88 lines
3.5 KiB
Plaintext
88 lines
3.5 KiB
Plaintext
From fork-admin@xent.com Sat Sep 7 21:54:10 2002
|
|
Return-Path: <fork-admin@xent.com>
|
|
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ECCB16F03
|
|
for <jm@localhost>; Sat, 7 Sep 2002 21:52:47 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
|
|
by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
|
|
for jm@localhost (single-drop); Sat, 07 Sep 2002 21:52:47 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
|
|
(8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g87KAIC31918 for <jm@jmason.org>;
|
|
Sat, 7 Sep 2002 21:10:21 +0100
|
|
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
|
|
with ESMTP id 820932940D3; Sat, 7 Sep 2002 13:07:03 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Delivered-To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
Received: from relay.pair.com (relay1.pair.com [209.68.1.20]) by xent.com
|
|
(Postfix) with SMTP id 394F429409E for <fork@xent.com>; Sat,
|
|
7 Sep 2002 13:06:04 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Received: (qmail 19746 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2002 20:08:45 -0000
|
|
Received: from adsl-67-119-24-60.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO golden)
|
|
(67.119.24.60) by relay1.pair.com with SMTP; 7 Sep 2002 20:08:45 -0000
|
|
X-Pair-Authenticated: 67.119.24.60
|
|
Message-Id: <005701c256aa$5d12d6e0$640a000a@golden>
|
|
From: "Gordon Mohr" <gojomo@usa.net>
|
|
To: <fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
|
|
References: <20020907135257.7E5CBC44D@argote.ch>
|
|
Subject: Re: Selling Wedded Bliss (was Re: Ouch...)
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
X-Priority: 3
|
|
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
|
|
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
|
|
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
|
|
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
X-Beenthere: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
|
|
List-Post: <mailto:fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
|
|
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
|
|
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
|
|
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
|
|
<mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
|
|
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
|
|
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2002 13:08:41 -0700
|
|
|
|
Definitional nit to pick:
|
|
|
|
Robert Harley writes:
|
|
> It is perfectly obvious that (heterosexual) promiscuity is exactly,
|
|
> precisely identical between males and females.
|
|
>
|
|
> Of course the shapes of the distributions may differ.
|
|
|
|
You've redefined "promiscuity" above as "total" or "average"
|
|
activity, which seems to rob it of its common meaning:
|
|
activity above some specific threshold (usually "one") or
|
|
norm, or involving extra or indiscriminate variety.
|
|
"Promiscuity" is thus inherently a description of
|
|
distributions rather than averages.
|
|
|
|
Consider a population of 3 males and 3 females. Let
|
|
there be three pairings which result in each person
|
|
having sex once. Then, let one of the males also have
|
|
sex with the other two females.
|
|
|
|
Sure, the average number of sex acts and sex partners
|
|
is equal between the sexes, tautologically.
|
|
|
|
But here more women than men are:
|
|
- above the single partner threshold
|
|
- above the overall average 1.67 acts/partners threshold
|
|
- above the overall median 1.5 acts/partners
|
|
- above the overall mode 1 acts/partners
|
|
|
|
And here women have a higher mode (2) and median (2)
|
|
number of partners.
|
|
|
|
So in this contrived population, females are more
|
|
"promiscuous" than males, unless "promiscuity" is
|
|
defined uselessly.
|
|
|
|
- Gordon
|
|
|
|
|