Skip to main content

Women.

It's not about me and women.

Earlier tonight, I was at Starbucks catching up on this month's issue of Esquire (note 1: the one with Christina Hendricks on the cover) (note 2: Starbucks AND Esquire... but I swear I'm not a yuppie). It was an interesting issue as just about the whole thing was focused on women. The standout feature they had in this issue was a survey they conducted on American women. They polled 10,000 women on all types of issues, ranging from politics to religion to sex.

The women were asked if they believed in God — 61% responded 'Yes' while 39% for 'No'. Interestingly, the follow-up asked whether they prayed — 45% said 'Yes' with the remaining 'No'.

There was also a series of questions related to cheating in their relationships. Asked whether they ever had an affair — a quarter of them responded 'Yes'. Yet, when asked whether they would still cheat if they wouldn't be caught — only 16% responded 'Yes' while 84% were for 'No'. The third in this series asked whether they've been cheated on and a staggering 49% said 'Yes'. That's an interesting piece of fact as that number is so close to the divorce rate in America, which sits at 50% (a number that I'm always in awe of, but not the good kind of awe, more of the shaking his head kind of awe).

Other interesting facts: the type of gift most women like to receive is a trip/vacation (at 81%). The second highest was jewelry at 11%. Asked what's the first thing they look at when they see a man: 49% said 'His eyes', followed by 'His body' (17%), thirdly, his clothes at 15%.

All that said, the survey was conducted on the internet and thus, doesn't reflect a scientific sampling of the population. Still, I think the findings are interesting. There's a ton of other facts in the article. Check it out if you're interested, it's on newstands now. Til next time, later geeks!

(Pony up Esquire).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dreamers, Achievers, Believers

It was quite a week last week. It started off on a more heavy note last Sunday, but as the week wore on, things became better and more clear. So let's do a little recap. This is going to be kind of long, so if you find this kind of stuff boring I've inserted pictures of funny cats for your entertainment. So... 1.5 Weeks Ago About 1.5 weeks ago, my friend Jon from Living Room gave me the contact info for his uncle. His uncle is an engineer and apparently was looking for new grads and new hands to hire. That week, I gave him a few calls but he wasn't there when I called him and when he returned my calls, I wasn't here either. We were playing phone tag that week *insert schoolgirl giggle*. Sunday Morning So last Sunday morning, his uncle gave me a call at 9 am (The morning! My weakness! HISS!) and we talked about stuff. I was telling him a bit about school as well as elaborating my work/coop experience as he didn't have my resume yet. So he goes on to tell

The Science of God

Not too long ago, two of my friends had posted their thoughts on evolution and creationism. Both friends shared similar sentiments on the topic (you can view Skylar's here and Keith's here ). Coincidence or not, shortly before they made their postings, I purchased a book called The Science of God by Dr. Gerald Schroeder, which was based on the same topic. Unfortunately, at the time of my friend's postings, I had not finished the book, but now I have. In The Science of God , Schroeder attempts to debunk the dichotomy that exists between science/evolution and creationism. He tries to show that there can exist a duality between the two and that discoveries in science actually prove the story of creation in the bible. The book can be roughly divided into three categories that being the concepts of time, the second with the biology of evolution, and lastly the concept of free will. In describing time, he focuses on the 6 days that are explained in the beginning of Genes

MAX PAYNE was oh so PAYNEFUL!!!

What a failure this was. An EPIC FAILURE~! And I'll tell you why. This movie had everything going for it which was why it made the failure seem so huge. It had star power. It had a very competent director. The visual style was there. It had a simple storyline... a storyline that was basically fuck-proof because it's so basic. The effects (when there were any) were also pretty great. So where did they go wrong? Pacing. If the first two-thirds of the film was like the last third, I think it would have been a fine film. Not great by any means, but fine. I mean, there was hardly any action in the first hour. It was all talk and build up. Every 5 minutes I was saying to myself, "okay, something cool is gonna happen now". But it never came. I think had they added 2 or 3 big action sequences during that hour, that it would have helped the film breathe and flow better. I mean, didn't they realize that the source material was an action game? Max Payne is