john@cisden.UUCP (John Woolley) (01/15/86)
In article <5570@cca.UUCP> diego@cca.UUCP (Diego Gonzalez) writes: > I promised you some better statistical information if I > could find it on the frequency of extra-marital relationships > among men. According to the breakdown on page 1096 of "The Hite > Report on Male Sexuality" (Knopf, 1981), here are the figures. and In article <671@tektools.UUCP> barbaraz@tektools.UUCP (Barbara Zanzig) writes: >They [Ladies' Home Journal] report results of a reader poll including this question, to which >12,000 women responded (but consider the source). The summary said >that 36% of respondents had had an extramarital affair. It seems to me this sort of statistic is meaningless. First, and most important, the survey depends on people's telling the truth. But they don't. Second, the Ladies' Home Journal survey is a survey of people who read LHJ, hardly a cross-section of women in general. (National Inquirer did a reader survey a few years ago and found that the most popular TV show was "Lawrence Welk"!) Third, both surveys have incredibly skewed samples for another reason: they depend on getting people to answer questions about things people don't usually answer questions about. It would really surprise me not to find some correlation between "Is the subject willing to answer intimate questions for a survey?" and "Does the subject engage in sex outside of marriage?" I don't claim to guess which way the correlation would go. Maybe folks who are faithful tend to be reserved about talking about it. Maybe they're proud of it and want to boast. Maybe lots of respondents to the surveys wanted to skew the results to fit their apprehensions of what they'd like society to be like, or what they think other people think it's like, or whatever. Maybe people answer according to how they wish they had behaved, rather than how they did. Maybe, maybe... So let's not draw any conclusions about sexual practices from such surveys. -- Peace and Good!, Fr. John Woolley "Compared to what I have seen, all that I have written is straw." -- St. Thomas
booter@lll-crg.ARpA (Elaine Richards) (01/18/86)
I HATE STATISTICS!!!!!
Statistics are doo doo. People lie through their asses when some magazine
runs a survey. Joe Schmoe thinks he's a stud so he says he's "had" 1000
women, three this morning. Jane Doe, a devout Catholic and employee of
Kleen Kut Wholesome Co. will not admit she engaged in autoanallingus in
front of her Gay Biker Commie Chapter of Hell's Demon Spawn.
When someone on the net says," Wow I read this thing that says n% of the
people who responded to the generic survey did such-and-such", 40 other
hackers say, well MY STATISTICS say...
It really dehumanizes issues that are fascinating, horrifying, amusing,
lively, and inspiring. I unsubscribed from net.women because a bunch of
armchair statisticians quoted rape stats like they were talking about
Hank Aaron's RBI record. Anyone who may have wanted to share real thought
on the issue was no doubt intimidated by these non-contributors. ("Well
they may haveknocked in YOUR teeth with a tire iron, but 90% of the victims
didn't etc.")(flame flame)
This is why I read net.pets. I haven't seen any statistics. Lets get off the
numbers and get SOCIAL!
E
*****
PS So WHERE can I get Chicago Pizza in the Bay Area?