Slashdot Mirror


Stats Show iPhone Owners Get More Sex

An anonymous reader writes "According to OK Cupid's survey of 552,000 user pictures iPhone users have more sexual partners than BlackBerry or Android owners. By age 30, the average male iPhone user has had about 10 partners while female iPhone users have had 12. By contrast, BlackBerry users hover around 8 partners and Android users have a mere 6. As the blog's author's wryly observe: 'Finally, statistical proof that iPhone users aren't just getting f*@ked by Apple.'"

280 of 397 comments (clear)

  1. Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Stats are wrong.

    1. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by think_nix · · Score: 4, Funny

      yeah they didn't even mention the n900 (maemo) I cannot count how many times some nice looking lady asked me "whats that ? looks neat!"

    2. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      They also didn't state whether it was heterosexual or homosexual!

    3. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Flea+of+Pain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ouch! I'm an anonymous reader now? I knew Samzenpus had a bad rep around here, but to completely strip out the name of the submitter...that is a little low.

      --
      Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
    4. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Seumas · · Score: 5, Funny

      I use my Palm.

    5. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      iPhones and similar stuff are toys for mainstream users. n900 is for serious sysadmin (or even programmer) work. Of course the second group tends to get no sex.

      The physical keyboard makes it a subnotebook with superior portability and networking capabilities. It has its flaws -- having to press Fn to get numbers makes typing, say, IP addresses a bitch, and 256MB main RAM cripples compilation speed even if the CPU is decent, but in the two weeks I have one, I spent productively a lot of time that would be otherwise wasted, in places I wouldn't take a laptop to.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    6. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by PowerEdge · · Score: 1

      Are you not aware of the number 0?

    7. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Pawnn · · Score: 1

      Did any of those times lead to...more activity?

    8. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by somersault · · Score: 1, Redundant

      in the two weeks I have one, I spent productively a lot of time that would be otherwise wasted having sex, in places I wouldn't take a laptop to.

      FTFY :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    9. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have a Droid for that purpose.

      --
      SSC
    10. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      I spent productively a lot of time that would be otherwise wasted having sex

      That would kind of distract the driver, or spook the passers-by, depending on what time you're talking about :p

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    11. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by kurokame · · Score: 4, Informative

      Given that this particular case of horrible statistics fail was all over the net for a while before it hit Slashdot, I'm guessing "an anonymous reader" may be code for "several dozen readers all submitted it at once."

    12. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Nursie · · Score: 1

      N900 owner here. I'm above the iPhone numbers personally :)

    13. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Informative

          It would have been nice if they referenced the original article, and used known information about the site, it would have made things clearer.

          The sample set was 30 year old men and women. OKCupid is all about asking questions and matching people. There's no way to verify your answers. I could say "I've had thousands of sexual partners."

          The entire question becomes, how many partners would do you want to advertise that you've had? If you say too few, you may be a prude, an asshole, or just plain unattractive. If you say too many, you're a slut.

          So the chart simply shows that iPhone users tend to claim higher numbers, while Android and Blackberry users don't feel the need to compensate as much by claiming large numbers.

          Do I really need to say that I had sexual relations with well over a dozen women between the ages of 16 to 30? It's probably not in my best interest. Obviously lying and saying that I had only slept with a very small number would be bad. You want to convey the message that you're not a slut, but you also don't want to appear inexperienced. For guys, we won't find too many women who actively seek out virgins. Women tend to like to have partners that know what they're doing.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    14. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by master_p · · Score: 1

      You've just proven how important case sensitivity is.

    15. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Inconexo · · Score: 1

      That's why Android users can have porn.

    16. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by vidnet · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm sure they melt like butter when you mention how it comes factory loaded with xterm and all the software updates are via apt.

      Here is an updated version of the graph, with the N900 included.

    17. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      I have a Desire...

    18. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by Kvasio · · Score: 1

      stats are ok - they include all these cases when iPhone owner bends over while Apple and AT&T wait behind

    19. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Indeed - they also forgot the market leader, Symbian. Not to mention that hundreds of millions of other phones that are sold (usually called "feature" phones) that make up the bulk of the market.

      It's a common tactic to only include the platforms that perform worse than the Iphone, in an attempt to falsely make the Iphone look number one. Doing it for such a pathetic statistic as this is particularly low, however.

      And yes, I do beat the Iphone average. (Obviously this is because I run Symbian, duh! Or rather not, since most of those came before I had a Symbian phone - and I suspect that most Iphone users' counts will be before they owned an Iphone, unless they were really inactive except for the last 3 years...)

    20. Re:Phone sex over video chat doesn't count by celesteh · · Score: 1

      My n900 has never gotten me laid, but it did once incite phone envy in a geek with a very hot girlfriend. I might have offered a trade, except I might have gotten stuck with his andrioid.

  2. More sex? Not necessarily by Dunbal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Another way to look at the study is that iPhone owners are insufferable idiots not prepared to make the compromises necessary to stay in a long term relationship, hence the greater number of "partners".

    Either way I hope they enjoy their HPV induced cervical cancer and other sexually transmitted diseases.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by hipp5 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Another way to look at the study is that iPhone owners are insufferable idiots not prepared to make the compromises necessary to stay in a long term relationship

      What are you talking about? They've been faithful to Apple and AT&T for almost four years now.

      Either way I hope they enjoy their HPV induced cervical cancer and other sexually transmitted diseases.

      Well now you're just being jealous. You'd take 10 sex partners if you could get 'em.

    2. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Either way I hope they enjoy their HPV induced cervical cancer and other sexually transmitted diseases.

      What? I heard if I went with Apple I wouldn't have to deal with viruses or infections!

      Are you saying the birth control app is useless too?!?!?!?

    3. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, because everyone that has had multiple partners in the past gets STDs.

      You sound like a public service announcement from the Eisenhower administration.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    4. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      I agree with your sentiment but do I sense a bit of jealousy in the intonation of your post? Who says they can't just be in polygamous long term relationships? Monogamy has only been the societal norm for a few hundred years.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    5. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by qoncept · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously? You are SO JEALOUS that you are wishing harm upon people who know how to have a good time? Wasn't there a character in Robin Hood like that? Maybe it was Men in Tights.

      --
      Whale
    6. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by lymond01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Either way I hope they enjoy their HPV induced cervical cancer

      I thought the latest studies showed conclusively that iPhones don't cause cancer.

      I'll wait to see if I'm modded Funny or Insightful.

    7. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, because everyone that has had multiple partners in the past gets STDs.

            No, but there is a positive correlation between number of partners and the probability of catching a disease. It's just like buying more lottery tickets, only the odds aren't millions to one - only hundreds to one. Enjoy your prize.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    8. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by g0bshiTe · · Score: 3, Funny

      The birth control app never passed approval for the app store.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    9. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Trust me, being widely known as an avid slashdot reader is a MUCH more effective form of birth control!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    10. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Monogamy has only been the societal norm for a few hundred years

      Well, that completely depends on what part of the world you're talking about (polygamy is still practiced in parts of Africa for instance), but if you're talking about Europe / North America, you're just absolutely and completely wrong. Polygamy has not been a regular part of culture in most parts of Europe for millennia. The Greeks and the Romans didn't practice polygamy, and with Christianization neither did the few parts of the rest of Europe that did practice polygamy (ie, the Vikings). Certainly I think it's safe to say that in most of Europe, polygamy has been extinct for a thousand plus years, and in other parts, several thousand years perhaps.

      Amongst the other major cultures of the world, most Islamicate countries allowed polygamy until relatively recently, though depending on the country, the number of practicing polygamists could vary widely (polygamy was only for the very wealthy in many areas).

      With regards to China I don't have as much knowledge, but as I understand it polygamy has been rare / forbidden amongst Han for thousands of years (while like in Islamic areas, the wealthy may have a mistress who is in effect a second wife).

      And regardless, even in areas where polygamy was allowed, thanks to population realities, I don't think you could even say that polygamy was the "societal norm." Think if you have a roughly 50/50 male/female ratio (I know that's not accurate, but close enough for these purposes) ...how do you expect the average male to have 2 wives? Or 3 wives? Or 4 wives (the max allowed in Islam)? There aren't enough women to go around!

    11. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by TerranFury · · Score: 4, Informative

      only hundreds to one.

      Actually 3:1, according to most studies(!)...

      Most of that is herpes...

    12. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Another way to look at the study is that iPhone owners are insufferable idiots not prepared to make the compromises necessary to stay in a long term relationship, hence the greater number of "partners"."

      Who wants to bang the same chick night after night after night?

      Ok, it might be good for some...but variety is the spice of life.

      Heard the old joke?

      "I'm gonna invent a new version of Playboy just for married men...

      Every night......same chick"

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    13. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Dunbal · · Score: 1, Troll

      You are SO JEALOUS

            It's the fact that you think I'm jealous of a silly gadget that makes you the type of person you are. I mean, we're not talking the $5 million mansion in the south of France, or the $2 million Bugatti here. You think I am jealous of your $400 phone? Right...

            Take a look in the mirror and tell me what you see.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    14. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by noidentity · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you saying the birth control app is useless too?!?!?!?

      No, that one actually works, though running the transmitter at maximum power runs the battery down fairly quickly (be sure to keep the phone in your "front" pocket for maximum effectiveness).

    15. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by stonedcat · · Score: 1

      However... Apple has submitted a patent for it after the fact.

      --
      You can't take the sky from me.
    16. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      If the "prize" is getting to experience different types of sex with multiple partners, I am already thoroughly enjoying it.

      The funny thing is, no matter how many partners you have had yourself, anyone with more partners than you is a slut and anyone with fewer partners is a prude.

