If I had to choose between two guys: one guy made about $250,000 per year and was just “ok” looking, and the other guy made about $60,000 per year, but was “hot”, I’d choose the guy with the cash.
I know…. I’m so superficial right? This is the truth according to a few researchers from University of Chicago and MIT who did a study to find out what factors drive communication between men and women.
The researchers recorded activity from 23,000 online daters during a three and a half month period and found that…..
For men there is no amount of income that the woman in the bottom ten percent in terms of appearance can earn to make men prefer her over women in the top 10 percent. That is, looks really matter to men relative to income. For women though, if the man in the bottom ten percent in terms of looks earns more than $248,500, they will prefer him over the more attractive guy earning $60,000. – bigthink.com
I can appreciate these observations, but it’s now clear that girls are getting hosed when it comes to the online dating stuff.
WHY GIRLS ARE GETTING HOSED?
For those of you who’ve never been on these sites (or at least tell people you haven’t), there’s usually a place for guys to enter their income on their dating profile, it looks like this on match.com:
match.com
So now we know he’s an English speaking liberal dancer who loves dogs, awesome. But, you can see what the problem is right? A TON of guys don’t fill in the “income” field.
Ok fine, maybe he left it blank because he’s modest or temporarily unemployed, or maybe he works for a non-profit. Whatever the case is, girls are left making a lot of assumptions about a guys career since a lot of them don’t indicate how much money they make.
Guys have it made because we know that nearly every girl puts her picture up (my guy friends have confirmed this for me). They say if a girl doesn’t put a picture up, it’s a huge red flag. Guys have the benefit of just taking a quick look at a picture of the girl and deciding instantly if he’s interested in her by comparing her picture to the other pictures he’s seen that day.
Here’s the problem….we now know based on the study that if a guy makes over $250,000, a girl is most likely going to be more interested in him than a guy who makes a lot less, but is hotter. So, how are we really supposed to compare apples to apples if some guys tell us how much money they make and some guys don’t?
Calgon take me away…… something needs to be fixed.
RELATIVE COMPARISONS DRIVE OUR DECISIONS
When we’re deciding between a few things, whether it’s what have for dinner, what to buy, or where to go on vacation, we rely on making relative comparisons because we don’t know what we want unless we have something else to compare it to. Seriously, have you ever ordered dessert with out asking what all the choices are or looking at the dessert menu? Maybe you want chocolate cake, but you always want to know what your other options are so you can compare the chocolate cake you think you want to a potentially better dessert.
We don’t have an internal value meter that tells us how much things are worth. Rather, we focus on the relative advantage of one thing over another, and estimate the value accordingly. -Predictably Irrational
We make comparisons in order to help us make decisions for the same reason we stereotype people: it’s a short cut for our brain when we don’t want to think too hard about something.
Look at this example from Dan Ariely’s book Predictably Irrational:
If you’re interested in subscribing to The Economist, which one of these subscriptions would you choose?
Economist.com subscription for 1 year- US $59.00
Print subscription – US $125.00
Print & web subscription – US $125.00
Out of 100 of students, 84 chose the 3rd option, 16 chose the 1st option, and ZERO chose the second option. The marketing folks at The Economist who work on the pricing for subscriptions know exactly what they’re doing – getting you to focus on a relative comparison will drive you to the subscription they want you to buy, the 3rd, which is coincidentally the most expensive option. Doy.
When Dan removed the 2nd option, 68 of his students chose the 1st option, the internet only at $59, and only 32 chose the 3rd option, internet and print at $125. Eliminating the 2nd option makes it hard for buyers to make a relative comparison with the 1st and the 3rd options because they’re not that comparable.
It’s harder to make a decision unless we see it in context relative to another comparable option. The marketers at The Economist slipped in the print only option (at $125) to make the print & web subscription look more appealing (also at $125). They don’t know if you want online or print, but if you want both, the $125 for both doesn’t look so bad because you now feel like you’re getting the web part for free.
THE SOLUTION TO THE ‘MISSING INCOME INFORMATION’ WITH ONLINE DATING SITES
Ok…..so I already know I’m not gonna get any dates after I post this since guys will think I’m a gold digger, I might as well tell you my genius solution since I’ve gone this far.
So let’s agree that based on this study, we know that past a certain threshold, $250,000, girls care less about looks and more about money, and, there’s no amount of money a girl could make that would make a guy prefer her if she was in the bottom 10% in terms of looks. Girls will trade out looks for money at a certain point and guys will never trade out looks for money.
