maximus Profile picture
Feb 20 5 tweets 3 min read Read on X
Not a single other source replicates this 29-point gap, but instead gaps of around 10-15%, which can reasonably be attributed to age gaps.
People should know by now that the stats that go viral are rarely the most accurate ones. Image
Image
Image
Image
The sample sizes of these other surveys are roughly comparable to Pew's.
The NHIS has a far larger sample size but is limited by the fact that it doesn't capture non-cohabiting relationships. But it shows that cohabiting young women were overrepresented in the Pew survey. Image
Image
The most popular explanation for the gap is covert 'Chad harems': women *think* they're in an exclusive relationship with Chad, but *actually*...
The same Pew survey leaves little room for this explanation, as 3/4ths of the gap was driven by cohabitation and marriage. Image
The only category where this theory could plausibly apply is the more ambiguous third category, where the average gap across all surveys is 4%.

Finally, there's nothing new about most young men being single, nor about singleness gaps the size seen in the more realistic estimate. Image
Image
Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with maximus

maximus Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @nuance_enjoyer

Feb 12
1/ This doesn’t mean what people think it does, and does not validate the '80/20 rule' as commonly understood.
For those open to a different perspective, here's why the simple extrapolation from dating app swipes to 'Chad harems' is unjustified 🧵
/2 First, the graph is based on self-reported selectivity (% of likes given) from 27 women polled by essentially a 'Chadfish' Tinder profile, which served as the proxy for female 'attractiveness'. Likes received by men was the proxy for male attractiveness.
/3 One limitation of this data is that only one side of the equation is presented.

The male Hinge data is often brought up, showing a steep skew in likes received. What's typically left out is the female data showing a similar skew only slightly less steep. Image
Read 16 tweets
Jun 3, 2025
Results from some recent European sex surveys.

1. French 2023 survey.
Median age at first sex is rising.
🧵 Image
74.1% of men and 79.4% of women aged 18-29 had had sex in the past year, down from ~85% in earlier years. Image
43.5% of men and 39.4% of women aged 18-29 had met a sex partner online. Image
Read 12 tweets
Dec 14, 2024
It seems feminists are increasingly adopting talking points from the manosphere and reframing them as 'empowering'.

This idea that 5% of men hoarded all the women (during the neolithic era - a detail often omitted) sounds absurd on its face because it is. Let's see why exactly🧵
The theory underlying this tends to be that as social/wealth inequality rose following the advent of agriculture, so too did reproductive inequality among men, with women opting to share a higher status man than settle for one of low status.
Issues with this theory:

The effect of social status on men's reproductive success is of similar magnitude in hunter gatherer, agriculturalist, and pastoralist societies:
researchgate.net/publication/30…
Read 9 tweets
Aug 12, 2024
'Chad' has been officially debunked.
Here's why the 'growing Chadopolization' of the sexual marketplace is a myth:
🧵 Image
There is a pervasive belief online that a minority of aesthetically gifted men—colloquially referred to as 'Chads'—are hoarding a growing share of the sexual pie, leaving the majority of men out in the cold and fighting over scraps: the so-called '80/20 rule'. Image
Before, this destructive sexual dynamic was suppressed by the enforcement of monogamy. Following the sexual revolution however, it has naturally re-emerged, and is having disastrous effects on society. This narrative has begun to be promoted by academics. Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 21 tweets
Aug 8, 2024
Here we go again. This 'app-driven chadopoly' theory is totally evidence-free. It's all based on overly simplistic extrapolations from imbalanced swipe rates and many men having low match rates. This says next to nothing about what actual behaviour these apps are facilitating 🧵
Image
Swipe rates in a vacuum provide negligible insight. For one thing--at least partially owing to the skewed gender ratio--many men adopt a spray and pray approach to swiping, filtering out any undesired matches after the fact (which swiping data doesn't capture). Image
When we look at the median match rates, we see a ratio of about 1:2.75 M:F, which happens to mirror the gender ratio. This means that after adjusting for the gender imbalance, the average woman is actually matching at the same rate as the average man.
Image
Image
Read 4 tweets
Sep 13, 2023
In a study by Scott & Ward (2018), observers rated the mental health, attractiveness, physical health, and masculinity of composite faces made from men who scored the highest or lowest in AQ (Autism), IDS (Depression), and SPQ (Schizotypy).
🧵 Image
Easy to mistake the 'low' and 'high' as referring to scores on the traits listed on the right, but low 'actual mental health' implies they score higher on the traits and vice versa.
What we see is that despite the fact that the composite images with low actual mental health were accurately perceived as such, only men high in schizotypal traits were rated significantly lower in attractiveness.
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(