
Chart Shows Who Marries CEOs, Doctors, Chefs and Janitors - sremani
http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2016-who-marries-whom/
======
casca
If anyone wants to improve the usability, data files are:

[http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2016-who-marries-
whom/job-...](http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2016-who-marries-whom/job-
name.csv)

[http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2016-who-marries-
whom/pair...](http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2016-who-marries-whom/pair-
count.csv)

~~~
sendos
I sorted the data by which occupation marries within the same occupation the
most:

    
    
         13.9%    Physicians and Surgeons
         10.7%    Textile Winding, Twisting, and Drawing Out Machine Setters, Operators, and Tenders
         10.1%    none
          9.7%    Farmers, Ranchers, and Other Agricultural Managers
          9.7%    Lawyers, and judges, magistrates, and other judicial workers
          9.5%    Miscellaneous Personal Appearance Workers
          9.3%    Veterinarians
          8.8%    Dentists
          8.5%    Miscellaneous agricultural workers including animal breeders
          8.4%    Postsecondary Teachers
          7.6%    Software Developers, Applications and Systems Software
          7.6%    Health Diagnosing and Treating Practitioners, All Other
          7.5%    Optometrists
          7.3%    Chiropractors
          7.2%    Pharmacists
          6.7%    Elementary and Middle School Teachers
          6.4%    Food Service Managers
          6.2%    Agricultural and Food Scientists
          6.1%    Physical Therapists
          6.1%    Gaming Services Workers
          6.0%    Upholsterers
          5.9%    Communications Equipment Operators, All Other
          5.8%    Air Traffic Controllers and Airfield Operations Specialists
          5.8%    Physical Scientists, All Other
          5.8%    Nurse Anesthetists
          5.5%    Chief executives and legislators
          5.5%    Real Estate Brokers and Sales Agents
          5.4%    Clergy
          5.2%    Marine Engineers and Naval Architects
          5.0%    Psychologists
          4.9%    Lodging Managers
          4.8%    First-Line Supervisors of Retail Sales Workers
          4.7%    Miscellaneous Managers, Including Funeral Service Managers and Postmasters and Mail Superintendents
          4.7%    Medical Scientists, and Life Scientists, All Other
          4.6%    Secondary School Teachers
          4.0%    Textile Knitting and Weaving Machine Setters, Operators, and Tenders
          4.0%    Podiatrists
          4.0%    News Analysts, Reporters and Correspondents
          4.0%    Sewing Machine Operators
          3.9%    Bailiffs, Correctional Officers, and Jailers
          3.9%    First-Line Supervisors of Personal Service Workers
          3.8%    Tailors, Dressmakers, and Sewers
          3.8%    Economists
          3.8%    Musicians, Singers, and Related Workers
          3.8%    Environmental Scientists and Geoscientists
          3.8%    Property, Real Estate, and Community Association Managers
          3.7%    Insurance Sales Agents
          3.5%    Agricultural Inspectors
          3.3%    Butchers and Other Meat, Poultry, and Fish Processing Workers
          3.2%    Morticians, Undertakers, and Funeral Directors

~~~
hkmurakami
Looks like there's a correlation with long hours and isolated work
environments away from other peer groups.

Doctors for instance are well known for pairing up during the residency grind
since it dramatically drops their interactions with anyone outside of their
residency program and also occurs during their late 20's. A perfect storm.

~~~
dominotw
>Looks like there's a correlation with long hours and isolated work
environments away from other peer groups.

Doctors are prestige seekers who see marrying a software programmer as a step
down.

~~~
ianopolous
I've lived with two medical doctors, both of whom referred to me, with a
doctorate in particle physics but now a software engineer, as the 'real
doctor'.

~~~
clentaminator
Which for me really highlights the point that, despite using the same title,
the word doctor implies two completely different but equally important types
of experience.

~~~
rahimnathwani
In Chinese, the common words for medical doctor (大夫 and 医生) are totally
different from the other type (博士).