      BTW, I have never had a STD in my life and I have had over 20 sexual partners. Just because you choose to have sex with a variety of different people doesn't mean you are not capable of making responsible decisions about who those people are. Which would be more dangerous - having sex with a couple high-risk behavior types, or many low risk ones?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    17. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      There were enough women to go around when men would go off and get killed in battles and hunting expeditions. Nowadays there is closer to a 1 to 1 correspondence of men and women living beyond reproductive age.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    18. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      Just get the condom app and you will be ok.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    19. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      neither it seems, interesting.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    20. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      And yet, according to a genetic study 80% of women have reproduced while only 40% of men reproduced. 60% died without ever reproducing. Until recently, the winners reproduced and the losers didn't. But even women losers managed to reproduce most the time.

      Polygamy (formal as wives or informal as lovers/mistresses) is very common for the wealthy now and in the past.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    21. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by drewhk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As someone on another blog observed, the REAL outcome is that no matter what phone you own -- girls has more partner than men.

    22. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by rsborg · · Score: 1

      Are you saying the birth control app is useless too?!?!?!?

      Here's your fully functional birth control app.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    23. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      I was thinking, not to beat a dead horse or anything, but perhaps iPhone users tend to be less technically inclined, and/or more interested in trendiness.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    24. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Moridineas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And yet, according to a genetic study 80% of women have reproduced while only 40% of men reproduced. 60% died without ever reproducing. Until recently, the winners reproduced and the losers didn't. But even women losers managed to reproduce most the time.

      There are many reasons for this in premodern societies. (and here I'll use premodern to mean pre industrial revolution roughly)

      1) Traditionally mens jobs were more dangerous, and fatalities among men were more common
      2) Traditionally men often had to fight in defense of home/state/county/country/whatever in higher numbers, where fatalities were high.
      3) In many more traditional societies, women HAD to get married and have children. Less so for men. Maybe not the norm, but think of such famous examples as Newton. It's really only recently even in the US where there is not as much a stigma of a woman choosing to either not get married or not have children.
      4) Polygamy or multiple consorts/concubines/girlfriends/what not IS a reason. One rich man can support several wives. Polyandry is not nearly as common.

      Polygamy (formal as wives or informal as lovers/mistresses) is very common for the wealthy now and in the past.

      But polygamy means one thing--having more than one spouse. Having affairs doesn't mean polygamy.

    25. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      !Monogamy is not (only) Polygamy

      Sure, no argument from me. Many people in monogamous cultures have affairs. Polyandry by comparison worldwide is so rare as to be statistically insignificant. So what's the problem?

      In addition Polygamy is often held to include practice of taking a consort in addition to a wife, and not just having multiple wives.

      No, polygamy means having multiple spouses.

      And the romans and greeks definitely did not conform to monogamy.

      Oh?

    26. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by paeanblack · · Score: 1

      I thought the latest studies showed conclusively that iPhones don't cause cancer.

      That's only if you hold your finger in the right spot.

    27. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

      Wow, bitter much?

    28. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by ooshna · · Score: 1

      In the words of George Carlin "I've never fucked a 10 but one night I fucked five 2s."

    29. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by ooshna · · Score: 1

      Once they realized it was too late they tried to patent iAbort

    30. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Statiscally speaking you probably have caught at least 1 strain of hpv, but considering the vast majority of strains are harmless and get cleared within a year it isn't a big deal.

    31. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      citation please.

    32. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I have no motivation to lie. I don't care what anonymous people on the internet think of me.

      I have been tested many times for STDs and come up negative on everything every time.

      The only time I ever had sex with a minor was when I was a minor myself. I have no interest in children in any way, shape or form.


      I don't understand what is so hard to understand that if you don't have high risk sexual partners, and practice safe sex as a rule why it is so surprising that you don't end up with a STD. That is kind of the whole point.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    33. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Toonol · · Score: 1

      Monogamy has only been the societal norm for a few hundred years.

      Read some history, don't just seize upon and parrot untrue factoids.

    34. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.emedicinehealth.com/genital_herpes/article_em.htm

      That alone states that there are 45 million cases of geneital herpes in the US. There are around 309 million people in the US.

      So 1 in 7 people in this country have genital herpes.

      The following states that 1 in 5 people in the US have SOME STD:
      http://www.agapeprc.org/std.php

      So while it's a bit short of 1 in 3, 1 in 5 is still not far off the mark (and MUCH more common than 1 in "hundreds"), and it's obvious that herpes makes up the majority of those cases.

      As mentioned in the linked article, a big reason behind it being more common than you'd think is that herpes (along with genital warts and several other diseases) is quite often asymptomatic. You can have it and have no ill effects, but still be able to transmit it to others.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    35. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by TerranFury · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the sources. I was using similar numbers -- 25% vs. your 20%. The issue was ratios vs. odds.

      3:1 odds for not having an STD <==> 1/(3+1) = 25% chance of having one.

      That's it.

    36. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by shermo · · Score: 1

      Yes but just because 1 in 5 people have an STD doesn't mean you have a 1 in 5 chance of a person you have sex with having an STD. I will be much higher, because the people who have sex have STDs.

      Or put another way, if only 50 million people in the US have sex, and all of them have an STD, then your chance of getting an STD are 100%.

      1 in 3 doesn't seem implausible.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    37. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a guy that once dropped a girl because he felt too cramped, now only to continually have girls lose interest after a month of dating him. So enjoy your 10 partners and 10 months of being sexually active.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    38. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      I was thinking in the same line... someone who is married has probably more sex in a year than someone who manages to have five one-night-stands in that same year. So less partners == more sex. So I would conclude from these statistics that iPhone users have less sex than other handset users. After all they obviously have to spend more time finding a new partner.

    39. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      They do it with girls most of the time or so?

      Imagine every woman to have on average five sex partners over her life. Imagine they are 100% heterosexual, only doing it with men. And only one at a time, no orgies. As long as there is an equal number of men as there are women, men should also have on average five sex partners over their lives.

      From various statistics it seems that some 95% of men is pure heterosexual, and a slightly lower number for women. The number of men and women in this world is also almost equal. So there is very little room for difference between numbers of sex partners for men and women.

    40. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by dimeglio · · Score: 1

      insufferable idiots not prepared to make the compromises necessary to stay in a long term relationship

      I fail to see the relation between number of partners and compromises towards long term relationships. You can have many partners each one can be in a long term relationship.

      Note that just a few porn stars iPhone users can skew the statistics. Also BlackBerry users are business men who would not necessarily disclose their promiscuity even anonymously. I'm really worried about droid users.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    41. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      So you want a "long term relationship" so that means everyone else must live up to your social needs or they are idiots?

      Some people want committed relationships. Some people don't. Short term. Long term. Casual. One night stands.

      I guess another way to look at your post is you've got a bad case of sour grapes because someone got laid more than you...

      Hey, you started the judgment game. I just thought I'd play along.

    42. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Another way to look at the study is that iPhone owners are insufferable idiots not prepared to make the compromises necessary to stay in a long term relationship, hence the greater number of "partners".

      Either way I hope they enjoy their HPV induced cervical cancer and other sexually transmitted diseases.

      You don't have many nice words to say to iPhone users, do you?

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    43. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by DeBaas · · Score: 1

      What? I heard if I went with Apple I wouldn't have to deal with viruses or infections!

      Are you saying the birth control app is useless too?!?!?!?

      Iphone 4 now comes with the complementary condom for your 'antenna'

      --
      ---
    44. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by drewhk · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

    45. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by zig007 · · Score: 1

      Yep! Been there, done that.

      Well, actually I haven't, this *is* slashdot, (not sparta), you know.

      Reaching the required three partners would require significant extrabasemental time leading to intolerable amounts of exposure to sunshine and other people.

      --
      Baboons are cute.
    46. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by qoncept · · Score: 1

      I totally admire that you can tell so much about me from one comment. Especially one that went right over your head, which totally blows my mind. I wasn't talking about a phone.

      --
      Whale
    47. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by radtea · · Score: 1

      Traditionally mens jobs were more dangerous, and fatalities among men were more common

      Traditionally? You mean: in the modern world, today.

      If someone dies on the job today the odds are over 90% they are male. Most of the really dangerous jobs like farming, lumbering and so on are still overwhelmingly dominated by men.

      It's true that everything has become safer, so this is no longer a major demographic issue, but don't kid yourself: "Men last!" is still alive and well as a slogan (it is usually stated in the converse form, mind, but the logical implication is inescapable.)

      All that said: male-male mate competition is a huge factor in human evolution. It explains why we have such a high degree of sexual dimorphism, which is only seen in species where males compete for multiple mating opportunties. All the "just so" stories about hunting and crap are just that: crap. Male lions are bigger than female lions, but guess which one does the majority of the hunting?

      Male humans are big and agressive not because we compete over external resources or hunt down wild animals, but because our male ancestors were able to intimidate and bully their way into more-or-less exclusive control of more than one female. This doesn't make polygamy right or appropriate for modern society, but it is the key to understanding why we are the way we are, and therefore controlling and channeling our aggressive and inappropriate impulses into avenues that are more useful and productive than violence and war.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    48. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      He's wrong to say it's only been a recent social norm. OTOH, it's still true that such people may include those in multiple relationships - polyamory is practiced in Western society (although admittedly, it wouldn't be that much of a factor in the statistics).

      And regardless, even in areas where polygamy was allowed, thanks to population realities, I don't think you could even say that polygamy was the "societal norm." Think if you have a roughly 50/50 male/female ratio (I know that's not accurate, but close enough for these purposes) ...how do you expect the average male to have 2 wives? Or 3 wives? Or 4 wives (the max allowed in Islam)? There aren't enough women to go around!

      Er, maybe you could have women with multiple relationships too. Only allowing one-man-many-women is just one form (which unfortunately gets most publicity).

    49. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Traditionally? You mean: in the modern world, today.

