Well that's not true. (It's not *meaningless*). But so what? It tells you something about the prevalence within that group.
-
-
-
Replying to @mankinholes
Hurrah! Exactly my point. And given the narrative of enthusiastic consent that's interesting.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
Back to my original point...so what? You seem to be suggesting something more than that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mankinholes
You keep saying so what? I'm saying, look here's a group of 44 people. More than half have unwanted sex. You say, so what? I don't get it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
You said that if I said it shows nothing then I am wrong. What if only 1 response was given. More meaningful or less meaningful?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mankinholes
You've already agreed it shows something about the group of 44, so you were definitely wrong. (You said it showed nothing.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
So your whole aim was to discover what these specific 44 individuals thought? That’s why it’s meaningful?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mankinholes
No, the aim was to find out whether anybody among my Twitter followers would answer, because I wanted to follow up. That was really it!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Okay to sum up. We both agree you can't generalize from a Twitter survey. The whole notion is totally bonkers.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.