------
jrmurad
Most interesting connection I saw: "Eligibility Interviewers, Government
Programs" <-> "Unemployed, with no work experience in last 5 years"

~~~
mklim
EDIT: Nevermind, some commenters further downthread pointed out that the
visualization was adjusted to always show same sex lines.

For me it was some of these jobs not having heterosexual lines in both
directions. "Electrical Power-Line Installers and Repairers", "Pipelayers,
Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters", and "Welding, Soldering, and Brazing
Workers" don't have any female -> male lines at all if I'm reading the charts
right, just male -> female and female -> female. "Miscellaneous Office Support
Workers", "Receptionists and Information Clerks", and "Preschool and
Kindergarten Teachers" are the reverse.

It makes sense given that gay people are more likely to be gender
nonconforming and all of those jobs are gendered very strongly, but still
interesting to see the extent of it.

~~~
1wheel
> the visualization was adjusted to always show same sex lines.

We went back and forth on this a lot. Just showing the top relationships by
number would result in omitting all same sex relationships, which didn't seem
right. Their inclusion seems to have caused lots of confusion though - maybe
it should have been called out more prominently than in the methodology. Even
better would have been to have a toggle to show the more distinctive
relationships.

~~~
tempestn
Yes, a toggle to filter for homosexual relationships, or even for each of
M->M, F->F, M->F, F->M would be ideal.

------
solutionyogi
Is it me or the visualization is very hard to follow?

E.g. if you highlight the 'Dancers and Choreographers' section, it's not at
all clear that more female dancers marry male welders.

~~~
tommoor
You're not wrong, this is incredibly hard to parse.

~~~
tommoor
As far as I can tell most groups seem to marry Elementary school teachers

~~~
sbierwagen
Part of the problem is that each profession isn't scaled to how many people
are in it. "47-5031 Explosives Workers, Ordnance Handling Experts, and
Blasters" had a total employment of 7,970 in 2012, but there were 1,353,020
people employed as "25-2021 Elementary School Teachers, Except Special
Education"

[http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes475031.htm](http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes475031.htm)
[http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes252021.htm](http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes252021.htm)

~~~
svachalek
Yeah it says male software developers are most likely to marry female teachers
or administrative assistants, like practically every other majority-male
profession. Would be more interesting to show trends relative to males in
others professions rather than in absolute numbers.

(edit: replace 'male' with 'majority-male' as I didn't mean to sound 1950s,
just meant the left side of the chart)

------
JoeAltmaier
Doesn't seem to be normalized? Lots of folks marry mostly teachers etc.
Perhaps because there are lots of teachers out there?

~~~
stephencanon
Was going to say exactly this; the data needs to be normalized by population
of the professions to really show us anything.

------
afinlayson
I guess I should stop using Tinder/OkCupid, and start going to teacher
meetings

~~~
chocolatebunny
Its really weird but it does seem like most of my peers either married other
people in software development or teachers. No idea why.

~~~
visakanv
Teachers have very, very predictable schedules compared to practically
everyone else. They're part of a reliable industry. They have a very clear
career progression ahead of them. They have holidays, maternity leave, etc.
It's very conducive to marriage and raising kids.

There are two things to consider from that.

1: people who want a stable married-with-kids life are likely to also want a
stable, predictable career

2: People who happen to be in a stable, predictable career find it easier to
say yes to marriage and kids

~~~
visakanv
As for marrying other people in software development, that's a really easy
one: proximity, physical presence, similar backgrounds, shared group of
friends, etc, etc. Dentists marry dentists. Military folk marry military folk.

------
rdtsc
Agricultural workers marry each other a lot. Also lawyers and judges marry
each other. Software developers too. But apparently we also like to marry
nurses, middle school teacher and accountants. But male and male marriages for
software developers are somehow with recreation and fitness workers.

Meter readers don't marry other meter readers too much. Guess,once you define
something so narrowly it would present a different picture.

Education related professions seem to marry other education-related
professions but in administrative positions (or "other instructors") and
somehow also marry various "managers"

And truckers apparently are fond of bartenders, just like dentists seems to
like to dental hygienists.

------
peter303
Business Insider has run several articles of the urban college female
"problem". With 30% more females obtaining college degrees currently than
males plus that males generally dont marry up, there is a surplus of
20-something college females in all metropolitan areas except San Francisco
and Washington DC. Good news for guys then.

One silly article tried explain the success of hookup apps is that more
desperate females are willing to put out in this environment.

~~~
auntyJemima
Males generally dont marry up?

Couple things come to mind. Throughout my time, I've seen that women have
their fair share of not wanting to marry down either. You want to say
generalizations generalizations. Sure, but I think the age old stereotypes do
have a hint of truth to them and the Bloomberg page here also states, "High-
earning women (doctors, lawyers) tend to pair up with their economic equals,
while middle- and lower-tier women often marry up."

