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 social status or sexual capital than themselves.

Contents

The antonym "hypogamy" [lower-alpha 1] refers to the inverse: marrying a person of lower social class or status (colloquially "marrying down"). Both terms were invented in the Indian subcontinent in the 19th century while translating classical Hindu law books, which used the Sanskrit terms anuloma and pratiloma, respectively, for the two concepts. [2]

The term hypergyny is used to describe the overall practice of women marrying up, since the men would be marrying down. [3]

Research

One study found that women are more selective in their choice of marriage partners than are men. [4] [5]

A study done by the University of Minnesota in 2017 found that females generally prefer dominant males as mates. [6] 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). Across studies, 3 out of 4 women rated socioeconomic status as more important in a prospective marriage partner than did the average man.

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. By this argument, marriage reduces the overall genetic quality of her offspring by precluding the possibility of impregnation by a genetically higher quality male, albeit without his parental investment, but the reduction may be compensated by greater levels of parental investment by her genetically lower quality husband.[ dubious ]. 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." [7]

An empirical study examined the mate preferences of subscribers to a computer 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." [8] :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. [9]

Another study found traditional marriage practices in which men "marry down" in education do not persist for long once women have the educational advantage. [10]

Additional 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. [11] They argue that as societies shift towards becoming more gender-equal, women's mate selection preferences shift as well. Some research supports that theory, [12] including 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. [13]

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. [14]

Prevalence

It is becoming less common for women to marry older men. 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. [15] [16] [17]

See also

Notes

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

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sexual attraction</span> Attraction on the basis of sexual desire

Sexual attraction is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest. Sexual attractiveness or sex appeal is an individual's ability to attract other people sexually, and is a factor in sexual selection or mate choice. The attraction can be to the physical or other qualities or traits of a person, or to such qualities in the context where they appear. The attraction may be to a person's aesthetics, movements, voice, or smell, among other things. The attraction may be enhanced by a person's adornments, clothing, perfume or hair style. It can be influenced by individual genetic, psychological, or cultural factors, or to other, more amorphous qualities. Sexual attraction is also a response to another person that depends on a combination of the person possessing the traits and on the criteria of the person who is attracted.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Infidelity</span> Cheating, adultery, or having an affair

Infidelity is a violation of a couple's emotional and/or sexual exclusivity that commonly results in feelings of anger, sexual jealousy, and rivalry.

Sociosexuality, sometimes called sociosexual orientation, is the individual difference in the willingness to engage in sexual activity outside of a committed relationship. Individuals who are more restricted sociosexually are less willing to engage in casual sex; they prefer greater love, commitment and emotional closeness before having sex with romantic partners. Individuals who are more unrestricted sociosexually are more willing to have casual sex and are more comfortable engaging in sex without love, commitment or closeness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sociobiological theories of rape</span> Theories about how evolutionary adaptation influences the psychology of rapists

Sociobiological theories of rape explore how evolutionary adaptation influences the psychology of rapists. Such theories are highly controversial, as traditional theories typically do not consider rape a behavioral adaptation. Some object to such theories on ethical, religious, political, or scientific grounds. Others argue correct knowledge of rape causes is necessary for effective preventive measures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Physical attractiveness</span> Aesthetic assessment of physical traits

Physical attractiveness is the degree to which a person's physical features are considered aesthetically pleasing or beautiful. The term often implies sexual attractiveness or desirability, but can also be distinct from either. There are many factors which influence one person's attraction to another, with physical aspects being one of them. Physical attraction itself includes universal perceptions common to all human cultures such as facial symmetry, sociocultural dependent attributes, and personal preferences unique to a particular individual.

Sex differences in psychology are differences in the mental functions and behaviors of the sexes and are due to a complex interplay of biological, developmental, and cultural factors. Differences have been found in a variety of fields such as mental health, cognitive abilities, personality, emotion, sexuality, friendship, and tendency towards aggression. Such variation may be innate, learned, or both. Modern research attempts to distinguish between these causes and to analyze any ethical concerns raised. Since behavior is a result of interactions between nature and nurture, researchers are interested in investigating how biology and environment interact to produce such differences, although this is often not possible.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David Buss</span> American evolutionary psychologist

David Michael Buss is an American evolutionary psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin, researching human sex differences in mate selection. He is considered one of the founders of evolutionary psychology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parental investment</span> Parental expenditure (e.g. time, energy, resources) that benefits offspring

Parental investment, in evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology, is any parental expenditure that benefits offspring. Parental investment may be performed by both males and females, females alone or males alone. Care can be provided at any stage of the offspring's life, from pre-natal to post-natal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sexual jealousy</span> Psychological concept

Sexual jealousy is a special form of jealousy in sexual relationships, based on suspected or imminent sexual infidelity. The concept is studied in the field of evolutionary psychology.

