Better-educated women 'find it harder' to meet partner

panda100

I was wondering what the Ladies of the Lounge thought about this recently published research on changing gender roles and attitudes to fmaily formation in Ireland: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/better-educated-women-find-it-harder-to-meet-partner-1.3108512

Better-educated single women find it more difficult to meet partners than less educated single women, and are less happy as a result, a landmark study on gender and families finds.
The book, Changing Gender Roles and Attitudes to Family Formation in Ireland, is published on Wednesday. It finds that despite increased acceptability of being single, a stigma remains particularly for older women.
And yet it is harder for older, better-educated women to meet a male partner than it is for older, educated single men.
This, the research concludes, is leading to greater social isolation among these women, increasing childlessness and lower levels of wellbeing.
“In spite of the pressure on women to get married they do not have equal access to one of the main routes to meeting people in Ireland, ” writes the author, Dr Margret Fine-Davis of the department of sociology at Trinity College Dublin. “The perception that a man can go into a pub by himself and be comfortable whereas a woman cannot . . . is one that exists despite women’s increased equality in the work place.
“Clearly this constraint must in itself contribute to social isolation and the difficulty of single women – especially those in older age groups – to find partners.”
While women in their mid-to-late 30s perceive a dwindling pool of prospective partners, men at this age perceive an “endless supply” of possible partners as it is more usual for an older man to choose a younger partner than it is for an older woman to, the study says.
Two jobs
The importance of work and career influences women’s personal lives and choices in a way it does not influence men’s, according to Dr Fine-Davis. This may be because a woman knows a “change of relationship status” will mean she takes on two jobs – her own and that of housewife, “whereas this status change impinges less on men’s time”.

Do people agree/disagree with the findings?

sullivlo

...

...

WTF?

Like seriously. WTAF. I'm single. I'd be considered "better educated". But it's not my education that has me single. Nor is it the prospect of becoming a housewife (again, WTF?). And it certainly isn't due to a fear of going into a pub by myself.

Christ.

I'm starting a module on sociology in college (hopefully being even better-er educated doesn't make me even more single) and if this is the poop that they're spouting, I can see myself not doing so well in the assignments.

I am amazed at this article. Genuinely.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

The theorising on the causes are a bit weird, particularly the pub one (surely online dating was a thing by the time they started writing the book), and the assumption that if you're not shacked up and blissed out in baby land that it couldn't possibly be a matter of choice.

But yeah apart from that it rings true. Especially this bit :mad:

The author cites a recent study which found “mothers were rated as less competent and committed than non-mothers and were discriminated against in hiring and salary decisions whereas fathers experienced no similar discrimination and were in fact advantaged over childless men”.

Life ain't fair and if you're a single straight woman in your thirties and up it'll be harder to find a partner than if you're a single straight man. But getting a book out of that 'water is wet' statement seems a bit of a stretch.

baby and crumble

Haven't read the full article BUT I can understand to some degree.

I am not saying I agree with ANY of these things, by the way. I'm just saying that this could be down to;

- Higher educated female less likely to partner with lower educated male partner- possible reasons are males perceiving a threat due to the lowered liklihood of being primary earner in the family unit, or educated females wanting a partner of equal educational attainment.

- Educated females prioritsing career development in their early to mid 20's, over and above meeting romantic partners (tbh that doesn't seem more likely than the same issue for men in that time, so probably less an issue)

- Men feeling threatened by educated women. This is definitely an issue, and I'm not even a woman who dates men! But an educated woman, who is ambitious, is often seen as undesirable by certain types of men.

- When it comes to purely physical traits, academic women (and I specifically said "academic" women rather than educated in this point) can often prioritise their work to the detriment of their physical appearance (i'm not saying academic women just slob around, I'm simply stating something I have noticed). Likewise it's not unheard of for academically employed women (and men) to work 12-14 hour days and weekends, leaving little time for socialising.

panda100

I can definitely relate somewhat to the article and see similar with many of my single friends. I do think it can be more difficult for older, educated women to find a partner for many of the reasons outlined by baby and crumble. Personally, education in itself is not that important to me, but intelligence is. I can't imagine going on a date with some one who I can't have a stimulating conversation with. I have noticed with my older, male friends that this really is not as important for them as it is me.