If we’re playing tit for tat, guys leaving the income field blank is the same (in terms of importance of information) as girls not having a picture up, right? So unless more guys start to fill in the income information, the inconsistency and lack of income data screws up any relative comparisons we’re trying to make. Guys don’t have this disadvantage because nearly all girls put pictures up.
The Solution: Dating sites should require that guys say how much money they make so girls a can make relative comparisons just like guys do with our pictures.
Please forward to anyone you know who works at online dating companies and thank you for supporting my mission.
Kathryn, the problem with this argument is that you are leaving out the risk in advertising income and the fact that “substance” should, at the very least be a major factor. When an attractive girl includes her picture in a dating site, there is no major risk in doing so. She is natuarally going to attract men who are initially attracted to her for her looks and there is really nothing wrong with that. The risk in posting high income, is that you are going to attract women who are initially attracted to the money (and as your argument suggests) they may overlook other factors. This is a liability from a guys standpoint. The only girl i want in my life who is initially attracted to me because of money is the one in vegas who takes singles.
Tom
Tom, OK so if I post my picture on match.com and a guy is interested in me because of what I look like, you’re saying that’s fine and there’s nothing wrong with that? Totally agree, bring it on. But, why is it that you can base your interest in me on my looks (which is *very* important to guys according to the study) but I can’t base my interest in you based on your money (which is very important to girls according to the study)? Both are equally superficial and not the best things to consider when choosing a mate long term. What if I said the only guy I want in my life is the one who doesn’t care what I look like? I’m all for keeping pictures up and agree that that would be totally absurd to not have girls put their picture up, all I’m saying is now we know based on the study the importance of looks (for guys) and money (for girls)….so let’s play fair.
Kathryn, I´m not rich, but even if I were, and I were participating in online dating, I would not include my income because:
- I would feel like a dushbag, and I don´t want a girl who´s looking for a DB.
- I´d feel like I´m going to attract girls who lack substance (money as a priority).
- It´s none of anybody´s business.
Let´s set the online dating aspect aside. In essence, you´re saying that if a guy walks up to you in person and can see what you look like, it should be socially acceptable to ask him how much money he makes off the bat? How do you think that´s going to work out? The guys with substance will politely decline, and the DB´s will gladly offer up that info. So, I don´t think this is a really effective method for finding Mr. or Mrs. Right.
I think the desire to know and the willingness to cough up this info so early in a relationship point to poor relationship priorities on both sides.
I like your blog and admire your initiative and resourcefulness, but is the lifestyle advice your offering really that girls should want to know immediately how much money a guy has and guys should be marketing that info??? Really? It´s a provocative subject K, but do you really think this particular bit of advice holds water?
Tom
Tom, first off, I’ve had lots of offline conversations with my guy friends about this since I posted it, including my (male) physical therapist who just yelled at me, and none of them have had the cajones to post their opinions like you have, you’re awesome. Anyway….I’m not soliciting advice to girls and suggesting they ask a guy what he makes, that would be as moronic as a guy asking a girl how much she weighs. I’m looking at it purely from a data perspective and saying that girls are unable to make ‘relative comparisons’ from one guy to the next due to the lack of information that seems important according to the study…..looks for guys, money for girls. And yes, guys who ‘talk about’ how much money they make are in fact douche bags, but guys who do enter that info on their profile aren’t necessarily DB’s.
I am SOO ENJOYING this.. Can we do this over drinks? Tom bring the ones $$ : : )
Perhaps on a site such as Match.com the men who don’t want to write how much they make could just write something like this
INCOME: “Vp of Hedge fund so Glassdoor.com-it ladies”
Women can add an app on their phones like salary.com/glassdoor.com
and when they are at a bar and meet a man who’s starring them up and down they can ask “What do you do?”… then go straight to the app type it in and see if they’d like to carry on the conversation.. haaaaa
Ps. I think the photos on match.com or these other dating websites should be a photo of when you wake up in the am. You only get better.
By the way, Kurt just got lasic (Im so bummed, now he’s not blind anymore).. and now I sleep with a pillow on my face : ).
Hi Kathryn, you picked okcupid.com. You are biting your own tongue. Okcupid requires everyone to put up a picture of himself/herself, not only women but men as well. So there’s no reason for men to have to put in his income after all if he does not want to attract gold diggers. Let’s be real, women get way more replies than men online or offline. The only reason you believe men should put in their income is because it makes it easier for women to pick and choose among many suiters. What happen to women liberations? The more things change for women, the more women stay the same…if you know what I mean. It is a sad situation because women work and now they expect even more from men in terms of his income!