Human male sexuality encompasses a wide variety of feelings and behaviors. Men's feelings of attraction may be caused by various physical and social traits of their potential partner. Men's sexual behavior can be affected by many factors, including evolved predispositions, individual personality, upbringing, and culture. While most men are heterosexual, there are minorities of homosexual men and varying degrees of bisexual men.

In sexual relationships, concepts of age disparity, including what defines an age disparity, have developed over time and vary among societies. Differences in age preferences for mates can stem from partner availability, gender roles, and evolutionary mating strategies, and age preferences in sexual partners may vary cross-culturally. There are also social theories for age differences in relationships as well as suggested reasons for 'alternative' age-hypogamous relationships. Age-disparate relationships have been documented for most of recorded history and have been regarded with a wide range of attitudes dependent on sociocultural norms and legal systems.

Douglas T. Kenrick is professor of psychology at Arizona State University. His research and writing integrate three scientific syntheses of the last few decades: evolutionary psychology, cognitive science, and dynamical systems theory. He is author of over 170 scientific articles, books, and book chapters, the majority applying evolutionary ideas to human cognition and behavior.

Mate preferences in humans refers to why one human chooses or chooses not to mate with another human and their reasoning why. Men and women have been observed having different criteria as what makes a good or ideal mate. A potential mate's socioeconomic status has also been seen important, especially in developing areas where social status is more emphasized.

Homogamy is marriage between individuals who are, in some culturally important way, similar to each other. It is a form of assortative mating. The union may be based on socioeconomic status, class, gender, caste, ethnicity, or religion, or age in the case of the so-called age homogamy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human mating strategies</span> Courtship behavior of humans

In evolutionary psychology and behavioral ecology, human mating strategies are a set of behaviors used by individuals to select, attract, and retain mates. Mating strategies overlap with reproductive strategies, which encompass a broader set of behaviors involving the timing of reproduction and the trade-off between quantity and quality of offspring.

Mate value is derived from Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and sexual selection, as well as the social exchange theory of relationships. Mate value is defined as the sum of traits that are perceived as desirable, representing genetic quality and/or fitness, an indication of a potential mate's reproductive success. Based on mate desirability and mate preference, mate value underpins mate selection and the formation of romantic relationships.

Female intrasexual competition is competition between women over a potential mate. Such competition might include self-promotion, derogation of other women, and direct and indirect aggression toward other women. Factors that influence female intrasexual competition include the genetic quality of available mates, hormone levels, and interpersonal dynamics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evolutionary neuroandrogenic theory</span>

The evolutionary neuroandrogenic (ENA) theory is a conceptual framework which seeks to explain trends in violent and criminal behavior from an evolutionary and biological perspective. It was first proposed by the sociologist Lee Ellis in 2005 in his paper "A Theory Explaining Biological Correlates of Criminality" published in the European Journal of Criminology. Since then, it has expanded into an interdisciplinary field that intersects biology, psychology, and sociology. The theory rests on two propositions. The first is that in human mating behavior, females prefer males that appear to be more competent providers of resources, and so males exhibit increased competitive behavior than females to obtain access to those resources. The second is that biological mechanisms lead to differential development in the male brain which then mediates the increased competitive behaviors that cause criminality. Though it was originally intended to explain high rates of criminality in young men, it has since been used as a framework to explain gang behavior, terrorism, and the rise of the criminal justice system.

In humans, males and females differ in their strategies to acquire mates and focus on certain qualities. There are two main categories of strategies that both sexes utilize: short-term and long-term. Human mate choice, an aspect of sexual selection in humans, depends on a variety of factors, such as ecology, demography, access to resources, rank/social standing, genes, and parasite stress.

Dating preferences refers to the preferences that individuals have towards a potential partner when approaching the formation of a romantic relationship. This concept is related to mate choice in humans, the research literature there primarily discusses the preference for traits that are evolutionarily desirable, such as physical symmetry, waist-to-chest ratio, and waist-to-hip ratio. Dating preferences, differs in that there are often social mechanisms that explain phenomena, rather than strictly evolutionary.

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. Shah, A. M. (6 December 2012), The Structure of Indian Society: Then and Now, Routledge, pp. 37–, ISBN   978-1-136-19770-3
  3. 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
  4. 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.
  5. Geary, David C.; Vigil, Jacob; Byrd-Craven, Jennifer (2003). "Evolution of Human Mate Choice" (PDF). web.simmons.edu. Retrieved 30 December 2020.
  6. "Women's Mate Preferences". ResearchGate . January 2017. p. 3. Retrieved 16 November 2021.
  7. 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 .
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. Rutter, Virginia (2011). The Gender of Sexuality: Exploring Sexual Possibilities. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers (Gender Lens Series). p. 19. ISBN   978-0742570030.
  16. Coltrane, Scott (2008). Gender and Families (Gender Lens Series). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p.  94. ISBN   978-0742561519.
  17. McVeigh, Tracy (2012-04-07). "Shift in marriage patterns 'has effect on inequality'". The Guardian. Retrieved 2018-11-14.