The meeting people in the pub comment is a bit ridiculous though. Most people I know, men included, would use online dating. Gone are the days when people meet in pubs.

notsoyoungwan

What irritates me about that article is the stating that being single and childless leads to lower levels of wellbeing. It shows an appalling lack of understanding that some women don't want the happy ever after partner and baby scenario. If that scenario was somehow foisted on me I can guarantee that would lower my wellbeing very significantly indeed! And being childfree is fantastic for my wellbeing.

meeeeh

I don't think dismissing the whole research (a book) on basis of a part of an article is fair. It could be complete nonsense but none of us can judge that on basis of that article without looking at what research was done. There is also no need to take it as gospel how to live. The title of the book is "Changing Gender Roles and Attitudes to Family Formation in Ireland" and I think it's very interesting subject. Whatever the conclusions it is clear that gender roles are significantly changing and I do believe is a subject that needs to be explored. There are consequences like fertility issues are more common. While it's great for people to live the type of life they want there is no point dismissing research if it points out to challenged large parts of population could or are facing.

I didn't read a book but it's​ a subject that needs to be explored.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Addle

How do they define 'better educated'.

baby and crumble

....... wrote: »

How do they define wellbeing?

Entire phds are dedicated to trying to define wellbeing!!!

meeeeh

Addle wrote: »

How do they define 'better educated'.

I would assume that relates to levels of education. It's pretty easy to get women in 35-40 bracket, ask them level of their education and their relationship status and then compare by categories. Wellbeing is harder to determine but I suspect it was self defining happiness on sliding scale (or something similar).

sullivlo

meeeeh wrote: »

I would assume that relates to levels of education. It's pretty easy to get women in 35-40 bracket, ask them level of their education and their relationship status and then compare by categories. Wellbeing is harder to determine but I suspect it was self defining happiness on sliding scale (or something similar).

It could be something based on Maslow perhaps? You can't reach self actualisation blah blah.

Having reflected and thought more about the topic, I think that most of my single friends are on the better educated scale. I don't take exception to that as a fact. It's the assumption that a) single women are unhappy and b) that single women won't go into a pub alone.

Another poster mentioned intelligence as a factor and I guess that's true too. It's hard to find common ground sometimes in social situations, but my range of friends is so varied in occupations that it doesn't really factor into things. But I broke up with an ex because we wanted different things - he couldn't deal with my long hours in work & asked me to give up my PhD for him. It wasn't something I was willing to do.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Addle

....... wrote: »

This always gives me a snigger on the census, they ask you to what level you have been educated, but not how many qualifications you hold.

That reads quite pompously.

Are 'better educated' women too haughty?

sullivlo

Addle wrote: »

That reads quite pompously.

Are 'better educated' women too haughty?

I wonder is there a perception between "social class" and "level of education"? I wouldn't consider myself haughty, but I had to work really hard to get to where I am today, nothing was ever handed to me.

I also rarely discuss qualifications with people. In work, obviously I have to, but socially I'm still plain old ms, nothing has changed.

I played a game of credit card roulette with a friend over dinner one night and she was surprised to see that I hadn't updated my bank account to say "Dr".

sullivlo

baby and crumble wrote: »

Entire phds are dedicated to trying to define wellbeing!!!

I think that's the thing that baffles me the most about social science. It's so hard to quantify, so much of it is down to personal perception and there are so many variables.

I'm starting a research project on social sciences and I'm finding it challenging but enjoyable. Such conflicting opinions. Even down to the different theorists being so conflicting, yet both correct in different circumstances. Amazing.

.......

This post has been deleted.

baby and crumble

sullivlo wrote: »

I think that's the thing that baffles me the most about social science. It's so hard to quantify, so much of it is down to personal perception and there are so many variables.

