Where singles are, part II

There was some doubt about whether places like DC really have more single women than places like Arizona.

The charts below are from the 2005 American Community Survey, and only include non-Hispanic whites age 25-40.

There definitely seems to be an excess of men in Arizona.

On the other hand, the DC data doesn’t tell us much because DC is a small city, and there may be a big surplus of single men in northern Virginia outnumbering surplus of single women who live DC.

If I were really ambitious, I’d try to analyze this by “PUMA Code”, but that’s harder.

Washington, DC
Cells contain: -Column percent -Weighted N		sex
		1 Male	2 Female	ROW TOTAL
mar	1: Married	35.2 10,272	36.0 11,477	35.6 21,749
	3: Divorced	3.3 964	4.5 1,450	3.9 2,414
	4: Separated	.2 61	1.0 316	.6 377
	5: Never married	61.3 17,905	58.5 18,672	59.8 36,577
	COL TOTAL	100.0 29,202	100.0 31,915	100.0 61,117

Arizona
Cells contain: -Column percent -Weighted N		sex
		1 Male	2 Female	ROW TOTAL
mar	1: Married	53.3 186,395	58.3 199,435	55.8 385,830
	2: Widowed	.2 819	.2 648	.2 1,467
	3: Divorced	10.2 35,618	14.4 49,171	12.3 84,789
	4: Separated	1.6 5,520	2.3 7,751	1.9 13,271
	5: Never married	34.7 121,237	24.9 85,347	29.9 206,584
	COL TOTAL	100.0 349,589	100.0 342,352	100.0 691,941

UPDATE

Inside-the-beltway northern Virginia also looks favorable for single white men:

Inside-the-beltway Northern Virginia (PUMA 100, 200, 301)
Cells contain: -Column percent -Weighted N		sex
		1 Male	2 Female	ROW TOTAL
mar	1: Married	45.4 18,979	46.6 20,830	46.0 39,809
	3: Divorced	3.5 1,476	6.3 2,800	4.9 4,276
	4: Separated	.6 238	1.1 512	.9 750
	5: Never married	50.5 21,094	46.0 20,547	48.2 41,641
	COL TOTAL	100.0 41,787	100.0 44,689	100.0 86,476

UPDATE – MANHATTAN

The same data for the island of Manhattan.

PUMA codes: 3801, 3802, 3803, 3804, 3806, 3807, 3810, 3805, 3808, 3809

Manhattan
Cells contain: -Column percent -Weighted N		sex
		1 Male	2 Female	ROW TOTAL
mar	1: Married	37.0 46,684	40.3 55,263	38.7 101,947
	2: Widowed	.1 186	.4 495	.3 681
	3: Divorced	3.7 4,660	3.7 5,073	3.7 9,733
	4: Separated	.2 286	1.0 1,367	.6 1,653
	5: Never married	59.0 74,429	54.7 75,020	56.7 149,449
	COL TOTAL	100.0 126,245	100.0 137,218	100.0 263,463

CONCLUSION

There are more young single white women in the major cities in the northeast than there are in the Southwest.

UPDATE – STATEN ISLAND

Even in the island of the guidos, the ratio is favorable for single men:

Staten Island (or Island of the Guidos)
Cells contain: -Column percent -Weighted N		sex
		1 Male	2 Female	ROW TOTAL
mar	1: Married	60.1 18,994	60.3 21,193	60.2 40,187
	2: Widowed	.0 0	.3 103	.2 103
	3: Divorced	3.6 1,145	5.8 2,049	4.8 3,194
	4: Separated	1.0 314	1.6 579	1.3 893
	5: Never married	35.3 11,175	31.9 11,200	33.5 22,375
	COL TOTAL	100.0 31,628	100.0 35,124	100.0 66,752

Finally, the entire United States:

Entire United States
Cells contain: -Column percent -Weighted N		sex
		1 Male	2 Female	ROW TOTAL
mar	1: Married	58.5 11,559,570	63.8 12,718,852	61.2 24,278,422
	2: Widowed	.2 35,429	.5 101,359	.3 136,788
	3: Divorced	8.3 1,643,924	10.7 2,122,804	9.5 3,766,728
	4: Separated	1.7 330,370	2.7 545,920	2.2 876,290
	5: Never married	31.3 6,186,002	22.2 4,431,608	26.8 10,617,610
	COL TOTAL	100.0 19,755,295	100.0 19,920,543	100.0 39,675,838

SECOND CONCLUSION

New York City has an unusually favorable ratio for single white men ages 25-40, compared to the nation as a whole.

UPDATE: THE GAY FACTOR

According to this article, lots of men in DC and NYC are probably gay, skewing things even more in favor of the single heterosexual man:

For the United States as a whole the numbers were 2.6 percent for men and 1.1 percent for women. For small cities and towns and rural areas the percent was smaller. But about 9.2 percent of men and 2.6 percent of women (aged 18 to 59) living in the central cities of the 12 largest metropolitan areas reported that they identify as homosexual.

