Also of note the income data is combined household income (2 incomes for a married couple) and over the entire population (including 40+ later-career incomes).
It's likely significantly over predicting how common $100k yearly income is among the 20-35 year old "dating pool". Though probably balanced out some by being 10 year old data by now.
operation_moose
The information that was missing from my life:
For the Average Man, gaining an inch of height is worth losing roughly $25k in annual salary. Meanwhile, an inch of pecker is roughly offset by reducing annual salary by $128k.
0-_-0
Hey, author of the blog post here! Found this after seeing my AWS bill spike from $0.18 to $3.00 this month, lol.
Glad to see that this is still getting some enjoyment, despite the fact that is was hastily put together as joke for my friends. I will say the data and stats aren't quite up to snuff, but gets the point across. Glad people seemed to enjoy it.
sheriffofpaddys
This is solid reporting:
> A 6" wiener is even rarer than being 6' tall. The average erect penis length is 5.166" with a std dev of 0.654".
itsmemattchung
> Blended Exclusivity Score ... 17/4000 = 0.425%
> In a gaggle of 100 suitors, it's actually unlikely that a single one will meet all three criteria. Perfection. We now have a truly unreasonable set of standards by which to choose our dating partner.
Is it actually truly unreasonable?
Who has not seen 4000 males? Sure, you might not be able to name 4000 but that's not the criteria. You only need to learn about 1000 of them because visually you can tell the remaining 3000 are too short. And of those 1000 you only need to learn a little to tell if they're going to earn over 100k (i.e. what career path and where they rank in their cohorts).
That Blended Exclusivity Score is really a minimum so of the 170 remaining people at least 17 qualify. You don't even have to sleep with the remaining unqualified ones, make sure the lights are on and just leave if it's too short.
lesuorac
I really thought this post was gonna be adjacent to the hip-hop group, and I was patiently waiting to be told that Poppin one's Collar accounts for a pecker deficit.
quadruple
So I'm an actual "6/6/6"... and I also have a statistics degree. This was absolutely hilarious to read!
I will say that I've seen multiple definitions of the 666 rule where the last 6 represents either penis length or a 6-pack. From personal experience, I will say that maintaining a 6 pack makes you much more desirable in the eyes of women than, uh, the other option.
I'm also not much of a dater, but my friends always freak out at me when I tell them I've never been on a dating app. They seem to think I'd do well. ...Maybe this is my sign that I should try a dating app?
joshdavham
Putting on my atheist hat for a minute, I think these statistics are interesting in reminding people that there is an underlying biological and evolutionary process underlying mate selection. You’re being evaluated for biological fitness criteria.
That said, individual chemistry is highly variable so these particular criteria are just a proxy and negotiable. Don’t take stated criteria at face value. My now wife’s type was chubby 6-foot plus midwestern future lawyers. But then she met a 5-9 Bangladeshi in law school and got baby fever and that was that. My personal view of it is God has a plan for all of us, but if you’re an atheist you can see it as the chemistry of biological compatibility being highly complex and individualized.
rayiner
These numbers seem based on global distributions rather than local ones. After all, six feet is just average height in the Netherlands.
comments (10)
It's likely significantly over predicting how common $100k yearly income is among the 20-35 year old "dating pool". Though probably balanced out some by being 10 year old data by now.
operation_moose
For the Average Man, gaining an inch of height is worth losing roughly $25k in annual salary. Meanwhile, an inch of pecker is roughly offset by reducing annual salary by $128k.
0-_-0
Glad to see that this is still getting some enjoyment, despite the fact that is was hastily put together as joke for my friends. I will say the data and stats aren't quite up to snuff, but gets the point across. Glad people seemed to enjoy it.
sheriffofpaddys
> A 6" wiener is even rarer than being 6' tall. The average erect penis length is 5.166" with a std dev of 0.654".
itsmemattchung
> In a gaggle of 100 suitors, it's actually unlikely that a single one will meet all three criteria. Perfection. We now have a truly unreasonable set of standards by which to choose our dating partner.
Is it actually truly unreasonable?
Who has not seen 4000 males? Sure, you might not be able to name 4000 but that's not the criteria. You only need to learn about 1000 of them because visually you can tell the remaining 3000 are too short. And of those 1000 you only need to learn a little to tell if they're going to earn over 100k (i.e. what career path and where they rank in their cohorts).
That Blended Exclusivity Score is really a minimum so of the 170 remaining people at least 17 qualify. You don't even have to sleep with the remaining unqualified ones, make sure the lights are on and just leave if it's too short.
lesuorac
quadruple
I will say that I've seen multiple definitions of the 666 rule where the last 6 represents either penis length or a 6-pack. From personal experience, I will say that maintaining a 6 pack makes you much more desirable in the eyes of women than, uh, the other option.
I'm also not much of a dater, but my friends always freak out at me when I tell them I've never been on a dating app. They seem to think I'd do well. ...Maybe this is my sign that I should try a dating app?
joshdavham
That said, individual chemistry is highly variable so these particular criteria are just a proxy and negotiable. Don’t take stated criteria at face value. My now wife’s type was chubby 6-foot plus midwestern future lawyers. But then she met a 5-9 Bangladeshi in law school and got baby fever and that was that. My personal view of it is God has a plan for all of us, but if you’re an atheist you can see it as the chemistry of biological compatibility being highly complex and individualized.
rayiner
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/average-h...
Maybe that's what the rule tells you. Ladies love the north Europeans.
panny
drcongo