Etwas zu Einkommen und Attraktivität:
About 64% of men and 51% of women report their income. Figure 5.6 shows how these self-reported income measures are related to the members‘ dating outcomes. Income strongly a®ects the success of men, as measured by the number of ¯rst contact e-mails received. While there is no apparent e®ect below an annual income of $50,000, outcomes improve monotonically for income levels above $50,000. Relative to incomes below $50,000, 18The BMI is de¯ned as BMI = 703 £ w=h2; where w is weight in pounds and h is height in inches. 21 the increase in the expected number of ¯rst contacts is at least 32%, and as large as 156% for incomes in excess of $250,000. In contrast to the strong income e®ect for men, the online success of women is at most marginally related to their income. Women in the $35,000- $100,000 income range fare slightly better than women with lower incomes. Higher incomes, however, do not appear to improve outcomes, and are not associated with a statistically di®erent e®ect relative to the $15,000-$25,000 income range.
Quelle: What Makes You Click: An Empirical Analysis of Online Dating
Und aus eine Stellungnahme einer Forscherin:
Researchers have done this* and find that for men there is no amount of income that the woman in the bottom ten percent in terms of appearance can earn to make men prefer her over women in the top 10 percent. That is, looks really matter to men relative to income. For women though, if the man in the bottom ten percent in terms of looks earns more than $248,500, they will prefer him over the more attractive guy earning $60,000. My students often interpret this result as saying that women really care about money, but that is not what it says at all—$186,000 is a huge difference in income. If women didn’t care about looks and only cared about money, the figure would be much, much lower. This says that despite the impression that on the marriage market women really care about income, the evidence suggest that they also care about looks. They just care about income too.
Und schließlich noch:
Three out of four women said they would not wed someone without a job, and 65 percent would feel uncomfortable tying the knot if they themselves were jobless.
But more than 91 percent of single women said they would marry for love over money.
„It is ironic that women place more weight on love than money, yet won’t marry if they or their potential suitor is unemployed,“ said Meghan Casserly, of ForbesWoman which conducted the survey with the website YourTango.com.
Quelle: Women will wed for love, if partner has job
Bei dem letzten Zitat handelt es sich natürlich nur um eine Internetbefragung, aber ich denke es gibt die Meinungen vieler Frauen recht gut wieder. Das Problem ist eben, dass eine Frau natürlich aus Liebe heiraten würde, auch wenn derjenige kein Geld hat, dass aber gar kein Geld haben (was meist die Folge ist, wenn man keinen Job hat) dazu führt, dass sich Frauen nicht in einen Verlieben, weil es eben einen niedrigen Status signalisieren KANN. Aber eben nicht muss. Eine Frau kann sich sicherlich zu einem arbeitslosen Mann hingezogen fühlen und in ihn verlieben, wenn er anderweitig Status darstellen kann oder sie denkt, dass seine Arbeitslosigkeit nur ein vorübergehender Zustand sein muss (bis er zB mit seiner Band groß rauskommt).
Die Diskrepanz ist also nur eine solche, wenn man nicht versteht, dass Geld nur ein Symbol für andere Attraktivitätsmerkmale ist. Deswegen zieht auch extremer Reichtum bei Frauen mehr als bei Männern, weil es eben Status signalisieren kann.
Alles Evolution 