quote:

---

Porsche drivers are less faithful than any other group of car owners, with almost 50 percent of them cheating on their partners, a survey published in German magazine "Men's Car" has revealed.

---

quote:

---

The most faithful group were owners of Opel-Vauxhall cars, with only 31 percent of male and 28 percent of female drivers in Germany having committed adultery.

---

Do you see what I am getting at? The "most faithful" group consists of people among whom 1/3 to 1/4 have committed adultery, as opposed to the loose group half of whom are adulterous.

Are people really that unfaithful? Did they just happen to poll a particularly unfaithful group of people, or do those stats represent reality?

[ May 26, 2004, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Jacare Sorridente ]
 

---

Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
 
It's the Germans. Heck, they love David Hasselhoff, so you know something is wrong with them to begin with.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
Maybe it was the group they polled?

But I have heard similar numbers before.
 

---

Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
 
Faithful people use public transportation.


 

---

Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
 

quote:

---

How prevalent is adultery? Two of the most reliable studies come to similar conclusions. The Janus Report on Sexual Behavior estimates that "More than one-third of men and one-quarter of women admit having had at least one extramarital sexual experience."{1} A survey by the National Opinion Research Center (University of Chicago) found lower percentages: 25 percent of men had been unfaithful and 17 percent of women. Even when these lower ratios are applied to the current adult population, that means that some 19 million husbands and 12 million wives have had an affair.{2}

---

http://www.probe.org/docs/adultery.html
 

---

Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
 
We just traded my Grand Cherokee for a mini-van. I guess that means I'm a pretty safe bet.
 

---

Posted by Jacare Sorridente (Member # 1906) on :
 
I should have known that Kayla the linkmaster would answer my question.

I am officially horrified now. At best, one in four men has been unfaithful, and one in six women?

That sucks. That really sucks.
 

---

Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
 
there is probably a fair share of people who would be unwilling to admit it, even to an anonymous survey... which might account for the higher estimates-- maybe they were trying to allow for or compensate for that.
 

---

Posted by Jalapenoman (Member # 6575) on :
 
My ex (who cheated) drove a '66 Mustang and a Toyota Tercel. I never cheated and drive a GMC Vandura. Please add those to your stats.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
Yes, it does. I have a few friends who have had their husbands cheat on them, and they were devestated. Considering how young everyone is, most of the cheating happened within the first two years.

Add to the that the number of times I've been hit on by married men, and I'm disgusted.

[ May 26, 2004, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
 

---

Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
 
Oh, come on, Jacare, they're not hurting anyone. They're having completely context-free sex. Why bring the fact that they're married into it? At worst, they aren't having their need for diversity fully met by only choosing one or two extra partners.

[/sarcasm]
 

---

Posted by Jacare Sorridente (Member # 1906) on :
 
afr- d'oh! i would have recognized that if I had gone to my sensitivity training class.
 

---

Posted by Pixie (Member # 4043) on :
 
Those really are horrific figures...
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
zgator, you are a staid engineer, you are ALWAYS a safe bet.


AJ
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
It'd be an interesting way to get incriminating evidence in a divorce proceeding. Tape your own line, then have someone call for a "scientific survey."

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Zamphyr (Member # 6213) on :
 
Seems pretty in line with divorce rates...overall didn't suprise me.
 

---

Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
 
Actually, it's only about half of the divorce figures.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
Yeah, infidelity rates ARE pretty high.

I bought a Volkswagen...I wonder what that says.
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
I'm actually surprised that people are surprised that infidelity is so common.
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 
Also, what constitutes infidelity in a poll like this? Are we talking "manipulation of the genitals for stimulation," or are we talking getting tanked one night, making out and feeling up some office coworker?

I mean, I can see how someone would feel pretty stinking guilty about the latter, and if it's simply a 'yes or no' question, chalk that up to extra-marital sexual experience.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
Let's see:

Extra-marital? Yes.
Sexual? Yes.
Experience? Yes.

Therefore, extra-marital sexual experience.

[ May 26, 2004, 11:58 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
Dagonee, how about: "No, your honor, I don't have proof of his infidelity. All the information I have regarding his affair is circumstantial. But he drives a Porsche!"

We have three cars -- do I have to add the percentages together? If so, I've probably already been unfaithful, and I didn't even know it. Wait -- do I have to add all the cars I've ever driven, or just those since I got married?

quote:

---

Oh, come on, Jacare, they're not hurting anyone. They're having completely context-free sex. Why bring the fact that they're married into it? At worst, they aren't having their need for diversity fully met by only choosing one or two extra partners.

---

quote:

---

Let's see:

Extra-marital? Yes.
Sexual? Yes.
Experience? Yes.

