Skip to content
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
lymanstoneky's profile
Lyman Stone 石來民 🦬🦬🦬
Lyman Stone 石來民 🦬🦬🦬
Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬
@lymanstoneky

Tweets

Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬

@lymanstoneky

石來民 Lutheran. Husband. Dad. Kentuckian. Demographer. @DemographicNTEL @FamStudies @AEI @NovakFellows . lymanrstone at gmail dot com

KY-DC-HK-QC
demographicintel.com
Joined July 2012

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      Their measure of "promotion" is also idiosyncratic. They COULD have used promotion as just "rank in the party list," i.e. an actual promotion in rank within an employer or institution, the party. But rather, they use tournament outcomes, i.e. winning an election.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      Show this thread
    2. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      That's fine and dandy, but most promotions at work are not like winning an election. If a manager retires, it;s usually the case that somebody is either promoted or hired from outside; and usually alternative candidates are not summarily dismissed from service!

      2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
      Show this thread
    3. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      So we're not looking at actual job promotions here. We're looking at tournament-style rewards of a kind that obtain for very few people other than the very tippy-top. That's fine for studying why we have fewer CEOs, but it doesn't generalize to most of our life experiences!

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
      Show this thread
    4. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      That is to say, I would not use a study of lottery winners to forecast the impacts of a UBI. In the same way, I wouldn't use a study of parliamentary election winners to forecast the effects of getting moved from sales to marketing.

      1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
      Show this thread
    5. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      The paper cites another paper showing that getting elected *even just once* raises *lifetime* income by 20%. That's a massive boost for a job promotion that might last less than a decade!

      1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
      Show this thread
    6. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      Next, we have to think about what's going on here. The study finds that their pre-promotion candidates had big differences: women had overwhelmingly taken most parental leave, men had not. Men had systematically higher shares of household income.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      Show this thread
    7. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      Next, note that in their preferred specification (within-gender differences in odds of divorce for people promoted in close elections), it turns out that women who "randomly" won more... already had significantly higher household income shares than women who "randomly" won less.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      Show this thread
    8. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      But anyways, when they start to look at subsamples is when it gets REALLY interesting. It turns out, these divorce results ONLY show up in households where the wife was already an earner! When a stay-at-home-mom gets elected, there's no change in divorce!pic.twitter.com/leZ9rsIssv

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
      Show this thread
    9. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      And notice the bottom left! In households where wives were the primary earners and husbands were stay-at-home dads, and then the husband gets elected, guess what happens? Dad's divorce odds rise!

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
      Show this thread
    10. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      So what we see is NOT "men being sexist." What we see is that in "traditional" households, women getting elected doesn't cause more divorce: it's only in dual-earner or female-earner households. But in those female-earner households, men getting elected ALSO causes divorce!

      1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
      Show this thread
      Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

      So what we ACTUALLY see is that in "reverse traditional" (i.e. women making vast majority of income) households, *either* spouse being promoted tends to cause more divorce.

      6:31 AM - 14 Jan 2020
      • 2 Likes
      • Art VanDelay
      2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          ONLY in dual earner households do we see the "women's promotion leads to more divorce but men's promotion leads to less divorce" finding. But since it doesn't generalize across family structures, we should be careful in interpreting it.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
          Show this thread
        3. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          And ESPECIALLY since the most "traditional" households, in terms of division of labor, don't show these patterns, we should really, really, REALLY be hesitant to suggest that this is about *specifically gendered* assumptions about division of labor. cc @DKThomp

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
          Show this thread
        4. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Astoundingly, the authors don't even mention the traditionalist graph there, or the interesting finding re: reverse-specialized households. They focus on just the dual earner graphs, and declare their theory supported.

          1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
          Show this thread
        5. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Their next robustness check is also interesting! They find that after a wife is promoted in traditionalist households, the husband tends to scale back his market labor.pic.twitter.com/Sm9kul5vaZ

          1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
          Show this thread
        6. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Which really belies the idea that what's going on is women getting promoted causes dudes to have anxiety and initiate a divorce. Seems like the husbands hit with the biggest "shock" here.... are pretty okay with it and appreciate not having to work as much?

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
          Show this thread
        7. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Their next robustness test looking at transitions in household type also show that women transitioning from traditional to dual-earner households have lower divorce rates than women already in reverse-traditional households who remain in them.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
          Show this thread
        8. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          i.e. it's not about traditionalists being bothered by women getting promoted

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
          Show this thread
        9. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          SO, what we can see is that in terms of MARKET LABOR, there simply is no evidence to support the veiw that traditional gender norms of any kind were to blame here. But market labor division is just one way to measure!

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
          Show this thread
        10. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Another classic indicator of traditional gender norms is difference in marriage age! And it turns out, when the politician-spouse is younger than the non-pol spouse, getting promoted increases divorce.... REGARDLESS of politician sex!pic.twitter.com/UNjx7212OX

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        11. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          The effect is bigger for women, but that may just be a small sample size of younger husbands becoming politicians. For same-age couples of EITHER politician sex, there's no effect. For politician-older, there's also no meaningful effect.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        12. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          So basically what we can say is: if one spouse of EITHER sex is 4 years younger or more and they get a huge promotion, it boosts odds of divorce. So it's age-based hierarchies, not sex-based hierarchies!

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
          Show this thread
        13. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          The ONLY robustness check that supports a sexism hypothesis is this parental leave one, but then there's the finding showing that in couples where the man took more leave, the man getting promoted was less likely to be divorced which is tricky to interpret.pic.twitter.com/vBtpKA165x

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        14. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          In other words, the whole effort to portray this as being fundamentally about anxiety men feel about their high-earning spouses just seems woefully misplaced.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        15. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          I don't have a good comprehensive theory of what's going on here. I think it's worth pointing out again that age imbalances were predictive across sexes, while traditionalist work arrangements were actually LESS likely to result in excess divorce for promoted women.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        16. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Finally, let me note on the Monitoring the Future survey @DKThomp cites: when individuals respond to surveys like that, we should not assume their main motives are the topic at the forefront of our minds.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        17. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          As just one example that comes to mind since I have a newborn in my lap, if more and more young people hold the belief set 1) expanded maternity leave is unlikely and 2) breastfeeding is important, then for any given set of preferences and values around women's work....

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
          Show this thread
        18. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Then respondents will necessarily tend to express preferences for women to work less. I'm not saying 12th graders are thinking about breastfeeding; but my point is....

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        19. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          it's trivially easy to come up with coherent and not-fantastically-absurd models where RISING unconditional valuations on women's career advancement nonetheless manifest in FALLING conditional valuations, if other factors are changing too!

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
          Show this thread
        20. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          For example if, as is in fact the case, the number of children young people say they want to have is rising, and if they believe maternal work makes it hard to have those kids, they might value work at the same amount or more than prev, but just value more kids even more!

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        21. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Or if, as is in fact the case, the intensity of parenting is rising and young people believe that "good parenting" requires a large amount of work, and that workplace sexism yields more income for men, then they would tend to express less egalitarian work prefs.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        22. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          Give me a few more minutes and I can give you several more plausible preference sets. My point is, it could be that progress on individual preferences and desires around women's work has stalled. Or maybe not.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
          Show this thread
        23. Lyman Stone 石來民  🦬 🦬 🦬‏ @lymanstoneky 14 Jan 2020

          The chart in the OP suggests hard opposition to egalitarian work norms is still falling at a decent clip, so color me skeptical of the idea that we're seeing a stall in changes in gender norms.

          0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
          Show this thread
        24. End of conversation

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info