You say problem in quotation marks and I don't know why that is? If people are
not finding their partners, that's a huge problem.

Here's the anecdotal: My sister and her friends are all pretty educated women.
Unfortunately, their standards have really gone up since receiving said
education. I'm not saying this to bash, it's simply my observation. These
days, they're all still single and reaching/past 30 and no man can scratch
their itch. The whole thing is problematic.

~~~
MicroBerto
Of course you'll find some males that "marry up", but the data proves what
many of us have known forever - as a man, you should strive to be elite in
_something_ , preferably something useful and sexually attractive. Otherwise
you're just another brick in the wall.

Where this is all going to blow up in society is the fact that women are now
better-educated, and will soon make more money than their male counterparts,
who are slowly getting more discriminated against (see Yahoo lawsuit) and less
engaged in the proverbial rat race.

A case in point is looking at highly successful black females. They have a
rough time in the dating scene, and this is extremely well-documented. Over
the course of the next generation, I see this spreading to other females as
well.

What effectively is going to happen is that you'll see more men dropping out
of the marriage pool, the pareto principle in dating will become stronger than
ever, and reliance upon the nanny state to help single mothers raise their
children will likely go up too.

Hate it all you want, but these are three extremely well-established trends
and I don't see them getting any better. Tinder is the canary in the coalmine.
This is where we're heading.

A country needs strong, highly-engaged men who act as leaders. America is
losing that more each and every day, and it saddens me.

~~~
colmvp
Regarding your point about black women:

At least in North America, Black females, like Asian men, have a harder time
in the dating scene partially due to their gender/ethnicity combination. Both
sets endure media representation and stereotypes that play against their
sexual desirability. I'm sure people here will profess that they are immune to
any images cultivated by the media and I'm not going to discount their
experience. However, I think it's naive to believe that images we consume on a
daily basis, such as the gender/ethnicity makeup of desirable lead characters
or negative representations in the news don't unconsciously affect us.
Anecdotally, I have met more black men who said they would never date a black
women and Asian women who said they'd never date Asian men compared to white
people who say they'd never date a white person. Online dating stats from
eHarmony, okCupid, and coffeemeetsbagel reinforce that observation.

On top of that, people generally have a statistical preference for those
within their own race. And if black men have a higher tendency to be
imprisoned than other men, that puts black women at an additional disadvantage
to finding a partner.

I guess my overall point is issues black women face are very different and
unique to what Hispanic/White/Asian women face.

~~~
LordKano
I have seen and experienced this, from the inside.

I'm an educated black man (MS Degree) with a good job (Fortune 500 company)
and my female relatives, many of whom are also educated and successful have
difficulty with establishing and maintaining relationships.

Obviously not all, but many black women have unrealistic expectations. As
other have already pointed out, women are adverse to marrying "down" so when a
woman reaches a certain level of education/career advancement, it's extremely
difficult to find a mate that meets her criteria. Lists of things, like Over 6
feet tall, lots of muscles, Bachelor's degree or higher, Churchgoing
Christian, no children, good relationship with his mother, not domineering but
not too passive, earning at least 6 figures and other wish-list type stuff.
There are women who won't give a man the time of day unless he meets all of
them. They, as you can well imagine, are lonely.

There are cultural taboos against black women becoming romantically involved
with non black or hispanic men. I have only personally known one black woman
who was involved with an asian man(his family came here from Vietnam and he
grew up in "the 'hood") and only a few who are involved with white men.

I have never been in a relationship with a black woman. A date here and there.
A fling here and there but never a relationship. Where I live, a video game
playing, Dungeons and Dragons fan, comic book collecting, politically active
guy doesn't tend to get much romantic interest from black women. Then, there's
also the phenomenon of the black women who don't want anything to do with you
getting upset because you're dating outside of the race.

I have also noticed that as we approach and pass 40 years of age, these women
with their stratospheric standards are forced to carry on alone and bitter or
drop their standards. Some of them get rid of them entirely just to get a man.
I have even heard a fair bit of professional women getting involved with
street dudes.

 _I guess my overall point is issues black women face are very different and
unique to what Hispanic /White/Asian women face._

Agreed. Some of the issues are cultural, some are societal and some are of
their own making.

