Let's play a little game...

DeeperBlue
Like a lot of others I'm curious to know the people behind the anonymous wrist shots. I think it's pretty common knowledge that watch enthusiasm does tend to be a male pursuit but I also wonder if actually there are more women than we think on WC and they just prefer to stay low-key and ninja rather than posting. Next week I will put up a poll asking if people identify as male, female or other, but before then shall we play a game and take people's prediction on outcome?
106 votes ·
#polls #fun #general
Reply
Mr.Dee.Bater
·

Here is my logic for why 95-99% of WatchCrunch members are male:

  • I'd typically guess that ~90% of watches are sold to men, because of the whole "things-people" dimensional differences 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19883140/

  • However, we also know that Internet discussion forums, like Reddit and Wikipedia, etc., etc., are also dominated by men - which can also be explained by the "things-people" dimension - where a number of estimates indicate another 9:1 ratio

So, if 10% of watch buyers are female, and 10% of forum members are female, what is the conditional probability of a forum member being female AND into watches?  0.1 * 0.1 = 1%

Aurelian
·

After viewing countless wrist shots on this site I am left to surmise that I am one of the most hirsute middle aged men here.  I have wondered why that is, because I have never thought of myself as a top one percenter in any category. There are several operating theories: 1) watch enthusiasts have evolved towards less body hair (years of Speidel watch bands trigger an evolutionary response); 2) half of you are lying in your bio and have two X chromosomes (the @Deeperblue postulate); 3) watch enthusiasts on this site are drawn from genetic subgroups that do not have significant terminal hair (East Asian v. Southern Mediterranean, for example); or that many watch collectors are castrati (this explains @HotWatchChick69 ).

@Deeperblue is conducting real science here.  This longitudinal study may take years.

DeeperBlue
·
Mr.Dee.Bater

Here is my logic for why 95-99% of WatchCrunch members are male:

  • I'd typically guess that ~90% of watches are sold to men, because of the whole "things-people" dimensional differences 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19883140/

  • However, we also know that Internet discussion forums, like Reddit and Wikipedia, etc., etc., are also dominated by men - which can also be explained by the "things-people" dimension - where a number of estimates indicate another 9:1 ratio

So, if 10% of watch buyers are female, and 10% of forum members are female, what is the conditional probability of a forum member being female AND into watches?  0.1 * 0.1 = 1%

But we are looking for an even more niche subgroup than this.... we are looking for female watch buyers on this forum that are ALSO active enough to even see this poll and ALSO waste their time answering it.

Ichibunz
·
Aurelian

After viewing countless wrist shots on this site I am left to surmise that I am one of the most hirsute middle aged men here.  I have wondered why that is, because I have never thought of myself as a top one percenter in any category. There are several operating theories: 1) watch enthusiasts have evolved towards less body hair (years of Speidel watch bands trigger an evolutionary response); 2) half of you are lying in your bio and have two X chromosomes (the @Deeperblue postulate); 3) watch enthusiasts on this site are drawn from genetic subgroups that do not have significant terminal hair (East Asian v. Southern Mediterranean, for example); or that many watch collectors are castrati (this explains @HotWatchChick69 ).

@Deeperblue is conducting real science here.  This longitudinal study may take years.

Hmm…I guess I’m the only one that have encountered few hairy arm women then…🤔…

YourIntruder
·

In a true scientific spirit I will try to break this down to something hands on.

First question is how many members are we? I haven’t seen any info of that. The best guess I can come up with is 2500 members. Why? In @Max post ”Welcome to WatchCrunch” there is 500 comment. I assume it’s only 20% was confident enough to comment. The first interval above 99% Malé indicated that we have Max 25 women in our team. Surely it’s more than that. Next level Is 125 women. My gut says it is more than that (in disquise as well). So my answer is C.

And you @Deeperblue are the rawmodel for the opposition to the male patriachy💪

thekris
·
Mr.Dee.Bater

Here is my logic for why 95-99% of WatchCrunch members are male:

  • I'd typically guess that ~90% of watches are sold to men, because of the whole "things-people" dimensional differences 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19883140/

  • However, we also know that Internet discussion forums, like Reddit and Wikipedia, etc., etc., are also dominated by men - which can also be explained by the "things-people" dimension - where a number of estimates indicate another 9:1 ratio

So, if 10% of watch buyers are female, and 10% of forum members are female, what is the conditional probability of a forum member being female AND into watches?  0.1 * 0.1 = 1%

Does it make you feel lonely to know how few other women there are here?

DeeperBlue
·

I have to say I am surprised that most people are going for the 90-95% range. This will be very interesting. I wonder if admin will pin the next poll to the top of the feed for a couple of days to get the best response rate? This is critical research after all 🤔

Bobofet
·

My wife is on here somewhere and is at least as into watches as I am, but she flies in stealth mode and has mad 🥷 skills…

Image

@WrapItUp 

JLeps8
·

can we extend the research study to explore how we can encourage the women in our lives to pursue a similar watch enthusiasm? 

asking for a friend. :)

DariusII
·
Aurelian

After viewing countless wrist shots on this site I am left to surmise that I am one of the most hirsute middle aged men here.  I have wondered why that is, because I have never thought of myself as a top one percenter in any category. There are several operating theories: 1) watch enthusiasts have evolved towards less body hair (years of Speidel watch bands trigger an evolutionary response); 2) half of you are lying in your bio and have two X chromosomes (the @Deeperblue postulate); 3) watch enthusiasts on this site are drawn from genetic subgroups that do not have significant terminal hair (East Asian v. Southern Mediterranean, for example); or that many watch collectors are castrati (this explains @HotWatchChick69 ).

@Deeperblue is conducting real science here.  This longitudinal study may take years.

Yes, a fewer number of watch wearers may indeed be hirsute troglodytes, or perhaps these city-slicking youngins' may just shave their arm hairs (as an exfoliating  exercise in personal grooming). Alas...we wire haired hound men are left to ramble along the edges of humanity as neither man...or beast...but a downtrodden creature with fuzzy wrists!

WrapItUp
·
Bobofet

My wife is on here somewhere and is at least as into watches as I am, but she flies in stealth mode and has mad 🥷 skills…

Image

@WrapItUp 

Image

Sneaky. Sneaky. 

celinesimon
·

Okay, I'm upset at the WatchCrunch algo because I NEVER see your posts @Deeperblue in my feed - even though I follow you, purposefully seek out (stalk) your posts, and comment/react whenever I do find them. What gives? 

This explains why I'm late to this poll party. 

I know that there are plenty of women into watches (I've found loads of them on purse forums, female collector groups, and counted more than a few of them as my customers when I worked at ADs). I also know (firsthand, unfortunately) that when a woman tries to participate in male-dominated forums or social media spaces, there's a high likelihood that unwelcomed DMs will come her way that have nothing to do with watch enthusiasm. 

So signing up is one thing, but long-term membership and participation are another.