I'm starting a research project on social sciences and I'm finding it challenging but enjoyable. Such conflicting opinions. Even down to the different theorists being so conflicting, yet both correct in different circumstances. Amazing.

The thing to remember with social science is that there isn't a "right" answer, like you often get in the physical sciences. Once I start researching something I've changed it by asking people to think about it. You cannot be objective. This isn't a bad thing, although many physical scientists can't understand that. I have real arguments with a friend of mine who did his PhD in biology 10 years ago. He doesn't get that you can only infer results from social science. You can't actually say for certain.

It's why I love working in this area. You could do the exact same research twice and getvtotally different results and that's totally fine.

sullivlo

baby and crumble wrote: »

The thing to remember with social science is that there isn't a "right" answer, like you often get in the physical sciences. Once I start researching something I've changed it by asking people to think about it. You cannot be objective. This isn't a bad thing, although many physical scientists can't understand that. I have real arguments with a friend of mine who did his PhD in biology 10 years ago. He doesn't get that you can only infer results from social science. You can't actually say for certain.

It's why I love working in this area. You could do the exact same research twice and getvtotally different results and that's totally fine.

You can't say for certain with physical science either, it's a conclusion from methods rather than a definitive answer, but I get his point of view. I'm struggling with all of the concepts involved, yet fascinated. I'm being really challenged and pushed out of my comfort zone!

rainbow kirby

From the sample size of 1 here, I'm married and both myself and my husband have a masters...

eviltwin

I would imagine age is a factor here, not necessarily educational levels. If you are concentrating on your career and putting off marriage and kids for that reason then it's more likely you will be coming to relationships late and therefore may find it harder to meet someone. I know women across the educational spectrum and can't really see a difference.

baby and crumble

rainbow kirby wrote: »

From the sample size of 1 here, I'm married and both myself and my husband have a masters...

That's the thing, it's not an exact "science". I've been with my partner going on 14 years and I have a H.Dip and 2 Masters degrees, she has a PG Dip and a Masters and is working towards her 2nd. I'm starting a PhD in October, part time. I think our difference is we met in college while getting our degrees- and we're well matched in educational attainment and career ambition. I think that might be the key point. We met at the right time.

I'd find it difficult to be with someone who didn't match my ambition and desire to continually keep educating yourself. TBH I don't think it would mater to me whether that's getting more "formal" education (ie traditional route of masters, etc) or constantly doing night or online courses in random topics like my Mum did all her life. It just means you've stuff to talk about, which makes dating and being with someone that much easier.

I know I'd find it tough being single, because when I discuss my education to date, lots of people (not just guys- and obviously I'd be dating women) tell me how intimidated they are to talk to me. I'm honestly lovely (I hope!) and don't give a crap about other peoples education, but I get how saying "I've 2 masters degrees and i'm working on a PhD" might be a bit much for someone in the dating scene if that's not something they have experience of. Likewise I'd be super intimidated by someone who is an artist or has massive amounts of creativity because I can't relate to that.

Does any of that make sense?

rainbow kirby

baby and crumble wrote: »

I think our difference is we met in college while getting our degrees- and we're well matched in educational attainment and career ambition. I think that might be the key point. We met at the right time.

We'd be the same. Met in our mid-20s when we were both early career professionals and we've built our careers together (even though I've been a little mammy-tracked at work since then).

One eyed Jack

panda100 wrote: »

Do people agree/disagree with the findings?

The findings are what they are - among the group of women who participated in these studies, it was found that older, more educated women found it harder than young, less well educated women working in lower occupational status careers, to find a partner -

Dr Fine-Davis says: “better-educated women, particularly those over 35, are finding it more difficult to find a partner” while women “in the lowest occupational status [said] it was easier to find a partner”. Many women are paying for their greater financial independence with being single, often against their wishes.

That in itself is no great revelation ('water is wet' as electro says), but where I would find disagreement with her perspective is in trying to frame this phenomenon as a gender equality issue -

“In spite of the pressure on women to get married they do not have equal access to one of the main routes to meeting people in Ireland, ” writes the author, Dr Margret Fine-Davis of the department of sociology at Trinity College Dublin. “The perception that a man can go into a pub by himself and be comfortable whereas a woman cannot . . . is one that exists despite women’s increased equality in the work place.

