You know the statement "Women own 60% of US wealth" is just MRA idiocy, right?

[Squinch]

156. OK, looking at the fourth link you referred me to, if we assume, as has been posited in this thread

that married people equally own all their assets, we can remove that category because presumably married men and women equally own their wealth. (I think that is very much up for discussion, but not here, so let's let it stand.)

So we look only at female-only and male-only heads of households.

I am seeing that the median value of assets for women householders is 22,184, (5,708 if you exclude the home). Median value of assets for men householders is 27,310, (8584 if you exclude the home).

Which says to me that the median male householder has more wealth than the median female householder.

The whole concept of "median" is problematic, because I think the erroneous statistic refers to some aggregate concept.

One thing interesting in the 2011 chart, though is the "over 65" number. Those who seem to subscribe to the "all the men will die and women will inherit their wealth" idea seem to be suggesting that women over 65 are much more wealthy and numerous than men.

This table doesn't say anything about how numerous the over 65 people are, but it DOES say that the median elder male is much more wealthy than the median elder woman: Men over 65 have a net worth of 130,000 (19,626 if you exclude the home). Women over 65 have a net worth of 104,000 (8,480 if you exclude the home).