Due to Fisher’s Principle, we know that there’s roughly as many women as men. So why don’t you go and take a population of 5 men and 5 women, and show how they can be partnered up in such a way that each woman is on average connected to more men than vice versa. You’ll quickly find it impossible, and that’s because it is mathematically impossible.
Let’s go through this step by step. Each woman in your model, has slept with 3 men, men 1-3. This makes the female average 3. Men 1 - 3 have slept with all 5 women each. So 15 sex partners, divided by 5 men, makes 3 sex partners for each man on average. Average for both groups are equal. Care to try again?
This silly train of thought simply ignores that not all men (and women) are of equal value or attraction. In this example, chances are the most attractive man gets more than his statistic average, with the least attractive man getting way less or even nothing.
Uh no. It’s not 1-1, it’s 1-to-many.
Due to Fisher’s Principle, we know that there’s roughly as many women as men. So why don’t you go and take a population of 5 men and 5 women, and show how they can be partnered up in such a way that each woman is on average connected to more men than vice versa. You’ll quickly find it impossible, and that’s because it is mathematically impossible.
deleted by creator
Let’s go through this step by step. Each woman in your model, has slept with 3 men, men 1-3. This makes the female average 3. Men 1 - 3 have slept with all 5 women each. So 15 sex partners, divided by 5 men, makes 3 sex partners for each man on average. Average for both groups are equal. Care to try again?
This silly train of thought simply ignores that not all men (and women) are of equal value or attraction. In this example, chances are the most attractive man gets more than his statistic average, with the least attractive man getting way less or even nothing.
True, but does not address the thesis being discussed, which is that heterosexual women have more sex than heterosexual men.