That wasn’t an insult, it was my best guess as to where that idea came from. It’s also not calling you an incel, just that I suspect incels came up with that idea and it somehow got to you (one potential way is that you are in incel, but again, that’s one way), so I’m annoyed you misinterpreted my careful wording.
I read that study you referenced, and it found that ~50% of both men and women rate “Good earning capacity” between 1 (desirable) and 2 (important), the averages being ~1.1 and ~1.6 respectively. This study shows that women care about it more than men, but, reading the results, they care somewhere between “desirable” and “important”, discrediting your idea that “Dating in your early 20s is basically impossible because your female counterparts aren’t looking for guys that are just starting out or figuring out who they are”. Looking at their box and whisker plots, it seems you’ll find significantly more women than men for whom bad earning capacity is a deal breaker, but that does not mean that most do.
Is it a factor when dating? Yes. Is it an overwhelming factor on average? This study says no.
What argument do you mean? I was suspicious of your claim, based on my biases of course, but I used your study to back up that suspicion. I’m not making an affirmative claim.
So you’re just babbling on then? You asked me to source my argument and argued it was incorrect while insinuating I’m an incel, yet you provide no source of your own other than your opinion. This is why I don’t reply half of the time. You effectively wasted my time. Please don’t argue someone else’s claims unless you’re prepared to offer more than your opinion.
You must be trolling, I’ve said I didn’t call you an incel yet you repeat it, and I cited your own source to disprove you yet you call that opinion. What source am I supposed to cite if not the very one you used? I’m merely arguing the null hypothesis, I don’t have to provide a positive claim/source, only dig holes in yours (which I did).
That wasn’t an insult, it was my best guess as to where that idea came from. It’s also not calling you an incel, just that I suspect incels came up with that idea and it somehow got to you (one potential way is that you are in incel, but again, that’s one way), so I’m annoyed you misinterpreted my careful wording.
I read that study you referenced, and it found that ~50% of both men and women rate “Good earning capacity” between 1 (desirable) and 2 (important), the averages being ~1.1 and ~1.6 respectively. This study shows that women care about it more than men, but, reading the results, they care somewhere between “desirable” and “important”, discrediting your idea that “Dating in your early 20s is basically impossible because your female counterparts aren’t looking for guys that are just starting out or figuring out who they are”. Looking at their box and whisker plots, it seems you’ll find significantly more women than men for whom bad earning capacity is a deal breaker, but that does not mean that most do.
Is it a factor when dating? Yes. Is it an overwhelming factor on average? This study says no.
So your argument is based on opinion yeah?
What argument do you mean? I was suspicious of your claim, based on my biases of course, but I used your study to back up that suspicion. I’m not making an affirmative claim.
So you’re just babbling on then? You asked me to source my argument and argued it was incorrect while insinuating I’m an incel, yet you provide no source of your own other than your opinion. This is why I don’t reply half of the time. You effectively wasted my time. Please don’t argue someone else’s claims unless you’re prepared to offer more than your opinion.
You must be trolling, I’ve said I didn’t call you an incel yet you repeat it, and I cited your own source to disprove you yet you call that opinion. What source am I supposed to cite if not the very one you used? I’m merely arguing the null hypothesis, I don’t have to provide a positive claim/source, only dig holes in yours (which I did).
“yeah your study supports your idea but not as much as you think”
Great analysis there, you really opened up my mind
It doesn’t though, please reread.