~~~
LordKano
Re-reading this a couple of days later, I can see how a part of it could be
misinterpreted so I wanted to clarify.

I should have said that _many of my female relatives_ have these problems.

In retrospect, it looked like I was saying all of them.

------
koolba
I don't see homemaker (i.e. housewife, stay at home dad, etc) on there. I
wonder if it's because it doesn't rank high enough or just wasn't included in
the data set. I'd imagine that the higher paying jobs would lean more towards
a single income household.

~~~
the_mitsuhiko
Probably because that's not tracked as a profession beacuse it's not really
one. You are tracked by what you actually learned. People become stay at home
mums/dad in the relationship, not before.

~~~
koolba
> Probably because that's not tracked as a profession beacuse it's not really
> one.

Anyone who thinks being a homemaker is not a profession has no clue what it
entails. If you consider a couple as a single unit, it's simply optimizing by
specialization. When you look at the cost of baby-sitting/nannies it makes a
lot of sense too. Why make $40K extra if I'm going to spend $35K on a nanny?

> You are tracked by what you actually learned.

No you're tracked by what your current position is. I'm pretty sure that
office assistants who studied literature are still tracked as office
assistants.

> People become stay at home mums/dad in the relationship, not before.

Exactly and this data represents a set of married people, not a set of jobs.
If it doesn't include homemaker as an option then you've excluded all married
single income households.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Anyone who thinks being a homemaker is not a profession has no clue what it
> entails.

Or just has one of the many common definitions of profession, for which
homemaker doesn't qualify. E.g., the first definition in most dictionaries
tends to be something like this "a paid occupation, especially one that
involves prolonged training and a formal qualification."

Homemaker is not, generally, a paid occupation, nor is it an occupation that
requires prolonged training and a formal qualification.

I think the desire to characterize it as a "profession" is that the social
perception of the social value of professions has led to a desire to
characterize any vocation with perceived social value as a "profession", and a
perception that a judgement that something is not a profession implies that it
is not a worthwhile vocation.

> If it doesn't include homemaker as an option then you've excluded all
> married single income households.

No, it doesn't. Its possible to have a married single-income household where
neither partner is a homemaker. (Single income households where homemaking
tasks are either shared or contracted out, and the non-income-earning partner
devotes their bulk of their time to tasks that are neither income-earning
_nor_ homemaking exist -- my perception is that they are _more_ common among
higher income groups, but that's not the result of any systematic study.)

------
krinchan
The number of professions that connect to registered nurses seems really high.
Especially in the gay male community. Huh.

 _looks at Facebook_

Wow. I _do_ know a lot of gay male nurses.

Disclaimer: I don't know of any stereotyping around that, but if there is, I'm
certainly not trying to contribute to it.

------
burger_moon
I guess it's not much of a surprise how often Truck Driver comes up
considering it's one of the largest professions in the US.

~~~
Grishnakh
It'll really suck for them when we have driverless trucks.

~~~
VeejayRampay
It won't. They'll simply shift to another job. It's not like they're absolute
idiots, they can learn a new trade.

~~~
Grishnakh
Like what? Driving a taxi/Uber? No, that'll be automated too. Working at
McDonald's? No, that'll be automated too. Becoming a software engineer? If
they were any good at that, they would have done it already.

The fact is, all these low-education jobs are going away in the near future,
to be replaced by robots and automation. We're not going to need hordes of
poorly-educated people to work any more.

------
pbnjay
I find it interesting that many of the IT/Engineering/Tech jobs have a high
degree of connectivity to elementary/middle school teachers. So the high
salaries are helping to balance out the crap salaries.

~~~
gedy
Hmm, or maybe to balance out the lack of pensions and retirement healthcare
after the techies burn out :-)

------
sremani
Software developers seem to be incredibly endogamous to me.

~~~
toyg
I love what these conclusions entail: female programmers are either lesbians,
or so turned off by their male colleagues that they'll marry _anyone else_
with a spread so wide to be statistically insignificant.

~~~
js8
Or maybe the males are marrying anyone..

Oh, right! Now I realize the chart doesn't really show "other". It would be
interesting to calculate entropy from the distribution for each profession.

------
quaffapint
TIL There is an occupation called 'Gaming Cage Worker'

~~~
zevyoura
It's the person who works in the "cage" in a casino, i.e. exchanges money for
chips and vice versa.

