21 Jul 2011, 10:12 am
swbluto wrote:
Here are the numbers: Food is $150 per month, if they aren't paying for rent as is the case with many girlfriends as many don't have jobs, rent will be another $300 to $400 per month (As opposed to having a paying room mate) and then miscellaneous will be another $100 or more per month. Add it all together, and you're looking at something like $600-700 per month at a minimum for your average doesn't-have-a-job girlfriend whereas a prostitute once a month would cost somewhere between $150-300 (Or even cheaper with a trailer park crackhead.).
ok, you're out of whack. first of all, the vast majority of women work. pretty much equal numbers of men and women work in the UK and US (79%M / 70%W work in the UK, and in the US women comprise 46.8% of the labour force), so a woman would be equally likely to be supporting a male as vice versa. so there isn't an "average doesn't-have-a-job girlfriend".
also, you can have sex daily (or more often) with a girlfriend or wife. or, let's just use the supposed average frequency of twice a week, even. so using your numbers, if you have have sex with a prostitute twice a week, it already costs more than supporting a girlfriend at home, with none of the added benefits.
sources
http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1654
swbluto wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
you kinda throw around a lot of opinions like they are facts... can you show me where it has been shown or proven that liars are more successful than truthful people? because i looked, and it seems you have made another unfounded claim.
The people with the greatest ability to lie tend to be the most successful, not that they necessarily lie a lot as implied by the "liar" label. For example, most women are great at lying and they seem pretty successful at hoodwinking naive males into marriage with the carrot of sex.
(Apparently wedding cake is the most powerful libido killer, lol.)again, you're stating something as fact that is just opinion.
most men seem to be happy when married - they live longer, eat better, are healthier, and have more sex. no hoodwinking going on there. i guess that YOU were not happy in your marriage, so now you have a vested interest in deriding the institution?
people on this thread are under the impression that you are a virgin, but if i recall correctly you are divorced. perhaps you are carrying some anger because of that?
21 Jul 2011, 10:41 am
swbluto
Veteran
Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: In the Andes, counting the stars and wondering if one of them is home to another civilization
21 Jul 2011, 10:55 am
swbluto
Veteran
Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: In the Andes, counting the stars and wondering if one of them is home to another civilization
21 Jul 2011, 10:57 am
Subotai wrote:
swbluto wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
swbluto wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
IMHO your statistical hypothesis from this poll in clearly invalid, and now is erroneous to the discussion.
And adding to that fact that most women don't know what they really want, most statistics aren't telling at all.In all honesty my learned friend hyperlexian, has given both qualitative and quantitative data to back up her argument. You have only given qualitiative data, five pages back in my reply to your OP I asked for figures to back up your clam that it saves both time and money to use prostitutes. I Taken your argument more sensuously when you finally give us qualititive data.
The same can be said about man now, also I agree with Mark Twain about statistics There are lies, damned lies and statistics.
Here are the numbers: Food is $150 per month, if they aren't paying for rent as is the case with many girlfriends as many don't have jobs, rent will be another $300 to $400 per month (As opposed to having a paying room mate) and then miscellaneous will be another $100 or more per month. Add it all together, and you're looking at something like $600-700 per month at a minimum for your average doesn't-have-a-job girlfriend whereas a prostitute once a month would cost somewhere between $150-300 (Or even cheaper with a trailer park crackhead.).
I disagree with the numbers. You assume the average girl is negative, lazy and selfish. Positive mentally healthy people generally have an income and are self sufficient.
I'm talking about "my kind" of average girl and they're going to be like me, you see, so my assumption is correct.
And, I think your definition of "mentally healthy" is pretty arbitrary.
21 Jul 2011, 11:23 am
hyperlexian wrote:
scientifically valid? no. useful to the discussion? yes.
I agree with at thos statistical speaking is done raise questions about your quantitative data.
hyperlexian wrote:
it would be that same as any thread on WP where we seek and trust people's opinions. are you saying that every thread on this site is invalid? it's the same people posting.
