Hypergamy

Last updated
Esther is crowned in this 1860 woodcut by Julius Schnorr von Karolsfeld. Schnorr von Carolsfeld Bibel in Bildern 1860 129.png
Esther is crowned in this 1860 woodcut by Julius Schnorr von Karolsfeld.

Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as "dating up" or "marrying up" [1] ) is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person dating or marrying a spouse of higher mating value than themselves.

Contents

The antonym "hypogamy" [a] refers to the inverse: marrying a person of lower mating value (colloquially "marrying down").

The term hypogyny can also be used to describe the overall practice of women marrying up, since the men would be marrying down. [2]

Concepts such as hypergamy, hypogamy, and hypergyny could be considered as special cases of mésalliance. [3]

By physical attractiveness

In the context of evolutionary psychology and digital sociology, hypergamy by physical attractiveness refers to the tendency of individuals to seek partners who are perceived as more physically attractive than themselves. With the advent of big data from online dating platforms, researchers have begun to quantify these patterns, observing distinct disparities in how men and women evaluate and pursue attractiveness.

Quantitative data from various dating platforms suggests a significant skew in how attractiveness is appraised. Data released by OKCupid indicated that while men tended to rate women on a traditional normal distribution (bell curve) of attractiveness, women rated approximately 80% of men as "below average" in physical appeal. [4]

Research into the intersection of race and physical attractiveness in online dating often highlights the persistence of specific demographic preferences. Studies published in journals such as Psychological Science and various sociological reviews have noted that in Western dating markets, white men often receive a disproportionate amount of interest and higher attractiveness scores compared to other ethnic groups. [5] Sociologists argue that these preferences are influenced by "sexual racism" or "racialized erotic capital," where Eurocentric beauty standards elevate the perceived desirability of certain groups. [6] Data-driven analyses suggest that most attractive white men often occupy the "top tier" of the digital dating hierarchy, receiving the highest volume of positive signals from a broad spectrum of female users, which researchers interpret as a convergence of hypergamy and existing social hierarchies.

By income

In a 2016 paper that explored the income difference between couples in 1980 and 2012, researcher Yue Qian noted that the tendency for women to marry men with higher incomes than themselves still persists in the modern era. [7]

The observed gender cliff in the distribution of women's share to the household income at 50% can be explained by income hypergamy preferences by both men and women, together with gender pay gap. [8]

By education

A study found traditional marriage practices in which men "marry down" and women "marry up" in education do not persist in countries where women have higher educational attainment. [9]

General differences by sex

Studies of mate selection in dozens of countries around the world have found men and women report prioritizing different traits when it comes to choosing a mate, with both groups favoring attractive partners in general, but men tending to prefer women who are young while women tend to prefer men who are rich, well educated, and ambitious. [10] They argue that as societies shift towards becoming more gender-equal, women's mate selection preferences shift as well. Some research provides limited support for that theory, [11] while other research strongly contradicts it. [12]

One study found that women are more selective in their choice of marriage partners than are men. [13] [14]

A study done by the University of Minnesota in 2017 found that females generally prefer dominant males as mates. [15] Research conducted throughout the world strongly supports the position that women prefer marriage with partners who are culturally successful or have high potential to become culturally successful. The most extensive of these studies included 10,000 people in 37 cultures across six continents and five islands. Women rated "good financial prospect" higher than men did in all cultures. In 29 samples, the "ambition and industriousness" of a prospective mate were more important for women than for men. Meta-analysis of research published from 1965 to 1986 revealed the same sex difference (Feingold, 1992).

Prevalence

In Britain, marrying up has decreased significantly since the 1950s. [16] It is becoming less common for women to marry older men, because current socioeconomic dynamics allow women more autonomy. Hypergamy does not necessitate the man being older; rather, it requires him to have higher status. The term 'social equals' typically pertains to shared social circles rather than economic equality. [17] [18] [16]

A 2012 analysis of a survey of 8,953 people in 37 countries, which found that the more gender-equal a country, the likelier male and female respondents were to report seeking the same qualities in each other rather than different ones. [19]

An empirical study examined the mate preferences of subscribers to an online dating service in Israel that had a highly skewed sex ratio (646 men for 1,000 women). Despite this skewed sex ratio, they found that "On education and socioeconomic status, women on average express greater hypergamic selectivity; they prefer mates who are superior to them in these traits... while men express a desire for an analogue of hypergamy based on physical attractiveness; they desire a mate who ranks higher on the physical attractiveness scale than they themselves do." [20] : 51 

One study did not find a statistical difference in the number of women or men "marrying-up" in a sample of 1,109 first-time married couples in the United States. [21]

Mathematical model

Gilles Saint-Paul (2008) proposes a mathematical model that purports to demonstrate that human female hypergamy occurs because women have greater lost mating opportunity costs from monogamous mating (given their slower reproductive rate and limited window of fertility compared to men), and thus must be compensated for this cost of marriage. At the end of his introduction, Saint-Paul states his model is consistent with statistics published by Bertrand et al (2013) but also notes that in US Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) data gathered the same year "aggregate evidence is not so clear-cut." [22]

Historical references

References to Hindu law books from the Indian subcontinent in the 19th century include the Sanskrit terms anuloma and pratiloma, respectively, for the concepts of hypergamy and hypogamy. [23]

The early Christian Church, through voices such as St. Basil the Great, sought to limit the effects of hypergamous customs, notably the large age gap that may have resulted from hypergamous mate selection. This guideline was not a part of church canon but some orthodox or Coptic churches recommend respective gaps of around 4-8 years or 1-15 years, with narrower age gaps recommended for younger couples. [24]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Not to be confused with the botanical term "hypogynous".