      You're absolutely right, and I should have made that point more in the way of "MOST traditionally male jobs used to have high fatality rates." For most men in the workforce today, there's not a huge risk of being killed on the job.

      For women, the rate has definitely gone up, especially since women joined the factory workplaces in huge numbers (eg, Triangle Shirtwaist fire), and have increased their numbers as police, soldiers, etc.

      All that said: male-male mate competition is a huge factor in human evolution.

      That's another great reason I forgot to mention. Prestige and conquest. For instance, it's estimated that a huge percentage of males in Central Asia are direct descendants of Genghis Khan (8%+). Similarly in South America (though differing greatly by country) HUGE percentages of the mestizo / native population are descended from European males and indigenous females. Relatively few descended from indigenous males and European females.

    50. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by potat0man · · Score: 1

      Worth it.

    51. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by marxmarv · · Score: 1

      It is possible to have sex without being married, and some cultures don't really care whether some organ of society has blessed your union or not.

      Now recalculate.

      --
      /. -- the Free Republic of technology.
    52. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by marxmarv · · Score: 1

      Contrary to what is taught in US schools today, protection from disease comes from barriers and knowledge, not authorizations in triplicate from your church and the county clerk.

      --
      /. -- the Free Republic of technology.
    53. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      I think you're confused by something here. Polygamy refers to having multiple spouses at the same time. A spouse is specifically a partner who some organ of society--either church or state or society (depending on time and place)--has recognized in some formalized fashion.

      You're quite correct when you talk about sex without marriage (it's absolutely beyond the obvious to even state that), but I fail to see the relevance to anything I said?

      some cultures don't really care whether some organ of society has blessed your union or not

      Interesting, where do marriages take place where church, state, or society doesn't come into it at all?

    54. Re:More sex? Not necessarily by hitmark · · Score: 1

      then consider that men stays able to reproduce for longer then females.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  3. Bad science: not more sex, more partners by hessian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This study suggests that iPhone users report more sexual partners.

    That doesn't necessarily mean more sex.

    One guy who marries a woman, loves her and has mind-blowing sex with her three times a week, is clearly ahead of some guy with an iPhone who had ten one-night stands.

    1. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by WarwickRyan · · Score: 5, Funny

      > One guy who marries a woman, loves her and has mind-blowing sex with
      > her three times a week, is clearly ahead of some guy with an iPhone who
      > had ten one-night stands.

      You're not married, are you? :)

    2. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately most Slashdotters will never experience either scenario.

    3. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by HaZardman27 · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I thought when I first saw this.

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
    4. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by kick6 · · Score: 1

      One guy who marries a woman, loves her and has mind-blowing sex with her three times a week, is clearly ahead of some guy with an iPhone who had ten one-night stands.

      Considering the possibility that the wife could be nagging at all times while NOT engaged in coitus, your conclusion is fallacious.

    5. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      Actually, 10 one night stands a week does beat out 3 times a week from marriage. You clearly haven't done the math.

      Also, as far as I know, there is no rule that a one night stand has to be the whole night.

    6. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by alta · · Score: 1

      Here, let me fix that for you...

      One guy who marries a woman, loves her and has mind-blowing sex with her three times, is clearly ahead of some guy with an iPhone who had ten one-night stands.

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    7. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Hatta · · Score: 5, Funny

      This ignores the Coolidge Effect. Shortly, novelty leads to better sex. To quote the wiki:

      The term comes from an old joke, according to which U.S. President Calvin Coolidge and his wife allegedly visited a poultry farm. During the tour, Mrs. Coolidge inquired of the farmer how his farm managed to produce so many fertile eggs with such a small number of roosters. The farmer proudly explained that his roosters performed their duty dozens of times each day.

      "Tell that to Mr. Coolidge," pointedly replied the First Lady.

      The President, overhearing the remark, asked the farmer, "Does each rooster service the same hen each time?"

      "No," replied the farmer, "there are many hens for each rooster."

      "Tell that to Mrs. Coolidge," replied the President.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    8. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Not financially, he isn't.

    9. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by toastar · · Score: 1

      Actually, 10 one night stands a week does beat out 3 times a week from marriage. You clearly haven't done the math.

      Also, as far as I know, there is no rule that a one night stand has to be the whole night.

      I think It's pretty safe to assume if your on slashdot you probably haven't had experience with 10 one night stands in a single week.

    10. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Bryan3000000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're not doing it right. :)

    11. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "One guy who marries a woman, loves her and has mind-blowing sex with her three times a week, is clearly ahead of some guy with an iPhone who had ten one-night stands."

      Ok...I'm still thinking the guy with 10 one night stands wins.

      Assuming the guy with 10 one night stands is in one week too...10 times having sex, vs 3 times for the married guy. Or if only one time a night, over 10 nights..he still beats the married guy.

      That and he doesn't risk losing half the shit he owns if he goes in search of new partners for more sex.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    12. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      . . . has mind-blowing sex with her . . .

      You're doing it wrong. :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    13. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by tizzo · · Score: 1

      This study suggests that iPhone users report more sexual partners.

      That doesn't necessarily mean more sex.

      What it does strongly suggest, however, is fewer repeat performances. And let's face it - for guys, no matter what phone they carry, that can only mean fewer requests for repeat performances (or more "hell no" responses to their own requests). And while the same doesn't apply to women in general, since iPhone users tend to be indiscriminate about things, it may very well apply to the women in the study.

      All of which leads to one inescapable conclusion. iPhone owners of either sex are lousy lovers. Ouch.

    14. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Antisyzygy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I dont know why everyone is getting "in one week" from that. He means 10 one night stands in a life time. Not to mention, what is the appeal of having 10 sexual partners in a week if you do not plan to impregnate all of them? I know your body plans this without you thinking about it, but seriously, develop your frontal lobe a little and get some self control. It only seems appealing if you aren't getting enough sex, but you would tire of it after a few weeks unless you have an addiction problem. Yes, Ive had 10+ sexual partners in my life, Im 27 and I do not own, nor ever will own apple products.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    15. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      He never said in one week for the 10 one night stands. He's arguing consistent sex is better than non-consistent sex.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    16. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Yes, Ive had 10+ sexual partners in my life, Im 27 "

      You're still young...but get busy man!!

      By the time I was your age, I'd already lost count of the number of girls I'd banged.

      And back in my day..they weren't as easy as they are today!

      And man...if you only think of sex as a way to procreate, I feel for you man. I think you have it backwards, marriage is only for those that want to procreate....sex is for everyone.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    17. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by gerddie · · Score: 1

      "One guy who marries a woman, loves her and has mind-blowing sex with her three times a week, is clearly ahead of some guy with an iPhone who had ten one-night stands."

      Ok...I'm still thinking the guy with 10 one night stands wins.

      Assuming the guy with 10 one night stands is in one week too...10 times having sex, vs 3 times for the married guy. Or if only one time a night, over 10 nights..he still beats the married guy.

      I think grandpa was talking about sex 3 times mind blowing sex every week vs. ten times sex of unspecified quality in an unspecified time frame. After four weeks, the married guy is ahead of the iPhone guy - only counting numbers.

    18. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      But if you can get 1 night stands you can get consistent sex.

    19. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, what is the appeal of having 10 sexual partners in a week if you do not plan to impregnate all of them?

      You're either a female or a eunuch. Either way, I'm guessing you don't do sports fishing, either.

    20. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      But if you can get 1 night stands you can get consistent sex.

      If this were true, iPhone users would have had HUNDREDS of partners, but this isn't reflected in the numbers.

    21. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by dangitman · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think It's pretty safe to assume if your on slashdot you probably haven't had experience with 10 one night stands in a single week.

      I think it's pretty safe to assume that if you've had 10 one-night stands in a week, you don't live on the planet Earth, as there are only seven nights per week here.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    22. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by WarwickRyan · · Score: 3, Funny

      > You're not doing it right. :)

      Well, I do own an Android....

    23. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Eric+MB+Lard+MD · · Score: 5, Funny
      I think you may be on to something with "fewer requests for repeat performances".

      My guess is that partners call back the iphone users to arrange a repeat, but end up having so many dropped calls they just give up.

    24. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      No. I just have had a long ass string of girlfriends, done a few one nighters and decided Id rather get laid whenever I want rather than go out and waste time trying. And sport fishing is one of the most boring "sports" I have ever seen. Fishing is fun when the intent is to eat it.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    25. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      My argument is, people look at sex as either a badge of pride or a very pleasurable act or both. You can get the pleasurable act from a girlfriend. The excitement of being with someone new is a valid point, but you can just swap out girlfriends when you get bored. As far as the badge of pride option, quantify WHY you would be prideful of having so many partners and what it even means. Literally the only rational reason would be because you happened to reproduce with lots of bitches. We don't reproduce as often anymore with sex, so we are tricked into thinking is awesome by our brains. Basically, my argument is that you can get what you need out of fewer people, and thus this whole Iphone users getting more sex thing is overrated.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    26. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      I challenge you to find a man and woman who have been married for 20 years (hell 10 years), ask them about their sex lives currently and find ANY in the entire country who use the word 'mind blowing' to describe it. It is not possible to have mind blowing sex with the same person 3 times a week for that long...

      great...maybe (slim chance)
      good...for sure
      satifying...definitely

      but mind blowing...get real.

    27. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by virtualXTC · · Score: 1

      Once you've had sex a few hundred times you might have a different perspective on this. If you get to the point where it's easy to have sex so that it's no longer in short supply, it's not the most fulfilling thing. It's basically a waste of time and energy.

      And yes, I'm doing it right.

      ...then she's doing it wrong!

    28. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by SimonInOz · · Score: 1

      >> I think It's pretty safe to assume if your on slashdot you probably haven't had experience with 10 one night stands in a single week.