One issue is that the girl is probably never going to look like her photo in person because she is using the best photo ever taken of her, while unless the guy is lying, #s are #s.
ps. i pulled down $10M last year, call me. haha riiiiight.
I just saw your FB posting, Kat, about people being all revved up by your lastest blog entry. I don’t know why people are–you are 100% correct. Have people ever read, or even heard of, the book The Moral Animal? It a book first published in the mid-90s and it talks all about evolutionary psychology. It tackles Kat’s exact subject matter. Basically, why men and women are biologically hard wired like they are in their mate selections. Woman are wired to select the man who will provide for her children, and men are wired to select the most attractive and “fruitful” mate to produce offspring–ie. pocketbooks and photos count for a lot to the sexes. This story is nothing new. Kat’s suggestion to make the playing field fair by both sexes disclosing what is most important to them from an evolutionary perspective, sounds pretty justifiable to me. Look, I’m married to a wonderfully handsome and successful man, so although I am no longer in the single world, I do subscribe to a quid pro quo dating arena. As a fellow business girl, bravo to Kat for bringing the idea of relative comparisons to mate selection!
Andy, good point. I look nothing like my profile picture in person.
Kelly, you said it better than I did, your point is much more scientific and sounds less superficial than my post. Everyone, read Kelly’s comment.
These evolutionary provider things are outdated and unnecessary, and people have the brain power to realize this. Men are also hard wired to spread their seed around as much as possible, it’s in our “evolutionary psychology” to have multiple mates. How many woman would be okay with this idea? We’re not cavemen anymore, and you gals aren’t cavewomen.
Kathryn, wow, this really got me thinking. As I first disclaimer to everyone else above, I have been married so long (12 years) that internet dating didn’t even exist way back when. But with that..I mean if I were dating on one of these site…prior to reading your post, I would have never posted my income (it is healthy enough) because of the “gold digger” argument above.
Now that you have put it in the terms you did,I guess I would post income. It is only fair. I cannot imagine responding to an ad for a woman sans photo and clearly the income thing is the male version of the photo (right–I did not misunderstand that one?) so there you go. You have converted one. It is only a moral victory as I have no plans to exit my marriage for internet dating, but still, take what you can get.
You’ve made a good argument Kathryn. Given the obvious fact that these two characteristics (looks & money) are important to men and women respectively, men have an out – and women don’t.
Also, in this arrangement, women are forced to invest a considerable amount of time to get the information that will make a large contribution in her decision making process. If men omit their income (and women would like to know), then women have to go for coffee, lunch, dinner, et cetera in order to get an idea. That ends up being a huge investment in time, not to mention other inconveniences.
Your solution just skews the information inequality in the other direction. If the goal is full disclosure, then that should work both ways. Men can’t tell very much about what a woman looks like just by seeing a (usually tiny and/or outdated) face pic in a dating profile – just like women can’t tell exactly how much a man makes by his education and occupational field.
If you wanted to make the requirement “woman posts multi-angled nude pictures and guy posts full financial data” – then you’d have full disclosure on both sides… and I suspect a lot of guys would be on board with that requirement.
Zach, I hadn’t thought of that, actually. I shockingly kinda agree with you. Ok fine….then if we’re all or nothing then….it’s nude pictures and full disclosure on salary, OR no pictures whatsoever, not even her face, and no indication of salary whatsoever.
But the sites are still skewed in your favor right now since you can see pictures of faces (despite being blurry and potentially outdated) and we don’t see salary hardly ever.
As someone who’s been discriminated against in the dating realm, because I wasn’t earning enough money, I find this whole idea shallow, superficial, and totally inane and stupid.
I’ve actually had a number of women ask “What’s your line 22?”, which refers to the 1040 line 22 for gross income. There’s been some who sneer at me for “being a loser” who files a 1040A or 1040EZ. There’s others who literally walk away, if it’s not over a certain number.
It took me a while to come to the realization that I was still a good person, that I was still caring, intelligent, generous with what I had, with ethics and integrity, no mattter what my income was.
And now you want to judge how worthy a guy is, just on his income? Did you go to college to get your “MRS” degree, and hook a rich doctor, lawyer or banker?
Well, I wouldn’t date you either. I’d prefer someone who’s more interested in me as a person, than what’s in my wallet or paycheck. But if you want to be that shallow and superficial, don’t cry to us when that rich guy you’re dating is a lying, cheating, abusive jerk who doesn’t respect you.
While you are at it, men should show how much they are spending on their dates/ex-gfs/ex-wives. And women should put in the sexual positions, fellatio techniques, how often they would pleasure their men,etc. It would become purely a business.