No that not what I said, opinions can and do change now. What I was pointed out is not to take statistical analysis at face value.hyperlexian wrote:
also, the only way it could have been artificially skewed is if men posted in the poll. and which way do YOU think that the majority of men (or even 50% of men on here) would vote? the odds are that men would have skewed the number to be artifically lower.
let me get this right you conducted a poll on a phpBB forum which done not have the functionality to assist you in separating data you collected from groups that you had no which to research.. What type of skew are you refried to as there are two types of skewness. What would be the motivation of men to vote in your poll, now? hyperlexian wrote:
the statistic seems a little low to me because in real life, 90% of the women i know would not sleep with a man who used a prostitute (i asked around). so this number is comparably conservative to me. you can ask your own female friends and get your own result... maybe it will be different amongst your friends, so that this statistic may in fact be a good average.
Again that type of sampling is just like conducting an internet poll, it can be questionable about the methodologies used the two of them. Again its something not to be taken at face value. What speciality do you mean about average now? As both mathematically and statistically there are more than one form of measurement of average (measures of central tendency).
Also to note am a bit wary of your use of percentages as your presentation of them can be viewed as misleading.
PS & OT: IOU 3 pints mate, you did me three favours today without knowing about it while look for one of my text books on statistics
21 Jul 2011, 11:40 am
cdfox7 wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
scientifically valid? no. useful to the discussion? yes.
I agree with at thos statistical speaking is done raise questions about your quantitative data.
hyperlexian wrote:
it would be that same as any thread on WP where we seek and trust people's opinions. are you saying that every thread on this site is invalid? it's the same people posting.
No that not what I said, opinions can and do change now. What I was pointed out is not to take statistical analysis at face value.hyperlexian wrote:
also, the only way it could have been artificially skewed is if men posted in the poll. and which way do YOU think that the majority of men (or even 50% of men on here) would vote? the odds are that men would have skewed the number to be artifically lower.
let me get this right you conducted a poll on a phpBB forum which done not have the functionality to assist you in separating data you collected from groups that you had no which to research.. What type of skew are you refried to as there are two types of skewness. What would be the motivation of men to vote in your poll, now? hyperlexian wrote:
the statistic seems a little low to me because in real life, 90% of the women i know would not sleep with a man who used a prostitute (i asked around). so this number is comparably conservative to me. you can ask your own female friends and get your own result... maybe it will be different amongst your friends, so that this statistic may in fact be a good average.
Again that type of sampling is just like conducting an internet poll, it can be questionable about the methodologies used the two of them. Again its something not to be taken at face value. What speciality do you mean about average now? As both mathematically and statistically there are more than one form of measurement of average (measures of central tendency).Also to note am a bit wary of your use of percentages as your presentation of them can be viewed as misleading.
PS & OT: IOU 3 pints mate, you did me three favours today without knowing about it while look for one of my text books on statistics
i think it's possible to accept it as a general caution. i don't think that walking into a random group of 100 women and asking them the same question will always generate identical results. but even if the results showed 50% or only 35% of women who said NO, then there is still a reason to pause and reflect and use caution.
there are several men who would (and probably did) vote in such a poll for the express purpose of skewing it in a certain direction because they knew the direction it was likely to go and it likely made them less than happy. also just to mess with my poll. additionally, if a man visited a prostitute (or was considering such) and wanted women to think that other women supported that idea, he could choose to vote that way as well in order to "normalise" his behaviour (i.e. "see? look! other women don't mind! why should you?").
yes, people's opinions change, but if you use that as a reason to disbelieve a poll then tou should never bother to look at research studies of any sort if they deal with matters of opinion. if you truly think that then it is a moot point.
fact is... no scholarly research exists about how women feel about it... makes a person wonder why nobody has ever bothered to ask how we feel. is it really just about the men and the prostitutes? i would say it is something that affects all of us and it's about time the researchers considered that.
21 Jul 2011, 12:16 pm
hyperlexian wrote:
i think it's possible to accept it as a general caution. i don't think that walking into a random group of 100 women and asking them the same question will always generate identical results. but even if the results showed 50% or only 35% of women who said NO, then there is still a reason to pause and reflect and use caution.