      You just don't get invited to the right parties, do you? Trust me, it's possible to do that.
      Oh - you mean one partner for the WHOLE night ... sorry

      "Pushing up the average since - oh, ages ago" - and yes, I own an Android (phone, not sex partner .. mind you ...). 10 - pah ...

      --
      "Cats like plain crisps"
    29. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Necrotica · · Score: 2, Funny

      > One guy who marries a woman, loves her and has mind-blowing sex with > her three times a week, is clearly ahead of some guy with an iPhone who > had ten one-night stands.

      You're not married, are you? :)

      Given the smiley at the end of your reply, I'm guessing you're not either.

    30. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by dangitman · · Score: 1

      You just don't get invited to the right parties, do you? Trust me, it's possible to do that.
      Oh - you mean one partner for the WHOLE night ... sorry

      Well, yeah. "One night stand" has a different meaning than "casual sex." It's basically a one night passionate relationship.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    31. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by mjwx · · Score: 1

      This study suggests that iPhone users report more sexual partners. That doesn't necessarily mean more sex.

      Actually it means neither. It means Iphone owners spend more time filling out surveys about sex and trying to link it to their phone.

      As an Android owner and having 4 threesomes since late may (OK they were all in early July) I dont hear the same form Iphone owners, apparently they have a problem with multi-tasking.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    32. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I'm over 40, and I've had one. I'm married to her. Why, yes, I am a Blackberry owner, why do you ask? :)

      I bet I'm happier than a lot of 19 year olds desperately trying to get their paws on the loneliest/drunkest chick in the bar.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    33. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      Im married now too. As a side note, my buddy has had way more women in bed than I and he uses a blackberry too. I think its the smart phone for investment types.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    34. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by themoneyish · · Score: 1

      Married people are not allowed on Slashdot.

      Also, 3 times a week after marriage is impossible. Don't you mean 3 times a day with your girlfriend?

    35. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      You mean those scenarios are mutually exclusive?

    36. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by DeadboltX · · Score: 1

      If iPhone owners have all these sexual partners, does that mean they are more likely to have an STD as well?

    37. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 1

      Considering the possibility that the wife could be nagging at all times while NOT engaged in coitus, your conclusion is fallacious.

      My ex-wife used to be really good at giving me fallacious. I used to get fallacious all. Night. Long.

      --
      "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
    38. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by binkzz · · Score: 1

      I think It's pretty safe to assume if your on slashdot you probably haven't had experience with 10 one night stands in a single week.

      I think it's pretty safe to assume that if you've had 10 one-night stands in a week, you don't live on the planet Earth, as there are only seven nights per week here.

      I suspect they were planning a Denial-of-Service attack.

      --
      'For we walk by faith, not by sight.' II Corinthians 5:7
    39. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by thtrgremlin · · Score: 1

      Actually trying to imagine this. A hat trick is one thing, but sleeping with 10 different people you have never slept with before, but never want to sleep with again, I am thinking something is SERIOUSLY wrong here. You might think after maybe 5 or so you might reconsider your game plan; Either you need better partners, or you are in desperate need of some training. In my experience, people that like what they get come back for more.

      --
      Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!
    40. Re:Bad science: not more sex, more partners by marxmarv · · Score: 1

      Basically, my argument is that you can get what you need out of fewer people, and thus this whole Iphone users getting more sex thing is overrated.

      I don't disagree with either part of your statement, even though I don't agree that one follows from the other. However, monogamy is not necessarily equally or more satisfying than having sex with people with whom you share a lesser bond. I'm all for keeping a small circle of play partners and one or more close emotional/life partners, as long as everyone knows about everyone up front.

      --
      /. -- the Free Republic of technology.
  4. Bad headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    More partners != more sex.

  5. iPhone owners are narcissistic assholes by GungaDan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    who readily lie to survey takers to make themselves appear "cooler" than they are. Shock and amazement to follow.

    --
    Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
    1. Re:iPhone owners are narcissistic assholes by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Why do you have so much hate?

    2. Re:iPhone owners are narcissistic assholes by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      So, you've taken this study, read it as something completely different, i.e, something that confirms your prejudices, with no justification for doing so, and got modded "informative".

      Only on Slashdot!

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    3. Re:iPhone owners are narcissistic assholes by mattbee · · Score: 1

      This wasn't an opt-in survey, they looked at the picture metadata from the contact pictures on a dating site, versus the number of (declared) sexual partners when those people signed up for the site. I think.

      --
      Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
    4. Re:iPhone owners are narcissistic assholes by thtrgremlin · · Score: 1

      But all bets are off if it gets them laid by the surveyor.

      --
      Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!
  6. Correlation != Causality by DerFlob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Correlation != Causality

    1. Re:Correlation != Causality by stagg · · Score: 1

      But it does wink suggestively at it.

    2. Re:Correlation != Causality by russlar · · Score: 1

      Exhibit A: me.

      --
      Anybody want my mod points?
  7. Help by w0mprat · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm trying to find a link to the study that showed homoexual men have more partners and less long term relationships.

    --
    After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    1. Re:Help by eln · · Score: 1

      Here you go.

    2. Re:Help by kanweg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, if gays are not allowed to marry, such as in some backwaters where the freedom of some somehow requires limiting the freedom of others, they don't get the opportunity to get stuck in a relationship.

      Bert

    3. Re:Help by SomePoorSchmuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't get the moderation of this as "funny". I think it's a fair point. I would be willing to bet that, technologically, homosexual men are much more likely to be Early Adopters than heterosexual men of the same age/race/region. The iPhone and its apps are the portable equivalent of a 1998 AOL account. I would not at all be surprised that if you were able to remove all homosexual men from the survey, the difference in results would disappear.

      There's also the other side of the situation to consider: a large part of the Blackberry market has been driven by corporate usage, rather than the free-living artists, musicians, graphic designers, videographers, members of academia, and the wealthy, who have been Apple's prime customers and are more likely to choose an iPhone..

      --

      Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
    4. Re:Help by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      The biggest difference interestingly is on the female side: 6.1 for android to 12.3 for iPhone. Males report 6.0 for Android to 10.0 for iPhone. And the number of people reporting having had same-sex partners is around 5% only.

    5. Re:Help by SomePoorSchmuck · · Score: 1

      The biggest difference interestingly is on the female side: 6.1 for android to 12.3 for iPhone. Males report 6.0 for Android to 10.0 for iPhone. And the number of people reporting having had same-sex partners is around 5% only.

      But aren't the main results talking about an average number of sex partners? If that small 5% are averaging 6-15 different sex partners per year, it only takes a few years with an iPhone 3G for that small group to greatly skew the average total number of partners.

      --

      Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
  8. whelp... by gblfxt · · Score: 1

    i guess no one here has an iphone, im guessing all you supposed iphone users were actually just trolls?

  9. This cannot stand! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's start an open source project to fix this miserable discrepancy.

    1. Re:This cannot stand! by stagg · · Score: 1

      A crowd sourced approach to the problem?

    2. Re:This cannot stand! by broken_chaos · · Score: 1

      If you do the crowd part right, you'll rocket past the iPhone users in an afternoon...

    3. Re:This cannot stand! by jd2112 · · Score: 1

      Simple: Hit on women with iPhones. According to this study you are statistically more likely to get lucky.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    4. Re:This cannot stand! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hopefully it doesn't end up as an open sores project...

  10. Flawed conclusion by wolfemi1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, this says that iPhone users REPORT sex with MORE PEOPLE than other phones. Maybe they're just more concerned with their image than users of other phones? ;)

    1. Re:Flawed conclusion by Gazoogleheimer · · Score: 1

      Precisely!

    2. Re:Flawed conclusion by stms · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that Women say they have a lot of sexual partners because they're concerned with their image?

    3. Re:Flawed conclusion by dbcad7 · · Score: 1

      Well.. Everything is better.. and you get more.. when you have an iPhone.. I mean otherwise it would be stupid to waste (I mean invest) money on an object that is so cool and awesome that just having it, means you get laid more.. I mean, this is how the real world works after all... Brush my teeth, dress nice, have some personality.. all a waste of time.. All I need is a cool phone, and a stick to fight them off with.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
  11. It could mean Android users are better partners! by kawabago · · Score: 1

    It doesn't necessarily mean they get more sex.

  12. The reality is ... by alexandre · · Score: 4, Funny

    Last week poll was about iPad users being rich and egoistical... and now about getting more sex?
    To some it up, they get ditched quickly even though they appear nice on the surface, they really are one sided assholes ;-P

    1. Re:The reality is ... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Or more likely the rich egoistical maniacs who aren't happy with the size of their e-penis now that they can't hold it in their left hand CLAIM to be getting more sex. But judging from the designer glasses and turtlenecks straight out of an episode of Will and Grace I'm not at all jealous.

      I kid, I kid. I love you iPhone users. Each and every one of you. Call me, I know you're interested ;-)

  13. Re:More sex yeah by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure most iphone users are getting plenty of same-sex partners, don't you worry.

  14. Dilbert said it best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Dilbert said it best, let me paraphrase...

    A 1000% growth of a really really small number is still a really small number.

    1. Re:Dilbert said it best by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      A 1000% growth of a really really small number is still a really small number.

      That's what she said - sigh.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  15. Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    iPhones are expensive.
    People who buy iPhones have a lot of money
    Women are often "attracted" to rich men
    iPhone owners get more sex.

    Just like how dumb people get more cancer.
    Dumb people smoke more.
    Smoking causes cancer.
    Dumb people get cancer more often.

    1. Re:Correlation is not causation by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

      If I could mod you up, I would, but not today.

      --
      Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
      The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
    2. Re:Correlation is not causation by mjwx · · Score: 1

      iPhones are expensive. People who buy iPhones have a lot of money Women are often "attracted" to rich men iPhone owners get more sex.