“Clearly this constraint must in itself contribute to social isolation and the difficulty of single women – especially those in older age groups – to find partners.”

Of course women have equal access to one of the main routes to meeting people in Ireland, it's simply their own personal choice that they choose not to avail of it. I don't agree with panda's suggestion that gone are the days when people meet in pubs. Although I can appreciate that most people panda would know (men included) would use online dating, I would suggest that online dating isn't nearly as popular as it's often perceived to be, and many women I've known and know would baulk at the idea of using online dating as a means to meet prospective partners or even to broaden their social lives to combat social isolation.

I haven't had a chance to read her book (and at £75.00 I'm unlikely to!), but when she mentions women's increased equality in the workplace, I wonder does she acknowledge the fact that the workplace is also one of the main routes to meeting people and alleviating social isolation for women?

It is of course widely acknowledged that for the vast majority of women (I'm allowing for women who of course prefer not to have children), they would like to start a family and have children, but at the risk of stating the blatantly obvious - of course there's going to be a trade-off in choosing between their career goals, and their personal goals. The impact of that trade-off can be alleviated by having a supportive partner, but again of course that's down to personal choice. It really isn't the fault of men that women find themselves forced to make these choices for themselves.

What particularly raised an eyebrow for me though was the last paragraph -

The study looks at other influences on people’s personal-life choices and outcomes, including priorities, values and attitudes to family formation, having children and childlessness.

While middle-class families have fewer children than they would like, working class families tend to have more than they wanted. The author suggests greater assistance with family planning may be necessary for this latter group as well as greater availability of affordable childcare, particularly for poorer single mothers.

“Women are caught between their biological clocks and their wish to continue actively in the labour market. It is apparent these factors are contributing to delays in couple formation, delays in marriage, postponement of first birth, an increase in the proportion of single people and an increase in childlessness.”

The costs are a decreasing population and diminishing social capacity to support an ageing population, and also a “greater proportion” of people with poorer psychological wellbeing.

It almost reads as though Dr. Fine-Davis is suggesting that the imperative is on women to bear the responsibility for the social impact of their personal choices, as though she's suggesting that women who decide to have children shouldn't have as many children, and women who choose not to have children are doing society a great injustice because educating themselves means they will inevitably end up with poorer psychological wellbeing, socially isolated, and the cherry on top is that they will bear the burden of the future of society on their shoulders...

I'm very confused by her conclusions tbh, as I believe that her conclusions would add to the social pressure that women already feel, rather than alleviate it. In short - I don't believe that gender roles in Irish society actually have changed, but certainly attitudes to the idea of family have changed. I think I'd actually have to read the book to get a better understanding of where Dr. Fines-Davis is coming from, as snippets like that in the opinions section of a national newspaper don't really lead to any better understanding.

To me it reads like twaddle and not unbiased research, they don't mention woman who are going out with younger men I am talking about 5 or 6 years its not uncommon and appeaser to be getting more common.

panda100

mariaalice wrote:

To me it reads like twaddle and not unbiased research, they don't mention woman who are going out with younger men I am talking about 5 or 6 years its not uncommon and appeaser to be getting more common.

+1 I'm 34 and tend to go for younger men for some reason. My last two relationships have been with men at least 4 years younger than me. I've nothing wrong with men my age or older but the most interest I get are from younger men. I think that stigma of age between men and women has been broken.

Persephone kindness

I dunno you had better ask someone more educated

For the record my OH and I did the exact same degree. We also got the exact same percentage in our final degree result. Weird!

Two primary degrees, one masters, one Phd and another PhD in the pipeline. Everyone I've gone out with including my current beloved, would be roughly around the same level of education but it's not something I've deliberately sought or consider especially important.

I do have a preference for people who are interested in work and education, since it's something I'll probably spend my life pursuing and I'm attracted to similar types.

