OKCupid poll shows daters' interests by race, sex

Black Women
blackwomen.jpg


Black Men
blackmen.jpg


GodChurchJesus.png

In fact, soul food and black women is the single strongest phrase/group pair we found.
:hmm:

This raw statistical data substantiates some of the generalizations we make regarding the intra-racial dynamics between Black men and Black women.

I read some posts in the "Signs of Divorce" thread, and a common theme was that the divorced brothas warned about getting involved with hyper-religious Black women. The irony is that this raw, unbiased, volitional data from a DATING website comprised of single people indicates that Blacks significantly identify themselves through religion more than any other race sampled. In my opinion this is a huge problem. I don't know what is going on in those Black Churches, but "leaving it up to God" isn't working.
 
Sample size: 526,000 OkCupid users at random and divided them into groups by their (self-stated) race.


I've never heard of this site... has anyone here registered to this small random dating site?

I did notice on the female list she lists 'my man' and 'pretty women' while on the male's list he wanted 'a good woman' and 'ladies'

Verdict: don't mean shit.
 
Sample size: 526,000 OkCupid users at random and divided them into groups by their (self-stated) race.


I've never heard of this site... has anyone here registered to this small random dating site?

I did notice on the female list she lists 'my man' and 'pretty women' while on the male's list he wanted 'a good woman' and 'ladies'

Verdict: don't mean shit.

BGOL: Registered Members: 62,927

I don't know that site, but then I don't know about any dating site except Match.com because I see their commercials :dunno:.

But a sample size of 526,000 users is not a de minimis amount, even if that is a smaller site.

I find the results interesting, especially since it is self-reported data. Wish a bigger more reputable site would do a similar study.
 
BGOL: Registered Members: 62,927

I don't know that site, but then I don't know about any dating site except Match.com because I see their commercials :dunno:.

But a sample size of 526,000 users is not a de minimis amount, even if that is a smaller site.

I find the results interesting, especially since it is self-reported data. Wish a bigger more reputable site would do a similar study.

Trust this... no one wants BGOL to be polled on anything

Its not that its a reputable website... the sample is too low to mean absolutely anything other than these batches of people use these words on their sites. It doesn't take into consideration, like BGOL, that many of them are not looking for those inside their race, so their keywords would be different... instead they matched paired divisions. Seeing that it is random, that makes it worse when they did this. It is also dealing with choice of the applicant, which is not part of this sample criteria.
 
Trust this... no one wants BGOL to be polled on anything

Its not that its a reputable website... the sample is too low to mean absolutely anything other than these batches of people use these words on their sites. It doesn't take into consideration, like BGOL, that many of them are not looking for those inside their race, so their keywords would be different... instead they matched paired divisions. Seeing that it is random, that makes it worse when they did this. It is also dealing with choice of the applicant, which is not part of this sample criteria.

The bold is why I find the results interesting. By bifurcating the racial groups into Men/Women, the result is pure, unadulterated data of what the aggregate group consciously choose to represent on a dating site, regardless of their individual objectives. If one brotha on that site was looking for a white woman, and another a sista, the results wouldn't reflect those individual distinctions, as the aggregate data is what they choose to put as an interest/identifier on their respective page.

Of course it would be silly to use this study to substantiate a broad generalization, but raw metadata like this caught my attention because of the "Signs of Divorce" thread where Brothas commonly mentioned difficulties with highly religious women. Seeing that Black men and women respectively referenced their religion more than other races, to me at least, gave that particular thread some bite.
 
The bold is why I find the results interesting. By bifurcating the racial groups into Men/Women, the result is pure, unadulterated data of what the aggregate group consciously choose to represent on a dating site, regardless of their individual objectives. If one brotha on that site was looking for a white woman, and another a sista, the results wouldn't reflect those individual distinctions, as the aggregate data is what they choose to put as an interest/identifier on their respective page.

Of course it would be silly to use this study to substantiate a broad generalization, but raw metadata like this caught my attention because of the "Signs of Divorce" thread where Brothas commonly mentioned difficulties with highly religious women. Seeing that Black men and women respectively referenced their religion more than other races, to me at least, gave that particular thread some bite.

That is true on the religious portion, but other keywords in brothers hunting for white women will be vastly different unless the white woman is also looking for a specific type black man or the other type... you know what... I am thinking too deeply into this... nevermind.
 
Its not that its a reputable website... the sample is too low to mean absolutely anything

uh....you know what statistical sampling is? how is 500,000 users too small - almost every single controlled survey uses way less subjects.
 
uh....you know what statistical sampling is? how is 500,000 users too small - almost every single controlled survey uses way less subjects.

^This. If the sample size was 20 million, Blacks still wouldn't want to hear the truths about themselves.
 
uh....you know what statistical sampling is? how is 500,000 users too small - almost every single controlled survey uses way less subjects.

Which makes them subjective based on topic and not accurate for the whole. Off a small mom and pop site dating site? This doesn't account for those who are not looking for others, which subject matter of the key words would be different. No reference to target age group, simply male/female black/white? To use this for all people?

No
 
I don't really see anything terrible about these lists. And 'soul food' probably means the show/film and not actual food :dunno:

And looking at these lists, it seems like we're compatible with samoans :lol:
 
Wow, the "real stuff white men like" is incredibly lame. Only interest I share is Groundhog Day, a great movie.

#1 for white women is the Red Sox??? That doesn't seem right at all. And NASCAR higher up than any sports listed for white males? They must be listing what they think white males want to hear.

:smh: @ the black male list-- I think BET and such media are culturally genocidal agents. I wonder what a list of interests would have looked like 50 years ago.

:smh::smh: @ the black female list-- Religion is the opiate of the people. They said the white female's interests could be best summed up with the word escapism; I'd say the black female's interests could best be summed up as escapism of a more pervasive kind.

:confused: @ "Of Mice and Men" on the list for Latino males. How can Corona and tequila not be listed?

:smh: @ Freakonomics on the list for Asian men. I shake my head out of jealousy. The only book listed for black men is the Bible, which we know more people list than actually read.

Pretty interesting: "Both Asian men and women choose I'm simple as their go-to self-description. Contrast this to black men's I am cool and Latinos' I'm a funny guy."
 
I've never heard of this site... has anyone here registered to this small random dating site?

Not registered but OKCupid is a huge dating site and consistently ranks at the top in terms of user utility.
 
most motherfuckers who use dating services to find 'the perfect one', are fucking losers.
 
Back
Top