      Thrid world nations have much higher birth rates then first world nations.
      Higher birth rate means more sex.
      More sex means less wealth.
      Iphone owners (report) more sex.
      Iphone owners must be poor.

      Argument ad logicam is fun.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Correlation is not causation by Delarth799 · · Score: 1

      Well, look at it another way.
      iPhones cost lots of money
      Spending lots of money leaves little for everything else
      That means Lefty and Righty have to get creative ;)

  16. Statistical proof? Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Finally, statistical proof that iPhone users aren't just getting f*@ked by Apple

    I've read some of OKC blog posts before where they analyze the trend data of their site's members. The conclusions they reach are often highly questionable if not downright incorrect most of the time. Anyone with a basic college level understanding of statistics can easily see that their analysis is usually flawed.

  17. Sorry, Researchers by Revotron · · Score: 2, Informative

    Some of us prefer quality over quantity - just like how the more refined and matured drinkers enjoy a single bottle of some obscure microbrew over a 24-pack of Pissweiser (Or Pissweiser Light for the vain, calorie-conscious drunkard).

    Sex isn't passionate or anywhere near as enjoyable when you've got a veritable police lineup of cheap whores at your every beck and call. Sure, you may have more sexual partners but there are definite drawbacks and it cheapens the experience. Not to mention that stinging, burning feeling shortly afterward.

    1. Re:Sorry, Researchers by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Sex isn't passionate or anywhere near as enjoyable when you've got a veritable police lineup of cheap whores at your every beck and call. "

      Hmm...I'm guessing you're never had a veritable police lineup of cheap whores at your beck and call before?

      Different chicks have different things to offer man...some are better at riding you cowgirl (grinding), others give mindblowing blowjobs...others...well, will get really freaky.

      If you're stuck with one women (especially one that has eaten of the dreaded wedding cake)...you're pretty stuck in one dimensional land. It gets routine, you know when she'll put her foot there, when she'll moan oh baby...and you know every time she's gonna say "Oh Hell No you ain't putting it there".

      Hell, even if she did do special stuff for you before...9 times outta ten, wedding cake makes that disappear because she doesn't have to try to 'land' you any longer...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Sorry, Researchers by nomadic · · Score: 1

      just like how the more refined and matured drinkers enjoy a single bottle of some obscure microbrew

      I don't know if I'd use those adjectives to describe those kinds of drinkers. Far less flattering ones come to mind. And, let's be honest, in the end it's all just fermented grain juice.

    3. Re:Sorry, Researchers by ph0rk · · Score: 1

      We're talking 10 partners by age 30 - for most people that is fewer than one partner per year since becoming sexually active.

      Seems pretty normal to me.

      --
      semantics are everything!
    4. Re:Sorry, Researchers by Revotron · · Score: 1

      If your comment is an autobiography of your sex life, I feel bad for you and your spouse. Whatever you do to ignite each other's passions obviously isn't enough.

      If all your woman is concerned about is "landing" you and not actually making you happy or having a passionate relationship, you went wrong somewhere.

    5. Re:Sorry, Researchers by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Well... Most iPhone uses are at their what, fourth one now? Maybe it's related :)

    6. Re:Sorry, Researchers by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "If your comment is an autobiography of your sex life, I feel bad for you and your spouse. Whatever you do to ignite each other's passions obviously isn't enough."

      Why would I want a spouse? I don't want kids...so, no need to get married.

      If not getting married...why only stick with and bang only one chick? That gets boring really quick, and hell....half the fun is the hunt.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:Sorry, Researchers by Phoe6 · · Score: 1

      Software is like sex: it's better when it's free - Linus

      Linus torvalds was a visionary in this regard and Android OS right adopted Linux on that basis.

      --
      Senthil
    8. Re:Sorry, Researchers by thtrgremlin · · Score: 1

      Why not quantity and quality?

      --
      Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!
  18. proving most iPhone owners aren't geeks by swschrad · · Score: 1

    looking at Andriod, however... hmmm.... .

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  19. Lies, damn lies... by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    ... and iPhone statistics?

  20. Are those averages real? by spun · · Score: 1

    Ten or twelve partners? Is that really the average? I've had about thirty, and that's with three periods of monogamy two, five, and ten years long. So not counting the monogamous periods, about one partner per month, obviously some short term relationships were significantly longer than this and some much shorter, and I'm not counting the occasional dry spell. And all along I thought I was a nerdy dweeb who didn't get a lot of sex. There must be a hell of a lot of people waiting until marriage and never, ever cheating to offset all the people having lots of sex, which I categorize as over 100 sex partners.

    Either that, or people lie on surveys to sound more chaste than they are.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:Are those averages real? by Applekid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Either that, or people lie on surveys to sound more chaste than they are.

      As the saying goes:

      To find out how many partners a woman has been with, ask her and multiply by two.

      To find out how many partners a man has been with, ask him and divide by ten.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    2. Re:Are those averages real? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      My thoughts, too. I'm ugly as fuck and I've had more than that.

      Then again, I guess it's all relative. I was with a girl who had been with about five dozen people before we met and she consider 30-50 to be totally normal for a girl by about the age of 30 (and to be fair, it might not be that far off since women obviously have a lot less resistance than men in hooking up).

      Of course, people are afraid of seeming out of the normal range, so women deflate the number of their partners so they sound less slutty and men increase their numbers so they seem more impressive.

    3. Re:Are those averages real? by spun · · Score: 1

      Yeah, just about everyone I know claims thirty to fifty partners by age thirty, and I don't know any pick up artists or total sluts, these are just normal people.

      Wait a second. I just figured it out. You see, I was a late adopter of cell phones, I held off getting one until 2000. I've only been with one woman since then. And this poll, it was of cell phone users! Obviously, using any kind of cell phone drastically reduces your chances of getting laid.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    4. Re:Are those averages real? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Oh, ok. I was going to say something about Spun's claimed number of sexual partners, but after running them through your filter they appear to be at least somewhat plausible.

    5. Re:Are those averages real? by zstlaw · · Score: 1

      I suspect people tend to over-inflate their numbers rather than understate though women may understate numbers to try to not appear "easy". I suspect there are many people who either are monogamous or who don't like relationships. I think "players" are fairly rare and largely sleeping with the same pool of casual partners in a given area.

      I personally am reluctant to date anyone who has had more than 2 partners in last few years because I have worked closely with sex researchers and seen # of partners is greater than linear with risk of disease. You have more than 20 times the exposure to aids than I have. Each person you sleep with has had partners that might have slept with other people. It is like playing "six degrees to kevin bacon" except you can die. I respect that you have different tastes but I hope you use protection properly because you never know you have caught HIV until years later when complications begin. It only takes one partner who went to Vegas and slept with a prostitute to contaminate an entire social network of casual partners.

    6. Re:Are those averages real? by spun · · Score: 1

      You don't know anything about my sexual practices, so you can't claim I've had more exposure to HIV. Maybe I'm only into frottage. Engaging in one high risk behavior with one high risk partner puts you at hundreds of times the risk of engaging in multiple safe acts with multiple partners.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    7. Re:Are those averages real? by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      There must be a hell of a lot of people waiting until marriage and never, ever cheating

      Maybe their goal in life is to replicate Isaac Newton's greatest achievement.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    8. Re:Are those averages real? by thtrgremlin · · Score: 1

      I have heard several versions of that "saying", and not only is it a bit different each time, but I am starting to notice a pattern. Are you trying to say that Ron Jeremy has really only been with about 350 women?

      --
      Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!
    9. Re:Are those averages real? by spun · · Score: 1

      You're probably right. My numbers are inflated by a couple orgies I went to in my younger days, perhaps one of the best reasons for being a freaky hippie lefty activist: all the liberal women.

      But besides those two incidents I don't really have any one night stands. I'm no Casanova with the ladies myself, which is why I wondered at the numbers, if a dork like me can get that many partners, anyone can. Mostly, I've had medium term 1-3 month relationships and longer, non-monogamous 'friends with benefits' type relationships.

      Getting laid isn't that hard. First rule, lower your standards. A homely girl who is really into sex is hotter in the sack than a pretty girl who is half asleep. Second, it's a numbers game, if you were to simply stand on a street corner and ask the next fifty women who walked by if they wanted to get laid, you'd get slapped ten times but you'd get at least one who was interested.

      Third, don't be a 'nice guy.' Okay, be nice (backhanded compliments are bullshit and will only help get you crazy insecure girls), but you're looking to get laid, not make friends (primarily) so let her know, and keep focused on that. That way you won't waste time with girls who aren't interested. Finally, find a hobby that girls are into as well (NOT gaming or sci-fi or computers, you know, like cooking or writing or gardening or something) and go do it where you can meet girls. It helps if your hobby attracts liberal girls, maybe go volunteer for the Green party or something.

      I think number three is where most geeks lose the game, we are nice guys at heart and we don't want to be sexist assholes. But the thing is, women like sex too. Flirting is not being an asshole, if you don't come across as desperate then they will usually take it as a compliment even if they aren't interested. Smile, look her in the eyes, compliment her, touch her arm casually, and you will quickly know if she's into you or not.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  21. Ahhhhh, by NEDHead · · Score: 1

    Is there an app for that?

  22. Android Stats not Surprising by medv4380 · · Score: 1
    Given that the android average hits right in the middle for the average partners for men and average partners for women over their life time I'm not too surprised. All these numbers tell me is that the IPhone appeals to a group outside of the average. Having a high volume of partners doesn't mean that you have more sex. For all we know the people who have fewer partners have sex more often since they are staying in a relationship for longer then the person who changes partners every other week.

    1 sex act per day with one partner is greater than 1 sex act per week with a different partner each week.

