I can barely imagine being married to anyone this illogical.
Women are emotionally driven ?
I can barely imagine being married to anyone this illogical.
This is where I got that calculator from. From the comments, a great many people don't get it.
You can almost always tell who the female commenters are, because they CLEARLY don't like the calculator. Same goes for the simps as well.
The thing is, people don't do well with large numbers of anything; it's like one of those D&D type of repelling spells. Otherwise, our national debt wouldn't be eleventy-trillion bazillion dollars.
Neck it down to, say, 100 men, for the sake of simplicity.
- the percentage of HOUSEHOLDS in this country that makes over $200K is 20%. So that's 20 men.
- the percentage of men in the US who are over 6 foot (the average is 5'9") is roughly 10% (90th percentile).
The calculator looks at those 20 men who make over $200K, figures out how many of those 10 men who are over 6 foot, overlap the two, and derives a number based on both those (and more) factors. I've never been good at math - okay, I suck at it - but in that overlap, the odds of finding a guy who's both 6 foot tall (or taller) AND who makes over $200K a year seem pretty small.
No it's obvious that the woman here was not drawing conclusions from the number she was being given - she kept hoping that another random choice would give the answer, as though each number given had no bearing on finding the solution. They might as well never given her a number at all unless it was "5".Women are emotionally driven ?
I'm sure you could find SOMEONE in 13 million you could be happy with.
If you're so selective only 4 percent of the country meet your criteria, then that 4% probably meets the criteria for 96% everyone else so why would they choose you?ONLY - IF - YOUR universe of selections is the entire country - which it never is.
Remember, if your number came out to 4% - that's 4% of 330 million, or 13 million.
I'm sure you could find SOMEONE in 13 million you could be happy with.
It's only depressing IF - your selection criteria is EXTREMELY narrow.Talk about a speed-dating marathon.
Because most of that population - isn't looking. Remember, one of those options is - "married". Not everyone is looking.If you're so selective only 4 percent of the country meet your criteria, then that 4% probably meets the criteria for 96% everyone else so why would they choose you?
It's only depressing IF - your selection criteria is EXTREMELY narrow.
But it's like listing all of the food items in the store and saying, see, your chance of getting a good steak is one in a million, because of all the things there that AREN'T steak.
Except you go straight to the meat section, over to beef, and pick out which kind of steak you want. The "probability" never matters.
UNLESS - you add criteria to make it nigh impossible - like decide when you go to Harris Teeter you only want grass fed Kobe beef that was butchered that morning, and your chances go down to ZERO, because there won't be any in that venue.
That's the relevant point - HIGH selectivity that drives the POPULATION of candidates to zero is more pertinent than "chances".
Mental illness in the 21st-centurywtf am I watching
Women double their dating pool by targeting top 10% men, (they're just married)