this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
321 points (92.8% liked)

2meirl4meirl

2060 readers
1 users here now

Memes that are too meirl for /c/meirl.

Rules:

  1. Respect the community. If you're not into self-deprecating/dark/suicidal humor then this place isn't for you. Kindly just block and move on. This is just how some of us cope.

  2. Respect one another.

  3. All titles must begin with 2meirl4meirl. This is for multiple reasons. One is just so you can be lazy with titles but another is so people who aren't into this kind of humor can avoid it.

  4. Otherwise just the general no bigotry, no dickishness, no spam, no malice, etc stuff.

Sidebar will be updated when I feel like and considering I'm Sadboi extraordinaire we'll see when that will be.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So 50 is, superwhore?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 69 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Id imagine there's a few zeros dragging the average down.

[–] Beacon@fedia.io 32 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Well there are also a few who are way above the average dragging it back up again. We need to see a distribution curve

[–] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This is still a bit misleading visually, because the population numbers for the bars are totalled, not distributed among the partner counts within each category. Eg. each partner count within the 2-10 partner bar has an average of ~5% of the population, which is less than the 0-partner bar, but they add up to ~45%, more than the 1-partner bar.

[–] Webster@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Red line appears to be total by specific percentage (maybe smoothed?)

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Oh yeah, true! Although that reveals that we're missing fine-grained data above 0 and 1, so even with smoothing it's not very detailed

[–] Beacon@fedia.io 2 points 1 year ago

Perfect! Thanks!

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

For every person who fucked 30 people, you need 6 people who never had sex to bring the average back to 5. I find 5 to be impossibly low, even as someone who's number is 5.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Eyy... How you doin', eh?

(Sorry. "Beacon" and "distribution curve"? I couldn't not.)

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I’m a picky slut and only have had seven sexual partners. One of them had over 50, though.

So there’s at least 55 people with no partners we’re making up for

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had 30 that I can actually remember when I count them out. And can only remember the names of 15 of them. So am I down right slut or is this not correct. Maybe it counting woman. Most women I met or been with numbers was in the low tens or single digit numbers. It's always men who I heard have huge numbers.

Then again some may lie. Once met a 22 year old who claimed he slept with 300 women. I didn't by that shit at all. At 22 I been with only 4. I didn't really start getting laid a lot until I discovered online dating. The amount of hookups through that app is off the charts.

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Men and women have hooked up with the same number of men and women. Just how the math works out. 1 dude sleeps with 5 different women, means 5 women all added 1 to their number.

[–] alnitak@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except that people can be gay.

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yea, that's why I specifically didn't mention that.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok but choosing not to mention that doesn't mean that you don't have to account for it. It just means you're being wrong on purpose

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's over complicating my point when it isn't necessary at the time. I don't know the numbers, but most people aren't having sex with both genders. So yes, there will be variance, but on the whole the numbers will be equal.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

You can't know that with your logic though. You're just assuming that's true

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Guess I'm a whore too, if that is true. I in the mid tens with sex partners. I thought I was on the low end. Is this a legit statistic?

[–] Beacon@fedia.io 7 points 1 year ago

40 to 60 sex partners is way above average by every statistic I've ever seen

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

Wait, they're shaking the data tables now, too?