  23. Here is my take on why it is so by CSHARP123 · · Score: 1

    After Steve has lubricated their ass or cunt depending on the gender, it is easy for others.
    Where as those BB users are the corporate types, for them without Viagra or the things of that nature nothing happens down there and you know in this cost cutting and firing of CEOs on suped up expense report days, it is not possible for them to afford. So they have lesser sex than iPhone users
    Majority of Android users are Geeks, they have all the theoritical knowledge but practically they dont have a clue about how to masturbate let alone do anything with the opposite Gender. Atleast we should be happy that some Android users are getting something.

  24. We iPhone owners are simply richer by sjonke · · Score: 5, Funny

    And thus can afford prostitutes more often then Android and Blackberry owners.

    --
    --- What?
  25. Or by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    They are hipster types who try hard to be "cool". Part of that is sleeping with people farm more indiscriminately than others. I mean on campus you see iPhones as a heavy part of the Greek scene. They are a fashion accessory, just like Uggs or anything else. Also part of that scene is random hookups.

    1. Re:Or by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Just admit you're jealous. I know I was in college.

    2. Re:Or by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not really. For one I'm not in college, I work at one, I'm 30, well past all that shit. For two I appreciate a real substantial relationship far more. Maybe it is just a family thing.

    3. Re:Or by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I appreciate a substantial relationship as well, though meaningless sex is better than no sex.

  26. It's a selling feature by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Wanna find someone for a one-night stand? There's an app for that!"

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:It's a selling feature by phoenixwade · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you're gay - there really IS an app for that...... lol http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/grindr-gay-bi-curious-guy/id308956623?mt=8

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    2. Re:It's a selling feature by ATrask · · Score: 1

      I was almost worried that this post would go without discussion of the infamous Grindr app.

    3. Re:It's a selling feature by kindbud · · Score: 1

      Yes there is. There are several, in fact.

      PinPointsX

      Grindr

      SpeedDate

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
    4. Re:It's a selling feature by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Damn it, I hate it when my jokes turn out to be too true to be funny! Like the other day, in keeping with my policy of misinforming my daughter as much as possible, I told her "Lady Gaga is named after the Queen song "Radio Gaga"! A few days later, I come to find out she really IS named after that song!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    5. Re:It's a selling feature by phoenixwade · · Score: 1

      I was almost worried that this post would go without discussion of the infamous Grindr app.

      There was almost no chance that would happen......

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
  27. Backwards. by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

    These people were doing what was necessary to acquire these stats long before having an iPhone. Therefore it is obvious that having more sex induces people to buy iPhones.

    1. Re:Backwards. by zarzu · · Score: 1

      exactly, because as we all know if two variables correlate, one has to be the cause of the other. anything else would be far too complicated for our tiny human minds!

  28. So... by cavefrog · · Score: 1

    I guess this means they're more likely to say yes when asked to install a trojan?

  29. This just proves what I've been saying all along by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    The vibrator built into the iPhone isn't strong enough...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  30. that explains the haters by jewishbaconzombies · · Score: 1

    At least know I know why the acrimony from the Apple haters.

    The smell of virgin is a special kind of bitter. The kind of bitter that makes nerds suddenly give a shit about what technology someone else choses to use. And they can't abide by THAT. Ho no.

    Meanwhile people who get laid have no idea why the fuck the nerds would give two-shits.

  31. Statistics show... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Customers already trained by Apple to "just bend over and take it" get more sex... next you'll be telling me that customers used to taking it from Microsoft without even any lube get a lot more sex!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  32. Re:It could mean Android users are better partners by jewishbaconzombies · · Score: 1

    Of course not - they could have been having a lemonade and eating cookies while going to a church function.

    Not engaging in hot unbridled steaming sex with fluids flowing everywhere. Not at all.

  33. Re:Finally statistical proof... by mini+me · · Score: 1

    Apparently all of those stories about iPhone owners having to give Steve Jobs a blowjob were true.

  34. And I've got a 10 inch... by cappp · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Those numbers don't match others I've seen although, as with all thing numeric online, it's best to assume a little healthy exaggeration. I did some digging and found that the US Census Bureau's 2010 Statistical Abstract includes a section on sexual activity. The full table (94 for those keeping track) is on page 19 of the report.
    For Males 25 to 29

    95.2% have had an opposite sex partner, 5.7% a same sex sexual contact
    10% had 1 contact
    8.8% had 2
    29.4 had 3 to 6
    23.2 had 7 to 14
    and 23.8 had 15 or more

    Median was 5.9

    For Males 30 to 34

    97.2% have had an opposite sex partner,
    10.7% had 1 contact
    6.9% had
    28.5 had 3 to 6
    21.9 had 7 to 14
    and 29.2 had 15 or more

    Median was 6.4

    There are differences based on race - Latinos have a median of 4.5 and African Americans of 8.3 - and sex: a quick glance at the numbers shows that a much greater percentage of women have had 1 partner (25-29 being 22.5% and 20-24 at 20.5%) than their male peers.

    1. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      I'm confused... shouldn't the average number of opposite-sex partners be about the same for both men and women? (Slightly less for women just because there are more of them.)

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For Males 30 to 34

      Remember, all these statistics about sexual activity are self-reported. In other words that means basically they ask you "Are you getting any"? Ask most men 20-34 if they're "getting any" and most of them will tell you they're knocking off a piece every night and two on weekends, that they last for hours and all of their partners are multi-orgasmic.

      Now flash forward to the specific survey of smartphone users. Somebody puts a "survey" on their website asking "do you get laid or are you a complete loser?". First of all, remember this survey is on an internet dating site. If somebody's getting laid regularly, what are the odds that they're going to be visiting "OK Cupid" to try to get a date? Do you know anyone who's ever used an internet dating site? Were they

      I think the important takeaway from this survey is that non-iPhone users tend to be more honest.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by Paradoks · · Score: 1

      Theoretically, yes, but the numbers for women should be higher at an earlier age, since there are more older men-younger women matches than older women-younger men.

      That, and since we're talking median(rather than mean) when we say, "average", one woman having sex with 300 men would skew the median in a way that 300 women having sex with 300 men wouldn't.

      That said, I don't know if one gender is especially more top heavy on sexual experiences than the other.

    4. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Latinos have a median of 4.5 and African Americans of 8.3

      So would that be like conjoined twins or what?

    5. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by maxume · · Score: 1

      I'm a fan of some of the difference coming from self reporting, but they don't actually make it clear how they determined the number of sexual partners.

      (and they ignore that the iPhone users could be having infrequent sex with changing partners while the Android users could be having frequent sex with the same partner)

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by cappp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I assumed it meant that there were a few heavily sexually active women who were pushing the numbers up for the guys. Or, as is always a danger, perhaps a little social pressure encouraged men to overstate and women to understate. Or the men were going going overseas for sex? Whatever it comes down to it makes for some fascinating social insight.

    7. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by cappp · · Score: 1

      Uh may as well make that a multiple posting buddy...the number as stated was 95.2% (more if you assume some of the opposite sex contact doesn't overlap). So at least we knew they were right about it making you go blind....

    8. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by Paradoks · · Score: 1

      Sex for women is who will it be. Sex for men is when will it be. A big difference, no?

      Yes. Thus the fact that the top end for women will have lots of prostitutes and porn stars, and the top end for men will have pick-up artists and celebrities.

      I'm still not certain which of those groups are bigger.

    9. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by arth1 · · Score: 1

      I think the numbers might be right, but that the causation is the other way:
      Jocks get more sex, and jocks are more likely to be sheeple who buy an iPhone.

      Me, I'm finally old and powerful enough that I can have no mobile phone.
      (Unfortunately, I'm not yet old and powerful enough that I get offered more sex than I can handle.)

    10. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      That’s true for the male population they will exaggerate their experience. The troubling stat is the female iphone users Women are more likely to understate the amount of sexual activity they have had. Thus the female iphoners are even bigger hoes, who will believe any claim a guy in a bar or in a turtle neck will tell them.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    11. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by BlendieOfIndie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If somebody's getting laid regularly, what are the odds that they're going to be visiting "OK Cupid"

      Actually, one of my friends uses online dating specifically to get laid, and he's already doing pretty well. OK Cupid has a bad reputation for this type of type of thing(the fact that its free probably has something to do with it). Online dating is a very good way to meet a lot of people in a short period of time. Its not just used by people that are desperate.

    12. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I'm not yet old and powerful enough that I get offered more sex than I can handle.

      The trick is to get offered sex by people with whom you would consider having sex.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    13. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      Interesting. So men had more sex partners than women. And you don't give the number for women, but for men less than 6% had same sex contact, so 94% exclusively opposite sex contact. I assume similar for women. Indeed the good question is: who did those men have sex with? Are there a few women with thousands of partners or so?

      It's the same as the typical feminist notion of "many men are cheating on their spouses" as if women don't... without partners no cheating. And those partners again tend to be of the opposite sex.

    14. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by cappp · · Score: 1
      I probably shouldn't have included the same-sex experience numbers, while I thought they were interesting the report makes it clear that there are a few methodological issues with using them. That being said - women 24-29 claim 14.1% same sex experience. The entire area is just ripe for some really interesting analysis.

      If you're interested in the rest:
      Women 25-29

      97.5% have had an opposite sex partner, 14.1% a same sex sexual contact
      22.5% had 1 contact
      11.7% had 2
      31.3 had 3 to 6
      20.3 had 7 to 14
      and 11.9 had 15 or more

      Median: 3.5

      The 30-34 numbers are pretty similar but with a greater concentration in the 3 to 6 catagory (38.8) and the median shifted to 3.8.

    15. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      Interesting. And after seeing those results it's of course time to jump to some conclusions.

      I heard before that women are more likely than men to have same sex sexual contact; this confirms that clearly.

      And it confirms one other "myth": it is easier for a woman to get laid. More of them had sex then men. More women report having had opposite sex sexual contact than men.