References

  1. ↑ Abgarian, Almara (21 October 2018). "What is hypergamy and are some people prone to it?". metro.co.uk. Retrieved 2 July 2019.
  2. ↑ Dickemann, Mildred (May 1979). "The ecology of mating systems in hypergynous dowry societies". Social Science Information. 18 (2): 163–195. doi:10.1177/053901847901800201. S2CID   144749330. It seemed clear from my materials that, as long ago proposed by Risley (1908) and Rivers (1921), this practice was a product of hypergyny, the upward flow of brides in a society which, being pyramidal, had fewer grooms at the top
  3. ↑ Eckland 1971, p. 233.
  4. ↑ Rudder, Christian (2014). Dataclysm: Who We Are (When We Think No One's Looking). Crown. ISBN 978-0385347372.
  5. ↑ Lin, K. H.; Lundquist, J. S. (2013). "Mate Selection in Cyberspace: The Intersection of Race, Gender, and Education". American Journal of Sociology. 119 (1): 183–215.
  6. ↑ Feliciano, C.; Robnett, B.; Komaie, G. (2009). "Gendered Racial Exclusion among White Internet Daters". Social Forces. 87 (3): 1539–1564.
  7. ↑ Yue Qian (2016). "Gender Asymmetry in Educational and Income Assortative Marriage". Journal of Marriage and Family. 79 (2): 318–336. doi:10.1111/jomf.12372.
  8. ↑ Grow, André; Van Bavel, Jan (2020). "The Gender Cliff in the Relative Contribution to the Household Income: Insights from Modelling Marriage Markets in 27 European Countries" (PDF). European Journal of Population. 36 (4): 711–733. doi: 10.1007/s10680-019-09547-8 . ISSN   0168-6577. PMC   7492320 . PMID   32994759 . Retrieved 9 February 2025.
  9. ↑ Esteve, Albert (2016-11-21). "The End of Hypergamy: Global Trends and Implications". Population and Development Review. 42 (4): 615–625. doi:10.1111/padr.12012. PMC   5421994 . PMID   28490820.
  10. ↑ Cashdan, Elizabeth (1996). "Women's Mating Strategies" (PDF). Evolutionary Anthropology. 5 (4): 134–143. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6505(1996)5:4<134::AID-EVAN3>3.0.CO;2-G. S2CID   83722614. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-04-12.
  11. ↑ Hadfield, Elaine (1995). Men's and Women's Preferences in Marital Partners in the United States, Russia, and Japan (PDF). Vol. 26. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. pp. 728–750. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-12-03. Retrieved 2013-11-29.
  12. ↑ Buss, David M. (2016) [1994]. The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating (3rd ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 68–71. ISBN   978-0465097760.
  13. ↑ Geary, David C.; Vigil, Jacob; Byrd-Craven, Jennifer (2003). "Evolution of human mate choice" . The Journal of Sex Research. 41 (1): 27–42. doi:10.1080/00224490409552211. PMID   15216422. S2CID   6848381 . Retrieved 30 December 2020.
  14. ↑ Geary, David C.; Vigil, Jacob; Byrd-Craven, Jennifer (2003). "Evolution of Human Mate Choice" (PDF). web.simmons.edu. Retrieved 30 December 2020.
  15. ↑ "Women's Mate Preferences". ResearchGate . January 2017. p. 3. Retrieved 16 November 2021.
  16. 1 2 McVeigh, Tracy (2012-04-07). "Shift in marriage patterns 'has effect on inequality'". The Guardian. Retrieved 2018-11-14.
  17. ↑ Rutter, Virginia (2011). The Gender of Sexuality: Exploring Sexual Possibilities. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers (Gender Lens Series). p. 19. ISBN   978-0742570030.
  18. ↑ Coltrane, Scott (2008). Gender and Families (Gender Lens Series). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p.  94. ISBN   978-0742561519.
  19. ↑ Zentner, M.; Mitura, K (1 October 2012). "Stepping out of the caveman's shadow: nations' gender gap predicts degree of sex differentiation in mate preferences". Psychological Science. 23 (10): 1176–85. doi:10.1177/0956797612441004. PMID   22933455. S2CID   3099690.
  20. ↑ Bokek-Cohen, Y.; Peres, Y. & Kanazawa, S. (2007). "Rational choice and evolutionary psychology as explanations for mate selectivity" (PDF). Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology. 2 (2): 42–55. doi:10.1037/h0099356.
  21. ↑ Dalmia, Sonia; Sicilian, Paul (2008). "Kids Cause Specialization: Evidence for Becker's Household Division of Labor Hypothesis". International Advances in Economic Research. 14 (4): 448–459. doi:10.1007/s11294-008-9171-x. S2CID   153727934.
  22. ↑ Saint-Paul, G. (2008). "Genes, Legitimacy and Hypergamy: Another look at the economics of marriage.] Econstor, IZA Discussion Papers, No. 4456". Journal of Demographic Economics. 81 (4): 331–377. doi:10.1017/dem.2015.8. hdl: 10419/36029 .
  23. ↑ Shah, A. M. (6 December 2012), The Structure of Indian Society: Then and Now, Routledge, pp. 37–, ISBN   978-1-136-19770-3
  24. ↑ Tanase, Nicolae (2001). Soțul ideal, soția ideală (in Romany). Romania: Agapis. p. 46. ISBN   978-606-8654-36-2.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.