.......

This post has been deleted.

.......

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

My mum is an MD with a PhD, so she's beaten me to the Dr. Dr.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Addle

sullivlo wrote: »

I played a game of credit card roulette with a friend over dinner one night and she was surprised to see that I hadn't updated my bank account to say "Dr".

Anyone can write/tick dr on an application form.
It used to automatically give the applicant a higher credit limit.

Addle

....... wrote: »

Does it?

The point I'm making is that I'd consider someone with degrees in more than one discipline better educated than someone with one degree in one discipline. But the census considers them to be the same. It's just a little omission on it I find amusing.

There are so many questions the census doesn't ask, so I find it a strange one to feel was missed out on.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Addle

....... wrote: »

Sure, but this is a thread about better educated women. So in the context I remembered the census question.

In a thread about religion I complain about the religion question.

In a thread about housing I might comment on the number of rooms question.

But none of those would be relevant in a thread about better educated women.

You must snigger a lot filling out the form so.

One eyed Jack

....... wrote: »

Sure, but this is a thread about better educated women. So in the context I remembered the census question.

In a thread about religion I complain about the religion question.

In a thread about housing I might comment on the number of rooms question.

But none of those would be relevant in a thread about better educated women.

I kinda get where you're coming from regarding the census, but the level of education question is just that, it doesn't matter how many educational qualifications you have at a certain level, it's only asked to determine what level of education a person has attained.

In the context of the thread though, I was expecting that the thread would be about the points raised in the article, and the study itself, not so much about just better educated women (and kudos to the women here who have achieved the qualifications they have!), but it's about whether older better educated women really do find it harder to find a partner than younger less well educated women working in low status careers, and motherhood and childlessness and the impact and implications of that for Irish society as a whole.

So for the women who took part in the survey, they must have been filling out self-reporting questionnaires which asked them a whole plethora of questions about their lifestyles and much more than just their level of educational attainment, in order to draw conclusions like potential consequences for not just better educated women, but also women who were not as well educated, and not just in terms of finding a partner, but also in terms of their attitudes to family and children and their overall happiness with the outcomes of their choices.

Persephone kindness

Congrats Candie That's amazing!

Finally an excuse not to go to law school. Awh ..it's unattractive. I only have one B.A in philosophy. So I wouldn't consider myself really educated.

My mother has a post grad and a degree. My dad has a PHD and another degree. My bro a PHD.

My brother has Dated generally people from his work or college place ..so women with PHDS!

.......

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

wetlandsboy

....... wrote: »

I do. I find it quite a laugh.

What about yourself?

What's the issue? The form just asks you about the level to which you are educated (6, 7, 8, 9, 10). You could have five level 9s - you are still educated to level 9.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Bambi985

It makes sense if you're studying or career climbing right through your 20s and early 30s that it slows down the rate at which you're going to meet a partner. All your energy is going on work and educational credentials where your counterparts are socialising, travelling, prioritising life outside of work and moving through various relationships.

One thing I've found anecdotally on the dating scene is that men by and large never really cared what I do, what degree I've done or what kind of job I have. It's more about how attractive I am and how much of a laugh we have together. The "work/degree" conversation would happen more as an addendum, an afterthought, a standard "getting to know you" question with no really weight attached to it.

I think as women we take a different approach and those kinds of questions inform whether or not this is someone we want to be with. Especially highly educated women. It's rare to find a woman with multiple degrees in a high power job with a high salary dating Joe from down the local, a woman like that will almost always want to find her counterpart and if she can't find him, she'll stay single.

milli milli

Bambi985 wrote: »

One thing I've found anecdotally on the dating scene is that men by and large never really cared what I do, what degree I've done or what kind of job I have. It's more about how attractive I am and how much of a laugh we have together. The "work/degree" conversation would happen more as an addendum, an afterthought, a standard "getting to know you" question with no really weight attached to it.
.

+1 Would agree with this.
I don't think it's something that guys (in general) put much emphasis on.