      Secondly it appears that men report almost double the number of partners, which of course is impossible without a lot of same-sex contact which is more the realm of women.

      The number of sex partners in the mobile phone survey reported by women also tends to be higher than for men; but with 14% also having same-sex contact that's getting more reasonable as the reported differences are less great. And as 97% also has had opposite sex sexual contact it means there really are lots of bisexual women around.

      And most of all the big difference between the reports indicates that likely both surveys are highly off the mark. Both report very different numbers, and in the government report the difference between numbers of partners reported by men and women is I think too great to explain by same sex contact. Unless those having same sex contact do it with way more partners than average.

    16. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      Actually, me and most of my friends are on OKCupid and it's pretty much just a hookup site (YMMV of course). And there are plenty of genuinely attractive, interesting people there (at least in my area). I imagine that OKCupid users have a much larger number of partners than people who are not actively. Much like people who go hit the bars every weekend probably have had more sexual partners than people who don't. It's very easy to get meet a lot of people, and if you're average attractiveness or better you can easily sleep with a bunch of women if that's what your trying for.

    17. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      Is there a statistic of how many iPhone (l)users were on the dating site versus the others? That seems far more indicative to whom gets laid the most, after all, if you're getting any you wouldn't be on a dating site...

    18. Re:And I've got a 10 inch... by cappp · · Score: 1
      I did some more digging and found the original study from which that government report gets its numbers. If you want to look it up yourself it's the "U.S. National Center for Health Statistics, Advance Data, No. 362; Sexual Behavior and Selected Health Measures: Men and Women 15–44 Years of Age, United States, 2002" and can be found here. The study notes that different questions were used with male and female subjects - the authors note that

      Among women 15–44 years of age in 2002, 11 percent answered yes when asked, ‘‘Have you ever had any sexual experience of any kind with another female?’’ (The wording of this question was less restrictive and less specific than the questions about men having oral or anal sex with men.)

      . They also threw a little light on those bisexual responses

      Approximately 1 percent of men and 3 percent of women 15–44 years of age have had both male and female sexual partners in the last 12 months (table B). Among females, 5.8 percent of teens and 4.8 percent of females 20–24 years of age had had both male and female partners in the last 12 months; percentages were lower at ages 25–44. Among men, about 1 percent had had both male and female partners in the last 12 months at each age

      . That only applies to the previous 12 months though so its a little hard to tease out a full answer.
      Give the reports a look, they really are quite interesting.

  35. Diversion of Blood by Anomalyx · · Score: 1

    Sex causes blood to rush to parts of the body other than the brain. Therefore, people who deprive their brain of blood more often than others are more likely to make the poor decision to buy an iPhone.

    --
    No, there is no "-1 I'LL NEVER ADMIT BEING WRONG!!!" mod.
  36. Because they can afford it by mldi · · Score: 1

    Well, it's been shown that Apple users tend to be bigger spenders...

    --
    If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
  37. Sorry Geeks ... by graphicartist82 · · Score: 1

    Don't rush out and buy that iProduct just yet.. Just remember that correlation does not imply causation.

  38. Alternative explanations by vadim_t · · Score: 1

    A. iPhone users tend to have less stable relationships, and go through more partners.

    B. iPhone users inflate what they report more than the users of other phones, for instance because they're more concerned with looking good.

    C. The set of iPhone users heavily intersects with the set of people who follow fashion trends and buys expensive gadgets, clothes, perfume, etc as a part of their strategy to attract people of the appropiate sex. Such people are very actively looking for partners, and as a result have more of them on average.

    The iPhone seems to have a sort of "fashion accessory" status that other phones, even more expensive ones, don't have.

    D. Combination of the above.

    In any case, I doubt very much an iPhone is a ticket to getting more sex. If you're a huge nerd, getting an iPhone won't make you less of one, and you still will prove to be quite unattractive to most people the moment you open your mouth. It's more likely that it's the reverse: you already know how to attract potential partners, and the iPhone is a small part of the strategy that includes fashionable clothes, well groomed hair, appropiate manners and so on.

    1. Re:Alternative explanations by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      The only people that would consider the IPhone a fashion accessory are morons and sluts. Hence the correlation with more sex.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    2. Re:Alternative explanations by pankkake · · Score: 1

      There are iPhone owners who are not morons or sluts?

      --
      Kill all hipsters.
  39. And now.... by VoiceInTheDesert · · Score: 1

    Let the confusion between causation and correlation begin!

  40. the Iphone came out 5 years ago by amanicdroid · · Score: 1

    they were 25 when the Iphone came out and 28 when Android came out.

    Isn't this proof that sluts buy the iphone?

    1. Re:the Iphone came out 5 years ago by amanicdroid · · Score: 1

      er I meant imply. If the survey told us the average number of sex partners per year since buying the mobile device compared to before we would have a better understanding whether the iphone helped them get more sex partners or if people with a pre-existing higher average of sex partners prefer the iphone.

  41. And for those that reached 30 before cell phones.. by tekrat · · Score: 1

    And for those that reached 30 before cell phones..
    You don't count.

    That OK cupid blog covered a lot of crap, like how a much more expensive digital camera makes you look better and therefore more likely to get a date.

    And none of the statistical analysis fits with me. No amount of f-stop can make me look better, and my number of sex partners at age 30 was still zero regardless of cell-phone type.

    Of course, no one ever performs a study on people that you can't neatly pidgeon-hole. Because that would be *work*.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  42. Sex Per Week (s/w) by StealthPanda · · Score: 1

    Looking back over the last few years:
    If I count up the s/w that I've had while single versus the s/w that I've had while in a monogamous relationship... well, the number is way higher for the latter.
    Being slutty != more sex. It just means more sex partners. Also, iPhone users lie.

  43. Obvious explanation by alvinrod · · Score: 1

    Maybe it's because Android users don't have to worry about holding it wrong.

    Nobody knows how to love you like--- well, you.

  44. The real reasons... by jayarr · · Score: 1

    From "Top 10 Reasons iPhone Users Have More Sex Than Android Fans" (http://www.esarcasm.com/17069/iphone-users-sex/): #10: After getting fucked in the ass by Apple for two years, letting some random dude in for one night doesn’t seem like such a big deal. ......... #1: It turns out “I have a magical device in my pants” is actually a great pickup line.

  45. More sex! by Ruvim · · Score: 1

    Did iPhone users include butt-raping by Steve Jobs in this statistics?

  46. Worst interpretation of statistic ever by aceofspades626 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All I see is a report from Okcupid that says most of their members use iPhones. The fact that this particular website is centered around getting people laid has nothing to do with whether any demographic within their members has more sex.

    1. Re:Worst interpretation of statistic ever by creat3d · · Score: 1

      The fact that this particular website is centered around getting people laid has nothing to do with whether any demographic within their members has more sex.

      Actually, it's probably a good indicator of the contrary.

      --
      Grammar nazis are to this community what excrements are to gold.
    2. Re:Worst interpretation of statistic ever by aceofspades626 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for not backing up that statement in the slightest. How could I have been so silly.

  47. iPhone Owners = more sex... by phoenixwade · · Score: 4, Funny

    THAT explains why so many iPhone haters are on Slashdot.....

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
  48. Either you do, or you don't... by Rooked_One · · Score: 1

    know how to talk to a woman in the right way to get some. Obviously you aren't going to land a supermodel if you are a geek, but there are plenty of girls who enjoy a good shag from your average joe that views it in the same way that they do.

    1. Re:Either you do, or you don't... by jimrthy · · Score: 1

      You just reminded me of a guy I know who was dating a model he met on WoW, last time I heard from him. I wonder how he's doing these days.

  49. Subby Stats Fail by meehawl · · Score: 1

    Ignoring all the other bad statistics in this "study", this particular chart doesn't show that Iphoners "get more sex" than other phone brand owners. It says nothing about the quantity of sex. It merely says that at age 30, Iphoners are more promiscuous than other phone brand owners. Given that promiscuity is directly correlated with BMI, and inversely correlated with attractiveness, obviously we need to find out more about the weight and attractiveness of Iphoners compared to other phone brand owners.

    --

    Da Blog
  50. Yeah, that's scientific, alright by ThorGod · · Score: 1

    ...because a survey conducted by only one website of people self selecting into the survey is science done well.

    You might as well conclude that people who understand logic have fewer sexual partners. (Because a false statement always implies a true or false statement.)

    --
    PS: I don't reply to ACs.
  51. You made me realize.... by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

    iPhone users are sluts!

    They've been faithful to Apple and AT&T for almost four years now.

    I've been a BB and Android user for 4 years and I've only had one partner (my wife).....well, maybe two (my hand)

    You'd take 10 sex partners if you could get 'em.

    Yes, I would

    --


    "Lame" - Galaxar
  52. Yet another possible explanation by randizzle3000 · · Score: 1

    More people that need a dating site to get laid use the iphone. This 'study' seems to only include OKCupid members. Dating site members are usually there for one reason, and it's not to "meet new people." What about iphone users that don't use dating sites?

    Also, I have lots of sex with my wife, I'm not 30 yet, and I'm trying to convince her to bring some of her hot female friends in with us. No luck yet...

    Oh yea, Motorola V750 Adventure. It's a stupidphone.

  53. iPod Touch? by antdude · · Score: 1

    OK, I need an iPhone. Will an iPod Touch work? :P

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  54. Car analogy by by+(1706743) · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing that people who drive the car I drive get more as well, simply because more people buy my car for the badge on the front than for the fact that it's a fun car to drive. Likewise, more people probably buy an iPhone for the fact that it's, well, an expensive, trendy device, than for the fact that it's a legitimately awesome piece of technology (especially when first introduced).

  55. This is bullshit. by Godskitchen · · Score: 1

    See title.

  56. How exactly was this measured? by HTMLSpinnr · · Score: 1

    Is this measured by specific accelerometer motion data?

