Is this piece of shit report really really true? Of course, you can use statistics any which devious way you want… Given Outlook’s crappy record, I’m skeptical… the folks out there have been “frank” enough to expose their survey methodology. I’m calling any Statistics whiz out there to point out any glaring (or hidden) fallacies.
Sex certainly sells.
Tags: General, Society & Culture
On 10.04.04 Ravikiran Rao says:
Why? This is entirely believable. They’ve surveyed children between 13 and 17, an age when ignorance about sex is quite common. They seem to be saying that Delhi children are much more ignorant than the others. I don’t know why that should be, but there is nothing I find incredible.
On 10.05.04 MadMan says:
Ah, but there is a big gap between what kids know at 13 and what they know at 17. To average it out is misleading at best.
If they had published results showing opinions by age, I’m sure the results would be seen in a different light.
On 10.05.04 RR says:
If it’s not cricket on Outlook’s cover, it is sex.
As always, titillation is packaged as information. We are informed as to what percentage of teens relate penis size to masculinity. Which sex survey wants to know the opinion of 15-year-old girls on penis size? Not even Playboy or Penthouse, I’m afraid, for discerning readers may see a predilection for paedophilia in that editorial strategem.
I’m intrigued that the surveyors chose not to sound the kids out on blowjobs. Perhaps that being a topic very dear to Outlook’s heart — the rag’s political masters seem to pretty happy with its performance — it will soon devote a cover to the theme.
On 08.18.06 riese busen galerie says:
why don’t i always find so nice sites? i really like your site.