= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DaFranker comments on 2012 Survey Results - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (640)
Why did you close it early? That seems entirely unnecessary.
I put a link and exhortation prominently in the #lesswrong topic from the day the survey opened to the day it closed.
3 vs 16 seems like quite a difference, even allowing for the small sample size. Is this consistent with the larger population?
So ~3x more people prefer polyamory than are actually engaged in it...
Impressive.
Woot! And I'm not even trying or linking LW especially often.
(I am also pleased by the nicotine and modafinil results, although you dropped a number in 'Never: 76.5%')
So more people are against than for. Not exactly a mandate for its use.
Sounds like you did a two-tailed test. shminux's hypothesis, which he has stated several times IIRC, is that people who can solve it will not be taken in by Eliezer's MWI flim-flam, as it were, and would be less likely to accept MWI. So you should've been running a one-tailed t-test to reject the hypothesis that the can-solvers are less MWI'd. The p-value would then be something like 0.13 by symmetry.
As I understand it, there isn't good data. Stereotypically, there are more MtF than FtM. But according to Wikipedia, a Swedish study found a ratio of 1.4:1 in favor of MtF for those requesting sexual reassignment surgery, and 1:1 for those going through with it. Of course, this is the sort of Internet community where I'd expect some folks to identify as trans without wanting to go through surgery at all.
Hmm. Thanks for the link to that wikipedia page. Interesting...
...the definitions given on that wikipedia page seem to imply that I'm strongly queer and/or andro*, at least in terms of my experiences and gender-identity. Had never noticed nor cared (which, apparently, is a component of some variants of andro-somethings). I'm (very visibly) biologically male and "identify" (socially) as male for obvious reasons (AKA don't care if miscategorized, as long as the stereotyping isn't too harmful), and I'm attracted mostly to females because of instinct (I guess?) and practical issues (e.g. disdain of anal sex).
Oh well, one more thing to consider when trying to figure out why people get confused by my behaviors. I've always (in recent years anyway) thought of myself as "human with penis".
If you can't think of practical ways for two people with penises to have sex that don't involve anal, you might just need better porn.
Haha, true.
Then again, I'm guessing looking at actual male-male porn would decrease the odds of that happening - which I've never done yet.
Same here. (But one of the reasons why I identify as male in spite of being somewhat psychologically androgynous is that I take exception with the notion that if someone doesn't have sufficiently masculine (feminine) traits, he (she) is not a ‘real’ man (woman). And I'm almost exclusively attracted to females, almost exclusively because of ‘instinct’ (a.k.a. males just don't give me a boner; is there a better word than “instinct”?) but also because I'd like to have biological children some day.)
Maybe the next survey should include the Bem Sex Role Inventory. (According to this, I'm slightly above median for both masculinity and femininity, and slightly more feminine than masculine.)