I'm just wondering if the ladies that have multiple masters/PhDs tell their dates in the same way that they've said it here? (As in listing off their qualifications in one sentence.)
I mean fair play to you and all, but it comes off as a bit boastful? And that's coming from someone with multiple qualifications. It's fantastic to be well-educated but there is a lot more to life.

wetlandsboy

Bambi985 wrote: »

... It's rare to find a woman with multiple degrees in a high power job with a high salary dating Joe from down the local, a woman like that will almost always want to find her counterpart and if she can't find him, she'll stay single.

How refreshingly honest! Certainly the opposite of what has been said in other fora on Boards. Just out of curiosity, is this the case for most women?

Bambi985

Every woman is different obviously. But it's an element of competitiveness you're often going to see on the dating scene and perhaps that's being reflected in a funny way in this thread.

When I was single I did the Tinder thing for a while (I'm in London) and a lot of male profiles were so detailed with work and educational credentials that it was almost like being on LinkedIn and looking at competition for jobs rather than being on a dating profile looking for a partner. I'm sure that wasn't any coincidence that so many profiles took the same "I've got X Y Z degrees and work in ABC" format but personally I found it so crass and tacky and would just be thinking "ok. But who ARE you?"

sullivlo

Bambi985 wrote: »

It makes sense if you're studying or career climbing right through your 20s and early 30s that it slows down the rate at which you're going to meet a partner. All your energy is going on work and educational credentials where your counterparts are socialising, travelling, prioritising life outside of work and moving through various relationships.

One thing I've found anecdotally on the dating scene is that men by and large never really cared what I do, what degree I've done or what kind of job I have. It's more about how attractive I am and how much of a laugh we have together. The "work/degree" conversation would happen more as an addendum, an afterthought, a standard "getting to know you" question with no really weight attached to it.

I think as women we take a different approach and those kinds of questions inform whether or not this is someone we want to be with. Especially highly educated women. It's rare to find a woman with multiple degrees in a high power job with a high salary dating Joe from down the local, a woman like that will almost always want to find her counterpart and if she can't find him, she'll stay single.

Just on this.

I'm not in a high power job and I don't have a high salary. But I think that compatibility is important in relationships. I have lots of friends who don't have degrees and I have lots in common with them. But if you're going to spend a significant chunk of time with just one person, you're going to want to have something to talk about and lots in common. I would have no problem in dating Joe from down the local if we shared similar interests and had similar values and views on life. What my partner does to earn a living doesn't bother me in the slightest.

But I have found that when I have discussed my job with some people that it puts them off. I don't know why. I rarely discuss my qualifications with strangers. If someone asks my job I will tell them that I am a scientist. If they ask more I'll tell them but I let them lead the conversation. If someone asks a follow up of what I studied I will tell them but not the levels of the degrees. And I never refer to my academic qualifications outside of work. Ever.

sullivlo

milli milli wrote: »

+1 Would agree with this.
I don't think it's something that guys (in general) put much emphasis on.

I'm just wondering if the ladies that have multiple masters/PhDs tell their dates in the same way that they've said it here? (As in listing off their qualifications in one sentence.)
I mean fair play to you and all, but it comes off as a bit boastful? And that's coming from someone with multiple qualifications. It's fantastic to be well-educated but there is a lot more to life.

No I don't list my CV in real life. It's in the context of the thread that I discussed qualifications. I don't think that qualifications are anything to boast about. All they show is that you can study. Don't make you smart.

eviltwin

wetlandsboy wrote: »

How refreshingly honest! Certainly the opposite of what has been said in other fora on Boards. Just out of curiosity, is this the case for most women?

God I hope not. I don't really put much faith in formal education. Some of the most intelligent people I know don't have a qualification to their name, one or two who have achieved a high level of education are thick as planks.

Educational snobbery is really unattractive. I have a degree but I'm married to a guy who only achieved leaving cert and not a very good one at that. Its never been an issue. We both have the same values and get along great and that is all that matters surely?

.......

This post has been deleted.

.......

This post has been deleted.