Women Who Are Least Likely to Land a Long-Term Mate Opt for Lucrative Careers
A new social psychology study from The University of Texas at San Antonio sought to answer why some women decide to focus on their careers instead of having children. The researchers proposed that sex ratio affects women’s family planning and career choices. The study found that a scarcity of desirable men led women to seek high-paying careers and to delay starting a family. A large determining factor as to whether a woman decided to focus on a career or not was the availability of an “investing long-term mate.” Women who were least able to secure a mate — which was determined by surveys that assessed self-perceived value as a reproductive partner — produced the strongest desire to hold lucrative careers.
The researchers concluded by saying that, “The fact that sex ratio has pronounced effects on women is not surprising when one considers theory in evolutionary biology and past research on operational sex ratios in numerous species. The relative number of available mates serves as a powerful environmental cue that signals what the current local environment holds in store for a given individual, particularly in light of his or her mate
value and, therefore, future mating opportunities.”
Forbes pointed out that the study failed to take into account that there are many programs in place that encourage women to enter good-paying jobs in the medical and science fields. This would play a huge role as to why women are choosing to pursue careers instead of watching their children play and cry all day. They also highlighted that women are “out-earning men in 147 of 150 of the country’s largest metropolitan areas becuase as the number of men in the population decreases, more job opportunities become available for women.”
Does this study offend your sensibilities? Do you think that it is biased? How has the economy shaped the results of this research?
Doesn’t it depend on the type of career as well? Stripping is a lucrative career isn’t it?