Via the Piled Higher and Deeper blog:

Some theories of mine:

1. The PhD blog questions whether immigration from Mexico explains the patterns in the southwest. I know that all the data says most immigrants are young, single males (it’s one reason that the population isn’t growing as quickly), so I’m inclined to believe this. I’m less inclined to believe the explanation about the east coast: that women, who attend college in higher proportions, stay on the east coast. They have to be migrating from somewhere and my guess is that it isn’t the west coast.
2. The disparities for men over women are actually pretty small, when you look at it. There are 40,000 more single men than women in LA, the largest difference, but that’s in a city of almost 10 million people. The disparity in the New York area, where women outnumber men, is four and a half times that size - 180,000. There, the city alone has over 8 million people, and my guess is the surrounding area probably brings it close to twice that.
3. What are the marriage patterns like in these areas? Thats one thing I always wonder about singles data (if the best cities for singles are so good, why do people stay single?) There’s some interesting sociology (or even better, matching mechanisms!) research for somebody who wants to do it. I’ve always said that just because there are a lot more people, doesn’t mean it’s easier to find one, or even easier to get married.
4. Aren’t there more women than men? If so, these numbers make a lot less sense - by definition women will outnumber men in most places.

Categories: America, Community, Dating, Immigration, Matching Mechanisms