Comments

[Peter]

Until recently there was a great deal of construction activity in fast-growing Arizona. One plausible explanation for the male surplus is that men from elsewhere in the country traveled to Arizona for construction jobs.

[mondo]

The problem with DC is that the quality of women isn't so great.

But to some, quantity is the new quality.

[Reactionary]

Best hope for single men is war which kill off young men in big numer. Then there is paradise for survived men.

[Peter]

Best hope for single men is war which kill off young men in big numer. Then there is paradise for survived men.

World War I already had this effect in Europe.

[SFG]

Best hope for single men is war which kill off young men in big numer. Then there is paradise for survived men.
Ever notice how guys always think they'll be the ones to survive? Kind of like the way guys think polygamy is good because they think they'll be the one with 5 girls instead of one of the 4 guys with no girl.

[Anon]

I've heard that there is a dearth of straight males in S.F. and as such is a paradise for picking up women as long as you can put up with gays, junkies and skyhigh rents. Can anyone here confirm this?

A tip for picking up women in metro areas: avoid talking about politics. If you are in a situation where you need to, always appear to be centrist. Pretending to be a liberal isn't actually a good idea. Liberal women usually aren't sexually attracted to liberal men. Women have a genetic inclination to men who are strong and independent, even if they aren't consciously aware of this. What women say they want and who they will actually have sex with are two entirely different types. I even had one fem/treehugger admit that this is all true while she was lying next to me naked. You would be surprised by how many will drop their liberal pretenses once they get nailed properly. But don't take my word for it, do some experimenting yourself.

If you actually are a liberal male, then keep being sensitive and overly nice. I'd rather you stay single and not procreate like many of your brethren. At current rates your group will be outbred and at some point this age of dopey egalitarianism will be over.

[Jack]

SFG, that is true. I think I would be one of the 4 guys without a woman, but I also think I would be one of the guys to survive the war.

BTW, the advantage single white men have in Manhattan and DC seems to be very slight in these charts; however, it is interesting that the Staten Island guidettes seem to be sticking around and eating Mom's Italian cooking instead of getting out. In any case, Arizona looks really shitty for a guy. Plus, it's way too hot.

[Peter]

BTW, the advantage single white men have in Manhattan and DC seems to be very slight in these charts

As the latest update shows, the gay factor probably makes this advantage somewhat larger than it appears from the numbers.

--

it is interesting that the Staten Island guidettes seem to be sticking around and eating Mom's Italian cooking instead of getting out.

No doubt in part attributable to the region's high cost of housing.

--

In any case, Arizona looks really shitty for a guy. Plus, it's way too hot.

Arizona's numbers do look dreadful, but to the extent that my theory is correct (see the first comment), it's quite possible that some of the single guys temporarily in the Grand Canyon State for construction work have girlfriends back home and aren't really on the market.

Oh, the "it's a dry heat" line may be a crusty old cliche, but it really is true.

[Half Sigma]

The weather in Arizona is nice, although it would not be nice if you had to work outside in construction during the summer--that would be horrible!

[Spungen]

What this seems to say is that women concentrate in large metro areas where there is an abundance of post-high-school degrees. I wonder what the market is like for *professional, educated* men in Arizona. I suspect it's better than those numbers reflect. And you didn't really give Arizona a fair shake by counting the whole state, instead of just Phoenix. Try comparing Phoenix to Buffalo, see how it goes.

[Half Sigma]

"And you didn't really give Arizona a fair shake by counting the whole state, instead of just Phoenix. Try comparing Phoenix to Buffalo, see how it goes."

More than half of Arizona lives in Maricopa County, which is the Phoenix metropolitan area. The bulk of the rest live in the Tucson metropolitan area. Arizona's rural population is pretty tiny. It's mostly uninhabited desert.

I'll compare Scottsdale to Buffalo to humor you. Stay tuned to the blog.

[rob]

Ever notice how guys always think they'll be the ones to survive? Kind of like the way guys think polygamy is good because they think they'll be the one with 5 girls instead of one of the 4 guys with no girl.

This is a built-in bias caused by natural selection: we are disproportionately descended from the winners of sexual selection.

What this seems to say is that women concentrate in large metro areas where there is an abundance of post-high-school degrees.

I saw an econ paper about this: women tend to move to areas where the single men are desirable. I'll post a link when I have time.

[Peter]

What this seems to say is that women concentrate in large metro areas where there is an abundance of post-high-school degrees.

Which would tie in the with fact that more women attend college. At least some of them stay in the areas where they went to school.

I wonder what the market is like for *professional, educated* men in Arizona. I suspect it's better than those numbers reflect.

Could be, but I wouldn't imagine that the available statistics allow for such fine distinctions.

Try comparing Phoenix to Buffalo, see how it goes.

My guess is that Buffalo's dating and relationship market for anyone, male or female, who has even the slightest bit of ambition is dreadful. No one stays if they don't have to.

