Post: #1

It's what we all know already.

https://images.journals.lww.com/stdjourn....T2-5.jpeg

https://journals.lww.com/stdjournal/Full...the.5.aspx

This is for men in the United States, no homos, no BJs. Compared to 2002, men overall had the same number of partners in 2013. But the top 20% of men (turbonormies) had a 25% increase in sexual partners, and the top 5% of men (chad) had an outstanding 38% increase in the number of sexual partners. Same amount of sex, but it all shifted to the top.

No surprises to anyone here. But this data is from 5 years ago and I'm sure it radically understates the issue today -- this is mostly pre-Tinder and we've seen how the incel rates spiked since it was released in 2012. This has been in progress for well over a decade, as I'm sure older people here can account.

Also "no significant changes were identified among women in the top 20% and top 5%, overall, and among subgroups."

Post: #2

(09-08-2018 03:42 PM)Ferrari Wrote:  It's what we all know already.

[...]

No surprises to anyone here. But this data is from 5 years ago and I'm sure it radically understates the issue today[...]

Also "no significant changes were identified among women in the top 20% and top 5%, overall, and among subgroups."

Post: #3

Nice.

Looks like all the guys too lazy to hit the gym will neee to call the wham wham whambalance

Post: #4

Quote:Median lifetime opposite-sex sex partners for males between 2002 and 2011–2013 remained unchanged at 5 opposite-sex sex partners (Table 2), nor were changes identified among subgroups of men.

5 Lifetime? ....In college that was a good week

Post: #5

Note the phrase "Median".

Post: #6

I find it believable. I’m on the opposite side of the distribution. I’m only up to two and I’m 43.

Post: #7

According to this study, I’m a chad. Later virgins.

Post: #8

(09-08-2018 04:38 PM)RexImperator Wrote:  I find it believable. I’m on the opposite side of the distribution. I’m only up to two and I’m 43.

Ive never gone past two at a time either

Post: #9

(09-08-2018 04:33 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  5 Lifetime? ....In college that was a good week

Times are changing, these new SJW things would rather rack up five of these:



Because they know it's only going end with them raising your kids anyway.

Post: #10

(09-08-2018 04:41 PM)scotian Wrote:  According to this study, I’m a chad. Later virgins.

Post: #11

This is a study about STDs (now called STIs for annoyingly politically correct reasons). It "oversamples" minorities and relies on what people tell them regarding sex partner number counts. Yeah, because people don't lie (eye roll).

This is probably about as accurate as overhearing locker room/slumber party talk. My conclusion is not to draw any conclusions.

Unless a study is deals with actual science (i.e. blood samples, DNA), it's hard for me to put too much faith it in.

Post: #12

You don't have to be Chad to bang a lot.

You are not necessarily a beta if you bang only 2-3 chicks.

Post: #13

(09-08-2018 04:25 PM)LINUX Wrote:  Nice.

Looks like all the guys too lazy to hit the gym will neee to call the wham wham whambalance

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8637535

If you want to get big, take steroids, don't waste your time.

Post: #14

(09-08-2018 05:39 PM)asdfk Wrote:  You don't have to be Chad to bang a lot.

You are not necessarily a beta if you bang only 2-3 chicks.

Thanks for the clarification, poindexter.

Post: #15

(09-08-2018 05:30 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  This is a study about STDs (now called STIs for annoyingly politically correct reasons). It "oversamples" minorities and relies on what people tell them regarding sex partner number counts. Yeah, because people don't lie (eye roll).

This is probably about as accurate as overhearing locker room/slumber party talk. My conclusion is not to draw any conclusions.

Unless a study is deals with actual science (i.e. blood samples, DNA), it's hard for me to put too much faith it in.

I don't agree, as the data methods look good. In sexual health the alarm bells ring off because in crude terms when lots of girls have sex with fewer men in quantity this is how STD outbreaks happen. An extreme example, If evrey girl fucks the one dude with the Herp that is how you get outbreaks and this is why the method of focusing on sex partners, over a time horizon, with the focus on opposite sex was used.

Also, again this survey shows the sad truth that most men get no pussy. Sub 5 partners in a lifetime, yes indeed. All seems to make zero sense but I have seen that majority of men don't get laid and if less men are getting married then that leaves even more men left with nothing.

You'll never get blood type data put out on mainstream srudies, especially in regards to heterosexual relations. Vast majority will be from qualitative means, vast majority of sexual surveys are of this variety. You provide a private setting and most people, if they agree to the survey, will give honest answers.

I need to dig to find median number for women. It should be less than 5 one would think, but if we see these trends if it's larger than 5 that is not good for trends going forward.