In today’s SMH is an AFP article that doesn’t make a lot of sense, and I’m not sure if it’s the research or the reporting: Purse strings hold key to sexual dalliances:
Men who earn less than their female partner are more likely to cheat on her, a new study shows.
Infidelity may be a man’s way of trying to restore his male identity when he feels it is under threat.
The article then goes on to say that men who earn more money than their partner are also more likely to cheat. So, might it be, perhaps, that the amount of money a man earns has little to do with whether he cheats on his relationship?
The study is by Christin Munsch, a sociology doctorate candidate at Cornell University. The uni’s newswire links to the Daily Mail version of the story:
Christin Munsch, of Cornell University in New York State, said: ‘At one end of the spectrum, making less money than a female partner may threaten men’s gender identity by calling into question the traditional notion of men as breadwinners.
‘At the other end of the spectrum, men who make a lot more money than their partners may be in jobs that offer more opportunities for travel like long work hours, travel and higher incomes that make cheating easier to conceal.’
The key to keeping a man faithful, it seems, is for him to earn a third more than his wife.
But men who want to keep their wife on the straight and narrow should keep her on a tight budget, the American Sociological Society’s annual conference heard.
Is it just me, or is this language worrying? When men cheat it’s because women make them cheat? And if a man doesn’t want his wife to cheat, he should control her?