard elsewhere is that men leverage financial resources to attract a mate and that online dating has ramped up the competition as it is the women who are no longer limited to the x mile radius, but can all congregate around the most valuable men in the world, creating a situation where men feel they need to be bigger winners, so to speak, to win them over. Anyway, neither are going to overcome any skepticism, but that's the idea. In the end, who cares anyway?