[John Smith]

women tend to move to areas where the single men are desirable

This would tie into the idea that women would rather be one of the four girlfriends of an alpha super guy rather than the steady girlfriend of a dud.

[trumwill]

I'm not sure how statistically significant this is, but I think that one of the reasons that there are more women clumped together in expensive places (the east coast being rather expensive) is that a lot of parents seem more willing to subsidize their daughters big city adventures than their sons, whom they expect to man-up and make it on their own.

[DF]

"This would tie into the idea that women would rather be one of the four girlfriends of an alpha super guy rather than the steady girlfriend of a dud."

John, I believe that's true. They clump in areas where men are known to be affluent and high status. Lena Edlund, Econ professor at Columbia has written a great deal on Gender Economics. She has pointed that out.

[RepublicanPatriot]

pardon my statistical ignorance, but something about these charts does not make sense. Look at teh chart for the United States.

How could a significantly larger percentage of the female population be married, when the female population is larger than the male population to begin with?

Doesn't marriage mean one man and one woman? So there would be more females "left over" and therefore a smaller percentage of the female population would be married than the male population.

Please explain.

[Half Sigma]

trumwill: "I think that one of the reasons that there are more women clumped together in expensive places (the east coast being rather expensive) is that a lot of parents seem more willing to subsidize their daughters big city adventures than their sons, whom they expect to man-up and make it on their own."

I agree.

RepublicanPatriot: "How could a significantly larger percentage of the female population be married"

Because we are only looking at ages 25-40, and not the entire population.

[Jack]

Yes, the reason there are less women in this group is many are married to older men.

I don't know about redoing it for education/professionalism. Some women with college degrees seem willing to date guys without them, who work in construction, as cope, firemen, etc.

[roissy]

a lot of parents seem more willing to subsidize their daughters big city adventures than their sons,

correct. and the reason for this is that parents get a bigger genetic legacy bang for their buck if they slick the rails for their daughters to meet high status men in the cities. the payback for subsidizing sons to move to the city is not as great since the sons' main sexual market value is not in their looks. it would take a lot more money than a weekly stipend from mom and dad to breach the inner alpha circle.

[Peter]

parents get a bigger genetic legacy bang for their buck if they slick the rails for their daughters to meet high status men in the cities. the payback for subsidizing sons to move to the city is not as great since the sons' main sexual market value is not in their looks. it would take a lot more money than a weekly stipend from mom and dad to breach the inner alpha circle

Assuming for the sake of argument that a woman's sexual market value is mainly in her looks, how do parental subsidies make any difference? If she's a 9 or a 10 she'll do fine for herself even if Mom and Dad don't subsidize her relocation to a large city. On the other hand, if she's a warpig, to use one of your favorite terms, all the subsidies in the world aren't going to help her much.

It would seem to me that subsidizing a son might have a bigger genetic-legacy payoff. If parental help enables him to live in a large city and maybe get a well-paying job, there's a chance he might be able to raise himself to Alpha status.

[SFG]

Naaah, you got it backwards, Peter. If she's hot she can marry a rich man; the upper crust lives in the big cities. If a man is not well-connected, there may be better opportunities to rise outside of big cities where competition is less fierce. It's easier to become regional sales director in North Dakota than it is Manhattan, I imagine.

[Jack]

Yeah, but all the women have left North Dakota for the cities...

[Jason]

It's been this way for as long as I can remember. More women in large Northeastern cities. Also, I believe some mid size Southern cities have a lot of extra women. Jackson Mississippi comes to mind. This is probably due to the fact that so many young black men die in street violence,

The West has always been awful for single men since the frontier days. Many, many men continue to take the advice to "Go West young man".

Sex ratio is extremely important to non-alpha males like myself. My first year of college I went to a school that had a large female surplus. Sure enough I dated a lot and had a very enjoyable time. Then I moved back to Las Vegas and dated no one for years. Las Vegas has tobe as bad as anywhere in the U.S when it comes to surplus males, there are dudes everywhere, it's like a sausage factory.

Sex ratio is Everything! Thanks for eploring this subject.

[Peter]

Sex ratio is extremely important to non-alpha males like myself. My first year of college I went to a school that had a large female surplus. Sure enough I dated a lot and had a very enjoyable time. Then I moved back to Las Vegas and dated no one for years. Las Vegas has to be as bad as anywhere in the U.S when it comes to surplus males, there are dudes everywhere, it's like a sausage factory.

As with Phoenix, Las Vegas has (or had, until recently) a huge amount of construction activity. Almost all construction workers are men and it's not at all uncommon for them to relocate from elsewhere in search of the well-paying jobs.

That being said, Las Vegas' other economic mainstay, the tourism industry (hotels, gambling casinos, restaurants etc.), seems to employ men and women in at least roughly equal levels. I am therefore somewhat surprised that the city is so sausage factory-ish.

[Peter]

Here is an even more nuanced analysis of the map. It looks at people with college degrees and takes population size into account.