How do you interpret these statistics about numbers of sexual partners?

Question

Here's a question that was posted before in a different section, but I began to think about . . .

The median number of lifetime female sexual partners for men was seven; the median number of male partners for women was four.

from:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19374216/

How is this possible? How can men have a net average number of female partners greater than that of women given that the initial ratio of male/female is 1:1?

Ah, I glossed over "median". Yes, the mean would be a more interesting number. I guess they want to give the public what they want, and yes, some men have an exceedingly large number of partners . . .

Hmm, all this really tells us is that the sluttiest chick in the group slept with 8 guys and the sluttiest dude slept with 14 chicks (assuming only no negative sexual encounters).

Answer 1

To understand it, consider an extreme case. In a population of 100 men and women, suppose only ten men were having sex, and the remaining 90 were celibate. Further assume that the ten sexually active men shared the 100 females. Then the median number of partners for men would be 0, while the median number of partners for women would be 10. So the medians don't have to be equal, they can be quite far apart. A difference in medians reflects an asymmetry in sexual behavior between the two populations.

Answer 2

Well, to begin-with, the ratio of males to females is not quite 1:1, but the real answer probably lies in what is called "normative response"

Male ego tells most men that they should be more sexually active, so they MIGHT tend to inflate the numbers a bit. On the other hand, many women might not want to admit to more than a few partners. Since the surveys have to rely on personal testimony, we can't really know why the statistics don't seem to gibe.

A statisticuan, lokking at data more than just the median might be able to answer whether the sampling database explains some of the difference.

Answer 3

Mark Twain said there are lies and statistics. Statistics are not really lies, but they can be used to present a picture which isn't really accurate if you don't understand the data or the statistical analysis of the data.

The median is the midpoint (there are an equal number of men/women on both sides of the median, and therefore not the average), so you'd have to look at the standard deviation and mean as well.

One possible explanation for this anomaly would be that most women have very few (0, 1, or 2) sexual partners, but a few women have "dozens" of partners. For the men's median to be 7, it could be as simple as most men having 7 partners. The median by itself is not an accurate representation of statistics without considering other statistical parameters.

Answer 4

You need to look up the word "median" and study it.

If you have 100 men and 100 women, it's possible for 99 of the women to not engage in sex at all, and 1 woman to have sex with 100 men. That would make the median (and the mode) number of opposite-sex partners for men to be one, while the median (and the mode) number of opposite-sex partners for women to be zero.

Answer 5

I have been a working polster for 51 years. Never ran into a midian # or % so low in an Honest quiz. Even in the Morman sponsered UUsl sorority sisters. By age and edu. level The numbers were still 16/+ average for thirtyfive year old females. 12 /- for men in the same Edu/Culture gp.

Answer 6

The answer is that the data isn't accurate. I think you would find that some of the men are claiming more partners than they have actually had, and some of the women claiming less.

Answer 7

He and I are both just slightly above the average.

Answer 8

mean, median , or mode

all averages

for "median"

if one hooker slept with 10,000 of em, it explains it I think pretty well

Answer 9

what about transvestites aka he-she's.. ???

what about 3-somes: maybe they only count as 1 ??

Answer 10

Men lie.