What they didn't teach you in high school social studies is that 95% of women have sex with only 5% of the male population.
86 comments
Which can only mean every 20th high school male has 19 penises instead of 1.
And every 20th high school female has 19 vaginas instead of 1.
You know, so the numbers line up right.
Yeah, uh... Sorry about that guys.
What about that 5% of the female population that are having sex with 95% of the male population though? How's that working out?
1. I think that if 80% of fathers had never had sex with their wives, they'd have figured out by now that something was not right about that situation (in addition to their not getting any, that is).
2. Why the heck would a social studies class address such a thing anyhow? That's a topic for a health or sex ed class.
~David D.G.
Because your teacher already knew that you were having sex with your grandma, mom, aunts, and your sisters?
This stat is hyperbole at best, but I think what he's saying is, 95% of women HAVE ALL HAD SEX with the same 5%.
i.e. There is a small core of extremely desirable men who "bang all them bitches". Perhaps as the result of "one night stands"
And looking into context it appears that this is in fact what he's saying, only with SO MUCH MORE CRAZY! Someone's been jilted a couple times... Maybe for being paranoid?
You know, the problem I see here is that people who wait 'til marriage to have their fuck and get eaten too probably date people with the same mindset. That pulls them out of the regular, healthy dating pool, leaving people who like sex and know it to do each other. So basically, it's got to be close to a fifty-fifty split. Doesn't it?
I know I read somewhere recently that women are closing the average-lifetime-partner gap...
Needs more research.
They didn't because, if it were true, it would be a miracle that we're 6 billion people and counting(and have the population or slightly more, let alone in places like Asia, not getting any)
They don't teach it because it's simply not true. To begin with, there are the same number of men and women, which makes your assertion practically impossible. Second, because if it were true, prostitution would make no sense. The big quantity of STDs that are transmitted only through the promiscuity of males wouldn't be there. And moreover, because statistics are clear, men have more STDs than women.
@David G
That's why it's fundie. Fair enough, loseloseprospect is not a religious fundie, but we mock all fundies here. It is possible to be fundamentally misogynistic, too.
Perhaps it's more true of fundies than the general population. It would explain all the apparent inbreeding, and the desire of the leaders to keep the masses ignorant about sex. And the lack of sex would explain the anger and frustration of fundie males. Hmmm.......
And don't worry, loseloseprospect, no matter how ugly, stupid and poorly endowed you are, eventually a woman will come along whose self-esteem is low enough to fuck you. With any luck, she won't even look or smell like a gorilla.
I'm thinking of starting a charity to send porn and hookers to fundies when they hit 18. Sex is powerful, and a few good sessions could help clear their minds quite a bit. Or guilt them into suicide before they reproduce-it's a total win/win.
He's obviously pulling statistics out of his ass:
"The average female in the U.S. will have sex with as many as fifty different partners by the time she is only 25 years old, while males have sex with only a third of that amount by the same age if they have multiple partners at all."
I read his blog, what a scary bunch of fundie, misogynist, bullshit.
He is the reason I carry mace.
Among unmarried men and women, that statistic is almost believable. For long-term relationships, men and women are about equally picky -- but for one-night stands, women are MUCH pickier than men are in terms of choosing their partners.
This is a consequence of evolutionary psychology. In the wild, contraceptives don't exist, and sex always carries with it the possibility of pregnancy. Therefore, humans have evolved psychological strategies for mate-selection that maximize their chances of producing fertile offspring that will survive to adulthood -- and these strategies differ between men and women. With men, the strategy is basically "bang everything that moves." With women, the strategy is to only bang the topmost, prime specimens of man-meat, the men whose genes are most likely to make your babies strong and tough, and to settle for second best only with great reluctance.
Therefore, among teens and early-20-somethings sowing their wild oats, it comes as no surprise that a tiny percentage of the male population would be having all the luck with the majority of the female population.
Not that I'm bitter. Nooooooo....
Wow, this POS's blog is one scary piece of work.
"The secret women are desperately trying to hide is that the average American female is a floating cesspool of VD; a walking toxic waste dump and a public toliet. American women are not just the opposite of marriage material, they need to be quaranteened."
Lethal case of the cooties, perhaps?
Hell, I haven't been laid much more than this loser, and I at least understand that the majority of women are not malicious. I mean, men's rights people are usually misogynist wackjobs, but most are outwardly merely contemptuous of women. You don't often see this level of seething hatred so obviously exposed.
And the population hasn´t got an inbreeding problem, apparently. Not that there are more single women than single men, of course(sarcasm, there are more single women than men)
I can't really get these bizarre figures to make any kind of sense. But... I'm not getting any, so I suppose I must be in the other 95%.
Sigh.
Oh well, I'm not the only one then!
So the other 95 percent men has to contend with only five percent of the women? I don't know if I should feel more sorry for the men who have such a small chance of getting any, or the women who must have sex constantly.
Strangely enough, I don't know any people who are like that. Most of the people I know are living steadily with one partner for years and years.
The quote is immediately obvious as nonsense, especially since a few percent of women are lesbians and have sex with no men.
The real numbers, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promiscuity :
A 1994 study in the United States, which looked at the number of sexual partners in a lifetime, found that 20% of heterosexual men had only one partner, 55% had two to twenty partners, and 25% had more than twenty partners. The numbers are similar for homosexual men, although early reports there were biased towards the high end because the samples weren't representative. These numbers are also self-reported , there being no other way to do things, so I suspect that some of those self-proclaimed Casanovas were exaggerating.
Heterosexual US women self-report to have somewhat fewer sexual partners, but again the reports are likely biased. I suspect that the bias here is in the opposite direction, given the phenomenon of slut-shaming. Oddly enough, lesbians in long-term relationships appear to be the most monogamous of any cohort.
In any event: it is perhaps possible that 25% of the heterosexual male population is having sex with ~75% of the heterosexual women, but that fraction may be as low as ~25% depending on who sleeps with whom. But 55% of the heterosexual male population is also having sex with ~80% of the heterosexual female population; and vice versa.
There's probably a reason they don't teach you that. Sorry, loser, that excuse doesn't work for humans. Maybe for one-male here animals, but not for humans. Let's try another statistic: 95% of women DON'T want to share.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.