Over the years, there has been a great deal of research done onthe relationship (if any) between a woman's pursuit of highereducation and her likelihood to marry and have children. And foryears the findings of this mostly scattered research hasperpetuated a popular societal notion that the more time a womandevotes to higher education, the less likely she is to marry andthe fewer children she is likely to have if she does, in fact,marry. Even the clever and eternally liberal Maureen Dowd wrote ina 2002 New York Times column: "the rule of thumb seems to be thatthe more successful the woman, the less likely it is that she willfind a husband or bear a child. For men the reverse is true."
Luckily, a study published this year by University of Washingtoneconomics professor Elaina Rose gives new hope to coeds andhigh-powered female professionals unsure of whether to breakthrough the glass ceiling or stay home with a bottle of Windex andpolish it. Her research shows that higher education is not thehindrance to marriage and motherhood it once was. "There used to bea marked tradeoff between higher education and marriage," Rose toldUPI on March 29, "but that is no longer the case."
To measure the change in what Rose calls the "success gap"during the 1980s and 1990s, she analyzed millions of census recordsand tracked the education and marriage status of Americans. In1980, a woman age 40-44 that had completed three years of graduateschool was 14 percent less likely to be married than hercounterpart with only a high school diploma. By 2000, thatdifference shrank to five percent.
"The market is adjusting to accommodate the increased supply ofeducated women," Rose said. She added that instead of men and womenhaving separate roles -- one earning while the other takes care ofthe home -- there are more shared responsibilities. "The perceptionthat women face a stark choice between career and family," Rosesaid, "is becoming less accurate in each successive decade."
But do not give the babysitter the night off just yet, ladies.After all, according to economic theory outlined in Rose's report,"Education and Hypergamy in Marriage Markets," Dowd's seeminglycynical and dated view is not entirely off target. The moresuccessful, educated and unmarried women there are waiting tomarry, the greater the disadvantage for this group in the marriagemarket.
However, Rose's report holds, this is only true if the level ofhypergamy is held constant. (Hypergamy, as anthropologists call it,is the tendency for women to "marry up" with respect to socialstatus, education, income, and other characteristics associatedwith economic well-being.) Since Rose's research contradicts thiseconomic theory, there must have been a substantial change in thelevel of hypergamy in recent years.
So what does this mean for us women? Are we one degree away froma world where women have replaced men in education, domesticity andearning power -- making them useful only for their sperm andpossible companionship? Or is it simply that we have become theultimate multi-taskers?
We complete years of education in enough time for ourreproductive organs to still cooperate, meanwhile pursuingpersonally and financially rewarding careers whose work days endjust in time to pick the kids up from soccer practice, pour ourhusbands a glass of wine (creatures increasingly inferior as wehave apparently abandoned the popular economic theory of "marryingup" and now, as a general rule, "marry down"), and throw dinner onthe stove. We have done it, ladies! Now we can make our homes andprovide for them too.
Kate Sklar is a sophomore who has not yet declared amajor.