BTW Kathryn, your idea of being fair isn’t really fair to begin with since it was “fairness” from a woman’s point of view…if a man is required to disclose his income, the woman should also disclose her bust size, her waist size,etc. Also, her history of dating in terms of how much a man has to spend on her…a man has to make an informed decision on whether the juice is worth the squeeze!
“For men there is no amount of income that the woman in the bottom ten percent in terms of appearance can earn to make men prefer her over women in the top 10 percent. That is, looks really matter to men relative to income. For women though, if the man in the bottom ten percent in terms of looks earns more than $248,500, they will prefer him over the more attractive guy earning $60,000.”
On the research i wonder how they determined the bottom 10% or top 10% in terms of appearance. I would date the girl from the movie “precious” if she made $250k
good point. everybody has a different definition of what’s attractive
This is why I’m single for the rest of my life. I cant make enough money for a woman to even bother to say hi to me.
Get out…..are you kidding Jerry? They can’t tell if you have money or you’re broke, unless you’re a douchey guy who is super flashy. Low key is better, they’re not saying hi to you because “you” don’t think they’d be interested in you….. so you give off that vibe.
I suppose your right… But how do I STOP giving off such a vibe.. I can feel as good about myself if I wanted to and that would still not make a difference. I only said such a thing because all my life I’ve been witnessing guys who are JERKS and who are flashy with their money and possessions and women go insane for them. Here I am, Mister Nice Guy with a cruddy job, barely have any money and once the question is popped up about my job, or how much I make, they instantly tune out. Being a couple isn’t for everyone and I see that now. I’m finished… given up on love or romance.
anywho sorry for bringing such drama to your blog, I just felt the topic explains why I’m lonely now.
Kathryn thank you for starting this discussion… I actually googled “should you disclose your income online dating” and came across your blog. Coincidentally, I googled this because I was making a Match.com profile
I have stumbled upon more than my fair share of luck career wise and I’m now at a point where I’m in my mid/late-20s and enjoy quite a bit of earning power. I come from a very modest family where education has always been trumpeted over material goods (both parents pursued PhDs in the field that they loved, which was absolutely not a field that paid well), so I have always grown up with this romanticized view of having a woman fall in love with me purely based on who I was, as I had expected to live a life very similar to my parents, stuck in the (low income) ivory towers of academia. As it stands, my Match.com profile would read Finance/150+k/year, which is more than my parent’s combined salaries.
From my position it is an odd predicament… I would like to have some recognition for having had a successful (and still quite young) career, so in that sense I don’t mind specifying a range, but ideally I would like to convey that without having any numbers involved at all. I want it to say “Don’t worry, we won’t starve” without coming off like a douchebag. I know it seems like I want to have my cake and eat it too…
Thanks for the article though, really provides food for thought.
I think guys are confused by this study because all it showed was that girls would choose a less attractive guy with money over a good looking guy who has less money.
The thing that guys have to remember is they still have to be “good” guys. Money, no money, ugly, hot, if they’re not a good guy, the money doesn’t mean anything. Meaning, there are other factors that the study doesn’t get into.
Put your income down for a while, then take it down…. and report back on what happens!
Actually, Kathryn, several studies show that girls often prefer “bad guys” over “good guys.” I”m sure there are a combination of reasons for this, such as “bad guys” are harder to obtain, therefore, probably more valuable as well as psychological reasons.
As for the study Kathryn blogged about, I would have to say it becomes increasingly accurate as a woman gets older. During a girl’s late teens/early twenties, they are usually financially dependent on parents, so wealth is not as important as looks. However, when said woman enters the “real world,” wealth becomes increasingly important for the reasons assigned in her article.
I find it interesting that the guys on this blog post find this idea hard to believe. I often hear people ask “how did that guy her” or wonder how/why a much younger female married a much older male. This is often rhetorical; within seconds, the person usually answers themselves with “he must be rich.” It seems as though we acknowledge the fact of the matter when we see others who fit nicely into that particular mold, but when we ask if that is true in our lives, we deny it intently.
To the guys out there: Realizing that money becomes increasingly important to girls as time goes on idea, coupled with the whole “bad guy” over “good guy” idea, will GREATLY help your chances at snagging a girl. Even using the “money theory” on its own can lend a solid strategy for landing a female. Suppose you know that you will probably not hit the $250,000 threshold. Knowing this, you know you must marry early, or your chances will begin to diminish. If your chances of earning over $250,000 or close are good, you will want to wait. This of course, applied to marriage. If you want to be a lifetime player, the older you get, the more you’ll need to make a halfway decent paycheck and make it look like you’re loaded.