Fair point
hyperlexian wrote:
there are several men who would (and probably did) vote in such a poll for the express purpose of skewing it in a certain direction because they knew the direction it was likely to go and it likely made them less than happy. also just to mess with my poll. additionally, if a man visited a prostitute (or was considering such) and wanted women to think that other women supported that idea, he could choose to vote that way as well in order to "normalise" his behaviour (i.e. "see? look! other women don't mind! why should you?").
I been think that would of happened, tho it done point point of a difference of opinion by gender in some quarters. hyperlexian wrote:
yes, people's opinions change, but if you use that as a reason to disbelieve a poll then tou should never bother to look at research studies of any sort if they deal with matters of opinion. if you truly think that then it is a moot point.
No in my academical studies of Mathematics, Accountancy, Economics, Statistics, Management Science and Computer Science I was always told to take an healthy scepticism of quantitative analysis and data. I don't go rushing into believing every piece of quantitative analysis and data into I know and understand it is of sound quality and been checked out by going thought the figures and methods involved in the research. hyperlexian wrote:
fact is... no scholarly research exists about how women feel about it... makes a person wonder why nobody has ever bothered to ask how we feel. is it really just about the men and the prostitutes? i would say it is something that affects all of us and it's about time the researchers considered that.
Now that surprises me considering that prostitution is claimed to be "the world's oldest profession" dating back from 18th century BC.
I do know that has been a few non academical studies into the economics of prostitution, something you may which to look at now.
22 Jul 2011, 3:06 am
22 Jul 2011, 4:34 am
swbluto
Veteran
Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: In the Andes, counting the stars and wondering if one of them is home to another civilization
22 Jul 2011, 8:18 am
What a critical oversight I made.
Anyway, here's anecdotal evidence for the expensiveness of girlfriends and his final solution to the... issue.
Quote:
From my experience, girlfriends (or to be politically correct, "relationships") are expensive. I just broke up with my first and only girlfriend, for reasons I'd rather not talk about (not financial). I added up how much money I spent on her, and it was a lot. My ex-girlfriend is fairly old-school, in a sense that she expected me to pay for everything, even though she had a real job. I added up the costs: dates, gifts, driving, and Valentine's Day gifts. Everything totaled to $350, in a course of about one month. The grand total she spent on me was less than $5 (a coffee and a bus fare). From an economic standpoint, it's clearly an unfeasible operation.
So I'm going back to the way men have been getting sex since the dawn on human life: escorts. Before anything remotely similar to modern civilization appeared, that profession already existed. Thousands of years later, it's still alive and well. Most escorts in the city where I live charge from $250 to $400 an hour, with the average being $300. Relationship or escorts? You do the math! I visit an escort at least once every three months to get my sexual fix, quickly and easily. No wracking my brain over what gifts to buy, no emotional drama from doing the "wrong" thing, no worrying about her cheating on me, and not having to ever hear "we need to talk". My sex drive is not that strong, so once every few months is enough for me.
So I'm going back to the way men have been getting sex since the dawn on human life: escorts. Before anything remotely similar to modern civilization appeared, that profession already existed. Thousands of years later, it's still alive and well. Most escorts in the city where I live charge from $250 to $400 an hour, with the average being $300. Relationship or escorts? You do the math! I visit an escort at least once every three months to get my sexual fix, quickly and easily. No wracking my brain over what gifts to buy, no emotional drama from doing the "wrong" thing, no worrying about her cheating on me, and not having to ever hear "we need to talk". My sex drive is not that strong, so once every few months is enough for me.
22 Jul 2011, 8:47 am
22 Jul 2011, 11:41 pm
23 Jul 2011, 10:28 am
23 Jul 2011, 3:25 pm
swbluto
Veteran
Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: In the Andes, counting the stars and wondering if one of them is home to another civilization
23 Jul 2011, 5:02 pm
23 Jul 2011, 5:55 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| I became too hyper-focused on the prospect of... |
08 Jun 2025, 4:41 am |
| Future for walle |
22 May 2025, 6:11 pm |