~~~
pc86
It seems odd that there are enough of them to warrant their own classification
as opposed to a general gambling or even recreation classification.

~~~
toyg
I expect it's a legal thing. Most people involved with the gambling industry
have no qualifications whatsoever, but the act of dealing cards is extremly
formalized (for obvious reasons), so there is probably a specific designation
in law for dealers.

------
kmod
At first I found this fascinating -- "data shows that CEOs marry assistants"
is a good narrative about gender attitudes towards marrying. But as I played
with it, I was kind of bummed to learn: most male professions tend to marry
assistants, since there are a lot of married female assistants (second only to
teachers for females).

I did a quick search for who male Programmers, Executives, and Janitors marry
(tried to pick a diverse set), and then filtered out the top five female
occupations in this data (Teachers, Assistants, Nurses, Misc Managers,
Salespersons). The remaining results were: male Programmers marry female
Programmers, male Executives marry female Executives, male Janitors marry
female Janitors or female Maids.

So I whipped up a script that, instead of measuring the absolute frequency,
normalizes the data set against how often the target occupation gets married
to. ie instead of just counting common pairings, it measures "how much more
likely is profession X (compared to the general population) to marry
profession Y?".

For male CEOs, the result is: they marry other CEOs. Male CEOs are 12x more
likely to marry a female CEO than males in other professions are. They are
also 12.6x more likely to marry embalmers! 7x more likely to marry Announcers,
5.3x more likely to marry "Dancers and Choreographers", and 4.9x more likely
to marry "Public Relations and Fundraising Managers". They are only 1.2x more
likely to marry a Secretary than other males are.

For male programmers, it is similar: male programmers are 20x more likely to
marry female programmers than other male occupations are. This is because only
0.2% of men marry female computer programmers, but 3.4% of male programmers
do. Male programmers also marry female Materials Engineers (20x more likely),
Information Security Analysts (13x), "Surveyors, Cartographers, and
Photogrammetrists" (10x), and "Architects, Except Naval" (8x).

I also picked one final way of slicing it: "how many more of these marriages
did we see than expected" (expected based on the relation frequencies of the
two occupations). This is another way of removing "well we would expect a lot
of these marriages", but in a way that is less geared towards low-occurrence
matches like CEO-Embalmer. For CEOs, the results are: CEOs, Misc Managers,
Elementary and Middle School Teachers, Secretaries, Accountants and Auditors.
For Programmers, it's: Programmers, Misc Managers, Other Teachers and
Instructors, Software Developers, Accountants and Auditors.

Anyway, this isn't to say that these other ways of looking at the data are any
"better", they're just answers to different questions.

I threw up the code in a gist -- sorry it's messy
[https://gist.github.com/kmod/ee6ac3c029641b39d0b6](https://gist.github.com/kmod/ee6ac3c029641b39d0b6)

~~~
1wheel
This is great, thanks for writing up what you found!

------
exception_e
An aside: This visualization's UX is rather poor but I'll let Bloomberg slide
this time around because their 404 page is incredible:
[http://www.bloomberg.com/404](http://www.bloomberg.com/404)

~~~
dragonshed
Eh, I'm a snob, I know, but I think the UX for both this and the 404 page is
poor.

For the dataviz, I noticed many nits, but for brevity I'll say this:, I think
the visualization falls way short of communicating patterns in the data, or
indeed illustrating any relative significance of a given match set over
others. The design and the narrative need some work. I can see the gender
matches are illustrated, but it isn't communicated why that is important. The
D3 development work is adequate, but within that, there are some behaviors
that could use some tweaks finesse (for example on desktop, when hovering
across multiple items to a specific, the experience stalls slightly while
calculating the graph updates for each item).

The 404 page shows some personality for sure, so that's cool, but a 1.6meg
choppy animated gif isn't exactly awesome, and the repeat-x doesn't add
anything either.

------
yorwba
I wonder what difference between "Software Developers" and "Computer
Programmers" causes the former to marry mostly within themselves and the
latter to prefer nurses, teachers and secretaries.

~~~
OJFord
If it's self-described, that's maybe even more interesting.

------
justin_oaks
I think it's funny to notice how people are saying "If you want to get married
to a (some profession) then you should work as a (other profession)." We
shouldn't think that the correlation implies a cause. This data doesn't track
what people's professions were before they were married, or how the
professions change over time.

