Chapter 7. Singlehood, Pairing, Cohabitation, Part 1.
I. Perspective: Black Male Shortage: single men per 100 single women: whites 25-29,
136; Latinos 141; vs. blacks 98;
whites 30-34, 133; Latinos 125; vs. blacks 134;
age 40-44, blacks 65! By law supply & demand, nonblack women can be more selective;
shortage eligible black males; result: % married blacks decline from 64(’71) to 43(’95)
1. worse for educated blacks: ratio men/women is 1/2; divorced over 35: 1/38 !
2. not only gender ratio: hi unemploy, early death, homicide rate, drugs, prison
II Choosing Partners
1. halo effect:assume good-looking have>desirable social charact than unattrac
2. attractive companion increase status:for unattract man, not for unattrac fem
3. attractiveness: men care about more than women
4. bargaining pts for econ indep fem:want>affective,companionable resources
a. still weaker than men today: in 1998 make 74% of what men made
5 double stand w/ age:phys attrac key in mar mark;elig part<asmen pick young
6 mar/monogamy: value go up w/ shortage fem; scarcer sex > bargain power
a. sex ratio: overall, 89 single men for every 100 women
b. 15-39 yrs (mar age):>men than women, reversing marriage squeeze
c. blacks: men less likely to marry because squeeze favors men
d. mar gradient worsens:tendency fem marry men>statu (hypergamy)
i. problem for women at the top: no one to look up to
7 Endogamy:field of eligibles narrow to same ethnic, religion, SES;fear outsider
8. Exogamy: must marry outside family and sex: some soc mar b/ cousins incest
9. Homogamy:positive assertive mating;age,race,height,eth,relig,SES,personality
a. 1st v. 2nd marriage: strongest in first and weaker in second marriage
b. race: in 1997, 97% of husbands and wives same race
c. religion: until 1960s, significant; only 6% of Jews, now 40%
d. Cause SES homogamy: share values, tastes,etc. + propinquity (oppor)
10. Heterogamy:Loving v. Virginia (1966) finds antimisceg law unconstitutional
a. Lingering belief: 20% whites, 8% blacks still think should be illegal
b. Exogamy:black 12% (1993); @50% Jap, Am. Indians,Cath,40% Jew
i. Risk div orce: bit>if dif relig back;inconclusive heterogamy
10. Parental image theory: seek partners who are similar to opposite. sex parent
11. Murstein’s stimulus-value-role theory: 3 stages in development of long-t rel
a. Stimulus stage: attraction physical,mental, social; most prom 1st meet
b. Value stage:weigh other’s values to see if compatible:2nd-7th meet
c. Rule stage: eval if other’s behav compatible w/ marital role; 8th+ meet
1. Closed v. Open fields: small# see other whether attracted (party) v lg# (mall)
2. initiate: on surface,man;fem may send nonverb signs of interest;smile, flip hair
a. sex dif: men >likely initiate meet directly;fem wait for intro (1/3-1/2 rely on)
1. ads: men twice as likely to place
2. dating: women may initiate, but less than men (Berger 1987)
3. meet settings:parties most, follow by classes, work, bars, clubs, hobby events
a. black churches: espec. for MC blacks, follow by concerts, plays, etc.
4 gays:rely on identifying cues to see if gay; then use nonverb to express interest