    --
    $ man woman *
    -bash: /usr/bin/man: Argument list too long
  57. Re:And for those that reached 30 before cell phone by 10Neon · · Score: 1

    Statistics aren't supposed to apply to individuals, but to the whole group.

    --
    The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
  58. Who took the picture? by wes+mantooth · · Score: 1

    Is the profile person the same person who took the photo? This is assuming that someone else with an iPhone didn't take the picture and give the photo to the profile poster. I think a better conclusion would be iPhone owners take pictures of sluttier people.

  59. Wait by 1stworld · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't the study explain to /. readers what sex is rather than confusing them?

  60. Class action by purplie · · Score: 1

    Hasn't worked for me even once. Anyone want to help me start a class action law suit? (Female replies only, please.)

  61. Anecdotal evidence by Locke2005 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm an Android user, and I got laid last night. By a remarkable coincidence, so did my wife, and she doesn't even own a "smart phone"!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Anecdotal evidence by thtrgremlin · · Score: 1

      Who told you?

      --
      Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!
  62. I own an iPhone by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    And that's all I have to say about that.

  63. Clearly we should believe this by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

    The poll must be accurate since nobody on a dating site would ever lie about themselves, right?

  64. Huh? by KnightBlade · · Score: 1

    So they showed a bunch of horny people 2 pictures to choose from. One holding an iphone and one holding some other phone. And that's supposed to mean iphone owners get laid with more partners? WTF? Am I the only one who finds the "research" absurd?

  65. Obvious setup for a joke (and only a JOKE) by Torodung · · Score: 1

    So basically iPhone users have fscked their brains out? Well, there's a surprise!

    (it's a joke, folks)

    --
    Toro

  66. Good way to filter out the hoes by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

    So basically what they're saying is that you should avoid any chick with an iPhone cause she's not only pretentious, she's a whore too. Sounds like sound advice to me.

  67. Awesome, I'm doing even better than the average iPhone user. I love my Symbian:)

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  68. This only proves one thing! by jcookeman · · Score: 1

    Women have more partners than men do! Sluts!

  69. Sell your iPhone! by Alarindris · · Score: 1

    I didn't have a cellphone until about 5 years ago and I had 26 partners at that time. Going for a one per year average ;)

    Note to self: don't buy an Android, Blackberry or iPhone.

  70. Wow man, this deserves a word from the Family Guy! by Phizzle · · Score: 1

    Oh, God, Lionel.
    You have been hurt.
    You have been hurt by somebody, that much is clear.
    Who hurt you?
    Who hurt you? Who hurt you?
    Who hurt you? Who hurt you?

    --
    I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
  71. wow this deserves a quote from the Family Guy! by Phizzle · · Score: 1

    So basically what they're saying is that you should avoid any chick with an iPhone cause she's not only pretentious, she's a whore too. Sounds like sound advice to me.

    Oh, God, Lionel.
    You have been hurt.
    You have been hurt by somebody, that much is clear.
    Who hurt you?
    Who hurt you? Who hurt you?
    Who hurt you? Who hurt you?

    --
    I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
  72. Bad study, bad conclusion by euphemistic · · Score: 1

    Alternate conclusions from these results:

    Iphone users are more likely to exaggerate or overcompensate. Iphone users have a greater fear of commitment.

    It's about as verifiable/falsifiable as any of the numbers and other conclusions you could draw from this 'study'.

  73. iPhone users more likely superficial swingers by loufoque · · Score: 1

    That's all that survey really means; and it's not really a surprise.

  74. Alternate titles. by Israfels · · Score: 1

    iPhone users are sluts.
    More money, more sex. No surprise.
    iPhone users change "rule of x3" to "rule of x9".
    Whores buy iPhones.

    1. Re:Alternate titles. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      More money, more sex. No surprise.

      Third world nations have a higher birth rate then first world nations. Higher birth rate means more sex.

      Explain.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  75. Logical Fallacy by Marful · · Score: 1

    Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc.

  76. do they ... by JonChance · · Score: 1

    get more sex or just lie about it more? The other question is how much is OK Cupid getting paid to promote a iphone from apple?

    --
    We cannot solve problems with the same thinking that got us there - A Einstein(paraphrased)
  77. Carnal relations is not call's rations by WebManWalking · · Score: 1

    ... or something like that.

  78. My wife and I ... by jc42 · · Score: 1

    Lessee; my wife has an iPhone, and I have a G1 (Android) phone. Should I infer from this that she's getting more sex than I am?

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  79. iPhone users have higher cases of STD by jopoy · · Score: 1

    At a bar ... Girl: Are you an iPhone user? Man1: Yeah, cool eh? Girl: Eeewww. At home ... Daughter: Dad, can you get me an iPhone? Dad: No! You're still young for that.

  80. Andorid users by Linux-Fiend · · Score: 1

    Allow you mind to stroll a bit and dream up a very pleasurable scenario ... the android user need not to dream because he or she is doing ... and the more daring ones are recording or streaming. Android users are too busy having sex and strutting confidently to even notice a survey. =P

    --
    -Fiend-
  81. partners fallacy by eak125 · · Score: 1

    Multiple partners |= more sex. Multiple partners = Less likely to commit and multiple partners = higher std risk! I personally have had 1 partner in the last 3 years. I'm still with her. We both have android. Maybe android = monogamy? The data seems to agree...

  82. no app by Torvac · · Score: 1

    there is no app for sex, i double checked.

  83. Re:And for those that reached 30 before cell phone by dtml-try+MyNick · · Score: 1

    And none of the statistical analysis fits with me. No amount of f-stop can make me look better, and my number of sex partners at age 30 was still zero regardless of cell-phone type.

    Wrong,
    No amount of f-stop can make you look better in real life....

    The single most important thing in the online dating game is the first impression. On a website there are only two tools available to you to make that first impression.
    1. Your written profile.
    2. Your photograph.

    Anyone can write a good profile.
    Just take your time for it. Read, re-read, adjust. Don't rush it, take a couple of days to work on it so you have time to make sure it's well written, and perfectly targeted at the demograph you'd like to meet.

    Your picture is even more important since it's the very first thing people look at when visiting your profile.
    The difference between having a normal, average, shot and good quality photo is huge.

    I've been dating via datingsites for a long time, for shits-n-giggles, to get laid, to just meet other persons, etc etc. I basically just like the game and the challenge of it.
    I'm a average looking guy and I guess I get a average amount of replies/succesrate.

    At one point a friend of mine, a professional photographer, wanted to experiment with some new techniques and asked if I could pose for a couple of shots.

    They turned out te be quite good, gave me a bit of a "rough" look and I started using pictures of that session in my datingprofiles. The results were quite staggering. The amount of replies and comments I got on my profile shot through the roof, four times as much as before when I used just a average pic.
    In online dating a good first impression isn't winning half the battle, it's winning 75% of the battle.. The steps from having a few messages send back and forth to a actual date is pretty easy after that.

    Lesson learned: Looks matter, A LOT, and they can be manipulated..

    1. write a good profile
    2. get yourself decent pictures
    3. .
    4. profit

    No "????" at 3 because you can skip that step if done right.

    Oh, and get yourself a iPhone ;-)

    --
    Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
  84. iPhone==promiscuous? by jandersen · · Score: 1

    According to this, it would seem that people who are more promiscuous choose iPhone. Of course, "more sex" sounds like "more fun", but promiscuity may simply mean that a person is more superficial and less willing to commit themself - ie less responsible and thoughtful, perhaps.

    And perhaps this agrees well with the idea that if you are superficial, you will just grab the iPhone, because "it is cool", because "everyone says so". Whereas if you are less superficial you look at all phone models available and buy the one that seems to give you best value for money - which isn't the iPhone.

    Just speculating, idly, as it were.

  85. Re:And for those that reached 30 before cell phone by slim · · Score: 1

    And none of the statistical analysis fits with me. No amount of f-stop can make me look better

    A good photographer can make you look better in a photo.
    A good photographer is more likely to adjust the f-stop for shallow depth of focus, in a portrait.

    There's the source of the correlation.

    Also, DSLRs don't inherently take better photographs; but good photographers do, and are more likely to use a DSLR.

  86. I'm so sick of this bullshit by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

    This is nothing more that a stupid advertisement for an iPhone, for christ's sake it's just a bloody tool.

  87. skewed data? by Pesticidal · · Score: 1

    Maybe Android users are generally more tech-savvy and remove the EXIF data from their jpegs before uploading them. Or maybe that's just me.

  88. I wish to apologize by sarbonn · · Score: 1

    As an iphone owner, I want to apologize for bringing down the average, because I don't have any partners right now. Either that, or some iPhone owner needs to thank me because he's getting 20 partners to make up for my lack of any partners. So either I'm part of the problem or someone is benefiting at my loss. Either way, I'm not feeling as happy about this report as I should be.

    --
    Sarbonn's blog: http://www.sarbonn.com/blog
  89. Promiscuous? by camelrider · · Score: 1

    Maybe the Android users are a bit more choosy than the iPhone users. Or maybe more committed to their relationship(s).

  90. Granted, the G1 is about as sexy as a Volvo by marxmarv · · Score: 1

    but in the 16 months I've owned one I've had five new play partners.

    --
    /. -- the Free Republic of technology.
  91. You say "slut" like it's a bad thing by marxmarv · · Score: 1

    and the questionnaire supplying that number is a private one that you typically answer early in the life of your account. Nobody sees that number. None of this means that adherents of the Apple Lifestyle (tm) are not maladaptive in other ways that lead to them getting laid more.

    Do I really need to say that I had sexual relations with well over a dozen women between the ages of 16 to 30? It's probably not in my best interest.

    It chases off the people who can't tell Disney from real life. A positive effect, IMHO.

    --
    /. -- the Free Republic of technology.