It would be interesting to see how people changed their profession as a result
of getting married. For example, when people get married they're probably less
likely to have jobs that require a lot of travel.

------
pj_mukh
There is a job called "Computer operators"? Isn't that just, Everybody?

~~~
Spooky23
Think blue collar IT. In the old days, the grunt who watched mainframe batch
jobs and fiddled with printers. If you see grumpy old people wearing overalls
or non-khaki pants in a government or bank datacenter, you've spotted the
operators.

Sometimes help desk types get categorized this way.

~~~
Gracana
My guess was data entry people.

------
ScottBurson
I am particularly amused by the thick line between "Proofreaders and Copy
Markers" and "Dispensing Opticians".

------
jchoksi
So disappointed. Was looking for the connection that shows who super models
marry, so that I may plan my career like wise.

~~~
seunosewa
My guess: Talent agents & managers, sportsmen, actors, photographers, male
models, musicians.

~~~
zhemao
If I'm reading the viz correctly, it's actually truck drivers.

------
suneilp
Changing the font color to black helps usability a lot. Just enter this
snippet in the url bar

javascript:jQuery('.job-text').css('color', 'black');

With chrome, you might have to re-enter the 'javascript:' part.

------
NamTaf
Non-software engineers are really strange:

Mech engineers marry registered nurses

Elec engineers marry teachers

Civil engineers marry teachers

Chemical engineers marry secretaries

Mining engineers marry teachers

Nuclear engineers marry teachers

With the exception of chemical engineers, there's basically no marrying inside
the field.

------
neves
Software developers (men) marry Recreation and Fitness workers (men). Maybe we
should use this data to incentive gay men to become software engineers! At
least would bring some diversity to my profession.

~~~
JabavuAdams
Most of the non-straight people I know are in software. It really doesn't seem
to lack diversity orientation-wise.

------
EGreg
Female Models, Demonstrators, and Product Promoters partner with:

Truck Drivers Miscellaneous Managers Retail SupervisorsLaborersRetail,
SalespersonsIndustrial, and Refractory Machinery Mechanics

~~~
zhemao
Yeah, the model-truck driver connection is a real head-scratcher. It doesn't
seem like they would often be in the same social circles.

~~~
sanoli
I wonder how broad the term 'model' is in this case.

------
etrautmann
This is absolutely brutal to use. I'd like to search for something specific
but can't ctrl-f, and visually searching is useless. Very cool in concept

~~~
stillsut
Type your search into the search box labeled "Select a job..."

------
everlost
Nice visualization! Maybe they should have limited the colors to just the
primary ones. I had a hard time figuring out the gradients in the middle.

------
dba7dba
I once knew a male high school teacher who was married to a Yale dropout,
after 1 year. He told me she had gone to Yale to meet someone to marry well.
Apparently common that time, 40 years ago.

Although it didn't quite work out well for her. He was a great msn husband but
not a doctor or lawyer...

------
johnchristopher
That's funny, I always got the feeling that almost every civil engineer I know
were married to nurses, mid school teacher or childcare worker (and the
occasional psychologist). Seems confirmed.

------
litmus
Someone please explain to me Emergency Management Directors (men) -->
Probation Officers (women), overwhelmingly beating out teachers and
secretaries. wat.

------
dghughes
This reminds me of how it seems celebrities can only marry other celebrities.
One exception is women celebrities can marry billionaires.

------
GSimon
Explosives Worker -> Librarians

I guess opposites do attract.

~~~
KMag
Maybe it's survival bias. Explosive workers who spend a lot of time reading up
on the latest industry literature after work survive longer than those who hit
the bar after work? (Yes, if the death rate made a measurable difference here,
OSHA would step in.)

------
donatj
Strangely I find this more usable on my Android Phone where it presents a list
than their fancy annoying graph.

------
js8
So Software Developers marry mostly within their own group? How does it stack
with the gender imbalance?

~~~
ktRolster
Most software developers stay single?

------
jldugger
Interesting, but sort of suffers from a few dominant trends:

\- white men without a college degree marry secretaries \- white men with a
college degree marry teachers

It'd be more interesting to know how occupations shift choices away from other
demographic factors.

------
tcfunk
I would have guessed Fence Erectors would be most likely to marry Republican
Presidential Candidates, but I guess I'm wrong.

