Tomm Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 I've wondered this before, too. It depends whether you're talking about mean, median or mode as 'average'. Cool people, read on. If you make a few assumptions (two heterosexual partners per interaction etc) then draw some graphs: x axis = the number of lifetime sexual partners, and y axis the number of people with that many sexual partners. You'll get an approximately bell-shaped curve, with the mean in the middle. Let's take men first (the blue line on the graph). If we assume that the graph is perfectly distributed about the mean (I.e. not skewed) then the mean number of partners=median=mode. Essentially this means that if the average is 5 partners, then the number of people with 4 partners is the same as the number of people with 6 partners etc. Now imagine a second graph for women (pink line). We'll assume that the number of interactions are the same (I.e. the area under the graph is the same as the male graph, and the mean is in the same place as the male graph). However, imagine that for there are a handful of women who have slept with hundreds of guys. We'll call them prostitutes or megasluts. Even though most of the individual women in the population have slept with 2-3 men (so the mode average will be 2 or 3), the handful of prostitutes sleeping with hundreds of men each will 'skew' the graph to the side. The mean average will be the same as the male mean average (5) but the mode (the tallest point on the graph) is 2. If you've read some statistics that the average number of sexual partners is different for men and women, they may be talking about the modal (or median) average as opposed to the mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Bizarrely I didn't read that article above, and I still used the term megaslut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JT! Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) drunken post Edited January 12, 2012 by JT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDoom Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Quigley Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Going back to your 5men and 5 women argument. Lets say they're virgins. 1 of the men sleeps with all 5 women (5,0,0,0,0) leaving the five women thusly (1,1,1,1,1) You can average it out as 1 per gender and get the same result, the problem there is that that's also like saying you lost your virginity because your mate banged 5 lasses, so on average you've lost your cherry. The average should only take into account sexually active members of the population, nullifying the four virgins leaving an average of 5:1. I think figures in things like this can always be twisted to how you want them to fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) In my eyes woman have NEVER had ANY sexual partners, and they are all clean and innocent. And if they are slaggy enough, and unsophisticated enough to tell you about it, then they probably aren't worth your time. In line with the argument, I'll go with what Robin said. There's far too many gays that aren't saying anything haha. Edited January 12, 2012 by Pashley26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dann2707 Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 From my phone, is that Jeremy Kyle in a soldiers uniform? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Change your friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD™ Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 In my eyes woman have NEVER had ANY sexual partners, and they are all clean and innocent. And if they are slaggy enough, and unsophisticated enough to tell you about it, then they probably aren't worth your time. What. The. f**k. Ring ring. Ring ring. Hello? Oh Jardo, it's for you, it's the 50s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Its ok, he's a virgin. He obviously feels intimidated. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) What. The. f**k. Ring ring. Ring ring. Hello? Oh Jardo, it's for you, it's the 50s. 50's ***, I would never jump into bed with a slag who'd had enough cock through her to make the hand rails on the QE2. If I'm in a relationship with a woman I don't ever want to know she's ever been touched by anybody, call me possessive but everybody feels ownership over their woman. I'd rather not ever know, and never be told. Just me though, I appreciate some people are more open minded and don't see that as an issue. But for me I just don't want to know. As George says, I've never smashed my yogurt truck in through the back doors so I wouldn't know. Edited January 12, 2012 by Pashley26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BONGO Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 The principle is correct and can be applied to any suitable model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 So Jardo, say that you were single and met a girl who until recently had been in a serious, long term and sexually active relationship with her boyfriend of 5 years. Her telling you that yes, her and the guy she'd planned on spending her years with had taken part in some internal heavy petting would be enough for you to think that she's a slag and wasn't even worth giving the time of day. Not being a virgin != Being a slag. You realise women don't just store semen, right? It's not really a collectors' item 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualjoe Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Not up for a threesome then bud? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Harrison Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Not being a virgin != Being a slag. Yeah Jardo you fat spastic. Also, good usage of != Rainbird. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Why thank you, good sir. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 So Jardo, say that you were single and met a girl who until recently had been in a serious, long term and sexually active relationship with her boyfriend of 5 years. Her telling you that yes, her and the guy she'd planned on spending her years with had taken part in some internal heavy petting would be enough for you to think that she's a slag and wasn't even worth giving the time of day. Not being a virgin != Being a slag. You realise women don't just store semen, right? It's not really a collectors' item Personally I just couldn't do it, I'm not saying that I could NEVER be with anybody who wasn't a virgin .(lol you've known Lou forever!) I'm saying I could never be with a woman who's been that cheap and easy that she's slept with blokes just because she wanted some cock. If it's been in a proper relationship or with somebody they have feelings for then fair enough, but one night stands and drunken quickies = skank who I wouldn't touch with yours, let alone have any feelings for. I feel bad enough about my girlfriends ex partners, and comparatively speaking to most she's pretty golden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Harrison Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Sucks to be you then, son. Skank hoes know how to f'ck, virgins generally don't. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bing Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Sucks to be you then, son. Skank hoes know how to f'ck, virgins generally don't. skank hoes, as you so eloquently put it know what they want, and generally know how to get it. where as a virgin, or just freshly bedded in young lady, can be shown the way, corrupted from being a little angel, and modelled into a filthy little harlot who craves dick. thas my take on it anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 Sucks to be you then, son. Skank hoes know how to f'ck, virgins generally don't. See you down the clinic then big boy I've got such a massive cock that most women are immobile after the first smash so regardless of talent they all look like Stephen Hawking when I'm done with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bing Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 See you down the clinic then big boy I've got such a massive cock that most women are immobile after the first smash so regardless of talent they all look like Stephen Hawking when I'm done with them. take it you have a good builder on speed dial then shag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topsy Posted January 12, 2012 Report Share Posted January 12, 2012 I've got a slight problem with these statistics. All my closer friends seem to be sluts?? (all under their 20s) ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD™ Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 See you down the clinic then big boy A. That comment says you're assuming that anyone who has sex with more than one partner will DEFINITELY end up in a clinic B. If you only sleep with 'pure' ladies then you won't see him unless she has a genetic disposition to AIDS. I can tolerate your normal levels of complete and utter bullshit, because it's 'banter', but this is you just bringing up an excuse for only being able to f**k fat birds. Discuss. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashley26 Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) A. That comment says you're assuming that anyone who has sex with more than one partner will DEFINITELY end up in a clinic B. If you only sleep with 'pure' ladies then you won't see him unless she has a genetic disposition to AIDS. I can tolerate your normal levels of complete and utter bullshit, because it's 'banter', but this is you just bringing up an excuse for only being able to f**k fat birds. Discuss. I don't need any excuses for only being able to bed fat birds, I've been living with my "fat bird" for years, we own a house together and all is gravy. Wouldn't really need or want to go out bedding bitches because I have it all at home. I thought most normal people stopped shagging around and tried to be a bit more mature about these sorts of things when they got to mid 20's? When do most people see it as the right time to start settling down and showing some signs of commitment? Surely, the number of sexual partners per year for instance is largely increased between the ages of 16-25 than say 25-35? Which probably shows why I feel the way I do. Edited January 13, 2012 by Pashley26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.