Growing up, I was told by my mother that men need women more than women need men. I scoffed and laughed at this growing up, not because it wasn’t true, but because it seemed to funny to me that women don’t need men as much, especially when it seems that women seem to make the most fuss about marriage than do men. I found it even funnier that what my mom said was true: there is a significance in longevity seen in happily married men but not women. I thought it was fascinating that longevity between married women and single women were not statistically significant, which confirmed my mother’s knowledge.
I also thought it was interesting that men knowing if his wife is happily married does not add useful information to men’s health, but if women knows her husband is unhappy in their married, that was a predictor if women was unhealthy and unhappy, as seen in James and Irene’s relationship. I think you could account for cultural differences for this case because in the early 20th century, women, usually ending up being housewives at the time, relied on men for income and probably placed the husband’s opinion higher than it is now. I wonder what the study would be like if it was replicated in the 21st century.
It is kind of funny to think that mens’ longevity is longer than for women because women seem to think about marriage more than men. You hear of women as children dreaming of when they get married. It is also interesting that the longevity between married and single women are not statistically signifiant. Your statement about cultural differences is interesting because women in the 19th century tended to be housewives and relied on men. So it seems that women should have a longer longevity even if they get remarried.