------
sypher47
Visualization is very terrible

------
DiabloD3
This chart is massively unusable.

As a guy, what occupation do I need to be in to increase my chances of
marrying a woman CEO?

~~~
mhb
It tells you in the introductory paragraph. You need to be a CEO. So better
improve at reading the executive summaries.

~~~
DiabloD3
I interpreted it differently. If you want to marry a male CEO, you have to be
a woman CEO.

I'm asking the reverse.

~~~
mhb
No. The article says _In other words, female CEOs tend to marry other CEOs;
male CEOs are OK marrying their secretaries._

This means that female CEOs want to marry other CEOs. Male CEOs are happy
marrying secretaries. If you want to marry a female CEO, you're best off being
a male CEO.

~~~
DiabloD3
Its official, I can't read. I swear it has to do something with that typeface
they used, it just doesn't want to render well and my brain won't just come
out and admit to this fact, so I keep trying to read it as if there is nothing
wrong.

Why do web developers do this?

------
sypher47
The visualization is horrible

------
jordache
the people behind this are no Mike Bostock..

crap visualization

------
elorant
The usability of the page is pathetic. First, the fonts are too small. If you
enlarge then you can't scroll horizontally to see the rest of the titles
because the lines get in the way. Didn't anyone think to make the graph
clickable instead of just mouse-over. And on top of everything we have the
heading of the site that floats and gets in the way. Fucking hell. Someone saw
the graph and said, wow let's just use it because it looks awesome. Sure it
looks awesome if you have a couple dozen labels, not a gazillion of them

~~~
1wheel
> Someone saw the graph and said, wow let's just use it because it looks
> awesome.

Close to what happened! The magazine graphic
([https://twitter.com/adamrpearce/status/697844614754123776](https://twitter.com/adamrpearce/status/697844614754123776))
was finished before I started on the web version, and I just had a couple of
days to make something that could go online. I initially tried a more sort of
538/scatterplot/analysis approach, but wasn't making a ton of progress. I
started just sketching out different ways of putting all 500 jobs on the
screen at once. The grid of jobs with lines showing up on mouseover was the
most fun to play with and being pushed to finish before valentines day, I went
with it.

Sorry it was hard to use!

~~~
fensterblick
I thought it was creative, entertaining and different than the usual boring
charts. It's not perfect but I still liked it!

------
necessity
We clearely need quotas for female truck drivers. What an absurd disparity!

------
dcposch
Surprisingly many of the comments here have a boorish, misogynistic tone.
Please be respectful. This is Hacker News, not r/RedPill

~~~
tomp
Surprisingly many comments accuse others of misogyny without pointing out any
specific instances or providing any argument whatsoever.

It turns out that "sexist" is also a commonly used tactic for shutting down
discussion.

------
throwaway8818
Yoga instructor is missing. That's pretty much the ideal wife (lots of free
time, unreasonably fit), and I'd like to know what job to obtain in order to
be pursued by yoga instructors.

And DJ is missing. Which prevents us from confirming the hypothesis that DJ's
do better than JD's.

[http://longorshortcapital.com/short-
jds.htm](http://longorshortcapital.com/short-jds.htm)

 _Most men seek the JD to “make a lot of money” which is really just a
euphemism for “power over women.” This means you sign up for four years of
college and four years of college debt, ... then three years of law school
with its accompanying three years of law school debt...

Over the entire course of this process the person who sought the opposite
designation, the DJ, will be pulling more strange each night than the JD will
in his entire life, all with a designation he obtained at no cost.

DJ is the actual opposite of a JD as not only are its letters the reverse of
JD but it goes before someone’s name not after. It comes at virtually no cost,
requires almost no talent or taste, and lends itself to sleeping in and having
anonymous sex with women who not only are not wearing sweaters but likely do
not even own sweaters._

~~~
oh_sigh
> Most men seek the JD to “make a lot of money” which is really just a
> euphemism for “power over women.”

The first sentence is so wrong, I can't even bother reading on.

~~~
cvwright
Don't bother, it only gets worse. The level of misogyny and sexism in this
thread is way beyond what I expect from HN. What happened to professionalism
and treating others with respect, guys? When our female colleagues complain
about sexism in tech, stuff like this is (part of) what they're complaining
about.

~~~
tomp
Where's the misogyny and sexism in what he said!?