Well said, this is the most logical comment I’ve heard. You sound older, and you probably make more than $250k given your comfortability with the topic. Guys can live in oblivion, or listen to your strategy, which is spot on.
Hello, Merely wanted to show you that your web site isn’t loading correctly on my i phone. Are you aware if there’s some setting I have to use to make it display correctly? Everything is out of line.
Every time I read a good post I do some things:1.Share it with the close contacts.2.keep it in some of the best sharing websites.3.Make sure to visit the blog where I read the post.After reading this article I’m really thinking of doing all three.
Love the conclusion. And what if the guy makes $500,000? Does she accept even less looks?
Should guys list their income online or no if they make $500,000+? Or does it look too cocky?
Kathryn, are you at a HF in SF now?
Sam
Ooops, scratch my last question as I read your conclusion.
I was told by a woman that if a guy makes more than $500,000, that’s just obnoxious and he shouldn’t list at all. She’s a dentist, and will likely make $250,000. Thoughts?
It’s like a catch 22. Guys can’t be honest!
Hi Sam – I don’t view guys as being cocky if they state their income on their profile. Just like girls aren’t cocky if they are good looking and show their face up close. But, how they act on the date is a whole different story. Just because the guy makes bank or the girl is attractive doesn’t give either one a hall pass to be a DB.
I explained to the girl who thinks it’s a DB thing to do to list a high income that the guy is just being honest and finds it no big deal since a lot of people make that around him probably.
He might also be signaling he wants to just associate with women around that income level as well, why not.
I think she bought it.
You’ve got it down Sam! Seriously though, I don’t get the big deal about stating the income on a profile. If the guy states his income and he has his shirt off and is standing in front of his Porsche, yeah, I know he’s a DB, even if he makes bank. You can tell a lot by the pictures.
I don’t know if it makes any difference for those men who are earning at the bottom 10% and for the women who are looks wise at the bottom 10% if men declare their salary or not. It only seems to “level” the playing field for men who earn a lot and women who look stunning so that they can make an “informed” decision as to who gets to go out with them on Friday night. For those of us who belong to the lower 10% it doesn’t exactly increase our odds.
Most of the men who ask me out, I probably earn more than them and they “settled” for me. I don’t know if I want to wear the pants though, TBH.
Interesting points.
I do have some female friends who make less money than their husbands, and my friends still wear the pants. I don’t think wearing the pants has to do with who makes the money necessarily.
Kathyrn -
Brilliant article and responses on your part. I’ll admit that looks are very important to me. I’ll take a broke, attractive woman over an unattractive rich girl. In fact, my last gf was broke but very attractive. Likewise, I get it when a girl wants a rich guy. I’m a lot of good things, but rich ain’t one of em.
And you’re completely right, it’s how you carry it. Looks draw me in, but personality keeps me there. LIkewise, a good woman will say ‘He makes money, sweet…’ but bails if he’s a DB. Granted I have to work harder because I’m not rich (or tall), but I am attractive and am not a total bum (and I have a fairly sweet apartment), so I manage to do just fine.
As a guy and while the author does make some interesting points, I found the end conclusion to be completely and entirely unromantic in nature. It turns relationships into merely a “business arrangement”. Money for women? Looks for men? What about women who make more than their husbands? What about men who have relationships and even marry women who are average- or even below-average looking? (Somehow I have a hunch that in the latter case, one reason a man might marry an average- or below-average woman was possibly because he genuinely loves her.) Looks and money are fine…but they are not the end-all, be-all though…
because women are materials ,and they are selling themselves to richer master.
I think the reason why some men (including me) choose to hide their salary is because we want women who like us for our looks and personality. For those women, the salary plays a very small part. Also, my education and industry will indiciate that I’m at least in the middle-class.
However, there are those who value income more than my personality. I’m not at all interested in those women so it certainly makes my life easier to hide income. It automatically filters out women that I’m not attracted to.
It’s a win-win for me.
Also, I think listing my occupation and education provides just as much information as women dressed in loose clothing (assuming they even show more than just their heads).
I hate to break this to you, but some women are winking at you online based on your education and your occupation alone. It sounds like you are above average in those areas, and women notice that.
So the “win win” you think you have based on *not* putting your salary down is self defeating. Assuming you went to a good school and work in a high paying industry (but still refrain from your salary), your occupation and education says enough, to your point.
We’re pretty good at deductive reasoning. So, you’re probably still getting a fair share of gold diggers.