Therefore, extra-marital sexual experience.

---

I would agree. HOWEVER, I know people who wouldn't. So, it's a matter of ethics, conscience, and semantics at that point.
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
In other words, a matter of what one's definition of "is" is?
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
"that is another of the many hypocrisies I find detestable."

Yeah, well, I know lots of people who claim to routinely hear the voice of God who are drippy, ignorant jerks. But I don't think that's relevant to this conversation, any more than the point you chose to make.

If some sneetches are furbles, and some furbles are radcliffes, are all radcliffes sneetches?

[ May 27, 2004, 12:20 AM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
So your point is that he shouldn't make irrelevant points, just like you?

[ May 27, 2004, 12:14 AM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
Do they have stars on thars?
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
Occasionally, I see one of the sneetches with stars eat a bit of jam. Which I find horribly awful. And therefore I just want to punch all those star-bellied sneetches right in their jammy jam-eating jam-holes.
 

---

Posted by CaySedai (Member # 6459) on :
 
is there any kind of separation between the unfaithful who were unfaithful once and those who were unfaithful multiple times? I mean, a husband who had one affair versus a husband who had multiple affairs. Does that mess up the count?
 

---

Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
 
I'm shocked that it's that common as well. 1 in 4 men are unfaithful? 1 in 6 women? Wow....

I can hardly believe that. I guess that's going to make me choose my dates more carefully now....
 

---

Posted by CaySedai (Member # 6459) on :
 
I think that doesn't account for repeat offenders. If out of 100 men there are 25 affairs, some of those affairs are from the same men. Also, it may depend on the demographics.
 

---

Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
 
Nah, I think it would be a simple "yes" or "no" question, not a survey of how many times they've cheated.
 

---

Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
 
LOL TomDavidson!

jammy jam-holes
 

---

Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
 
I ride a bicycle, which I guess means I ain't gettin' none anyway.

(not really, I drive a POS, which also means I ain't gettin' none)
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
The rates of infidelity can be lower than the divorce rate because some marriage that end in divorce involved folks who had a marriage end in divorce previously. I only know personally of 7 cases. Lest we run away with anecdotalism.
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Also, not all divorces are due to infidelity, plain and simple.
 

---

Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
 
Yes, because single people watch way more TV than families, what with their picnics and reunions and conversations and whatnot.
 

---

Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
 

quote:

---

Some figures can be inflated to make the public think it's ok, that everybody is doing it, it's another means of the media to get a family disrupting message to the crowd and people are buying into it.

---

quote:

---

Saxon, the media follows a liberal agenda.

---

quote:

---

I believe that the media is deliberately trying to make people better consumers. I also believe that, to many in the media, doing so requires reshaping them in many ways that are indeed "anti-family." And I would agree with them. Healthy families are not among the best consumers, since they find much of their happiness in life through each other and not through what they can buy, wear, eat, drink, or listen to.

---

quote:

---

Yes.

---

Alright then. So, just to sum up: The media follows a liberal agenda. To further this agenda, it deliberates tries to destroy families.

If I might extend this a bit: A liberal agenda includes the desctruction of families. A liberal agenda is a course of action designed to bring about an outcome favorable to liberals. Liberals have liberal agendas. Therefore, liberals are deliberately trying to destroy families.

Does my extension fit your worldview? If so, do you have any speculation on why liberals would be out to destroy families? Is it a goal unto itself, or is it one step toward a larger end?
 

---

Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
 
So, in general, you would say that liberals are characterized by selfishness, wanton or immoral behavior, and disregard for the law?
 

---

Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
 
Boy, did this thread get weird fast.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
Saxon75! Somehow we haven't crossed paths in a long time.

I'm with Tom in that I was surprised at how relatively low the numbers are.

Did anyone see "Crazy People"?
 

---

Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
 

quote:

---

Saxon75! Somehow we haven't crossed paths in a long time.

---

That's funny, I feel like I've been here the whole time. But hello all the same.
 

---

Posted by Magson (Member # 2300) on :
 
A few weeks ago in the Marilyn Vos Savant column somone asked a question about how many kids are born fathered by someone other than the woman's husband.

Ms. Savant cited a study that reported that a full 10% of children who undergo genetic tests are determined to not be fathered by the mother's husband, and then went on to say that it seems likely that any mother who knew that her child was not her husband's would try to avoid having the child genetically tested, if possible.

This, of course, discounts step-families and also what they call "genetic chimaera's" in which case the mother is the one whose DNA doesn't match the child, even though it is most definitely her child.

So. . I don't knw about that figure, and Ms Savant didn't name her source, and I can't find anything about it. . so. . guess it's not very reliable.
 

---