New haven america wrote:Cekoviu wrote:news flash: there are almost 4 billion women
a small number of women doing that implies nothing about the entire female gender and definitely cannot be fucking used as a basis for a "theory" about "society"
Eh, like 95% of hetero women are married to men taller than they are (This is big in power dynamics), and ~76% of hetero women are married to men of a higher class or high income then them.
But that's because there's a market for it, and if a similar market for guys existed or the roles were reversed then I'm 100% sure you'd see a similar trend because a lot of humans have a tendency to be greedy assholes that are looking for something better without actually doing it themselves.
are those women all the mistresses of the men to whom they're married?
Taihei Tengoku wrote:Cekoviu wrote:news flash: there are almost 4 billion women
a small number of women doing that implies nothing about the entire female gender and definitely cannot be fucking used as a basis for a "theory" about "society"
It takes slightly less than a million women to have a "representative sample" with 95% +/- .5% confidence, using only elementary statistics, for four billion women. For a country of three hundred million, only thirty-eight thousand. Perfect? No. Actionable? Nineteen times of twenty you'd come out right.
If only someone would study this....
oh my god, this is so fucking stupid that i can't even believe you unironically posted this. a sample which you have selected based on the trait you're testing for is NOT representative of the population REGARDLESS of the sample size. the fact that you think >38,000 women act this way means absolutely nothing about whether women in general act this way
plus, you don't actually have statistics or surveys