But wait a minute... the spots on the map are based on absolute differences, not scaled for population. It looks like Las Vegas has about 20,000 more single men than women, a difference that constitutes about 1% of the Las Vegas region's population. The L.A. region has a larger difference of 40,000, but that constitutes only 0.3% of the region's population. (It would be even better to take the ratio of men to women in each region, but I don't have that data.)
Also, shouldn't we take demographics into account? I'll bet a lot of those single women are aging widows. Notice that the retirement mecca of Miami has a rather large female-over-male disparity. (I'm reminded of this old post about where to find single women.)
2 comments:
And Glen, there's nothing wrong with dating older women. Some of them still know how to have fun and get serious when appropriate. It would be nice if the charts included ages and sexual preferences, though. Good luck on your trollin' adventures.
It looks like Las Vegas has about 20,000 more single men than women, a difference that constitutes about 1% of the Las Vegas region's population.
That's not the right denominator. You should divide by the number of single men, not by the total population.
Plus the demographic stuff you mention.
I think Seattle probably scores highest (excluding Alaska) on the male misery index.
Post a Comment