Plenty of Fish Applies to the Picky?

February 16, 2009 10:14 PM

Population Filter: I have a problem that's been bugging me for a while. Looking at the qualities I tend to be attracted to, can you help me figure out the ballpark number of potential matches?

How many english speaking, non-religious or atheist, hetrosexual or bisexual males are there, who are above average in intellect and interested in S&M, while being between the ages of 20-40 (at the moment)? How many of these do not have serious health problems caused by addiction or mental illness? And how many are frugal, and believe in gender equality in a long term domestic partnership with kids?

Obviously there are other important qualities to look for in a partner, but I want to know the realistic odds of me ever marrying/settling down based on those being my limiting criteria. It's also a private speculation on how accurate the term 'plenty of fish' is when applied to me, something I've been wondering for several years now.

I suppose given the scattered nature of my statistics, I'd take global, or local, and I'd love to see the process one uses to reach the numbers.

posted by Phalene to human relations (19 answers total)

I don't have an exact methodology for this, but at one point, a friend of mine went through these calculations for Melbourne, Australia. She used the Australian Bureau of Statistics as a source for a lot of the data, which can address issues such as age, income, ethnic background, religion, language, marital status. I think she then applied broad rules around estimated percentages for sexuality and historical info on likely percentages of men who never marry and so forth. I think she also looked at the 'competition' in terms of the ratio of men to women.

I don't remember the result, but even just taking into account these quite broad criteria (and not applying more difficult ones like frugality), it became a somewhat depressing number!
posted by AnnaRat at 10:26 PM on February 16, 2009

The most recent episode of This American Life considers this problem (not with your specific criteria, but similarly stringent ones). The answer returned: zero. (Though that did have a more restricting criterion of a specific municipality, but still.)

What is my point? Looking at this sort of thing statistically is sort of pointless. You don't fall in love with a statistic. You fall in love with a person. And chances are, that person's not going to hit every mark on your checklist.
posted by ocherdraco at 10:29 PM on February 16, 2009 [5 favorites]

I know you're asking for a specific methodical answer... but is there any part of this equation which figures in and allows for how lovable you come across to potential partners? Because in affairs of the heart that kinda makes a bigger difference than the statistics of intellect, interests, health quality, etc. You could be in a room with a zillion people who statistically should want to jump your bones, but they don't notice you. Or you could end up being attractive to nearly every woman who meets you even though the odds are against it, just because they feel so delightful in your company. And that could work in reverse for you as well. YMMV, but I've found being a perfect match on paper rarely equals the reality of love. E-Harmony be damned. Not sure how to work that factor into your method, though... I went to art school to avoid equations and stuff.
posted by miss lynnster at 10:38 PM on February 16, 2009

I wish I had an answer for you, but I must ask...How exactly is this information going to help you? Really, if you meet a wonderful man who fits all your criteria, but whose 41st birthday is tomorrow, will this new information give you pause...because you know, there are, like, 3,402,593 other men who aren't so old.

I don't mean that to sound snarky. I'm genuinely interested in the math-y population part of your question. But for the matchy bit, it just seems like your 'odds' are hugely dependent on other variables that don't factor into this equation. Like how much time you spend outdoors. Where you work. What you do on the weekends. The city you live in. Not to mention the silly cultural stuff...do you have a dog, like to smile at strangers, dance in public and not care who's watching, whatever.

If you do find that someone though, it will be really great to look back at this list, and then also at all the other criteria that were specific and necessary for you falling in love with that person, and seeing how everything added up. Or not (but in a good way).
posted by iamkimiam at 10:41 PM on February 16, 2009

Another problem is that a lot of people who self-report as falling into many of these categories will change after they move in or you get married. People aren't constant in some things, and are more constant than others. I wonder if it would be possible to distill the core value that are reflected in your list, things like "kind," "tolerant," and "rational."

I am married, but occasionally try to find adult friends, and it is demographically impossible to find someone that matches my core eight values and also gets along with my wife. So I compromise and spend a lot of time on metafilter.
posted by mecran01 at 10:45 PM on February 16, 2009

My methods are based entirely off of data found on the internet and random speculation.

Limiting data to U.S. and Canada 40million and 4.4million respectively (rough estimates basted on U.S. Census Bureau Data.

So 44.4 Million males between the age of 20-40. 20million U.S. men are estimated to be married. And for posterities sake we'll guess 2.2million Canadian men are as well.

Now we're at 22.2 Million men in North America. Not really sure how to divide out the homosexuals and/or ill (mentally or physically) at this point so its just guess work from here on out. Conservatively I'll give you 10million not gay and or with debilitating illnesses.

1.2 million (12% of people identify as atheist) but we need to divide by 1/2 figuring half male half female. So 600,000. You're down to 600,000 in NA without calculating S&M, above average intelligence and your other 2 factors frugality and gender equality with kids.

However as others pointed out the likelihood of someone possessing all the following qualities: Frugality, Gender equality, Wants Kids, Seeking LTR, Above average intelligence, AND an interest in S&M you're likely to rule out all possibilities. And that's not even taking into account who you find to like physically, their personality etc.


*I also did these calculations at 1AM while avoiding homework for college so don't rip me to big of a new one :-)*
posted by Sgt.Grumbless at 10:50 PM on February 16, 2009

Starting with the US male population, for age range 25-44 (close enough), we have 41.6 million individuals.

These numbers are a little random, but atheists/agnostics don't seem to number more than 10% in the US population. Now you have 4.2 million guys. (I rounded up because "non religious" is a much larger group than "atheist", and also men may be more likely to identify as atheist than women.)

Now we want to disclude gay men, which also appear to be about 10% of the male population. They might be a slightly higher percentage of the atheist male population; we'll give you the benefit of the doubt though and assume not, so we are now at 3.8 million.

As far as above average in intellect, well, let's go with a strict 50%. Even if there is some correlation between intellect and tendency to indentify as atheist, I'm going to guess you mean a more select group than just the top half, so I think I'm being generous. so that's 1.9 million.

Mental illness, including substance abuse, according to Wikipedia, afflicts 46% of Americans at some point in their life. I don't know how you would begin to account for correlations between this and your other requirements, nor do I know what you mean by "serious health problems"; let's be very generous and say only 25% of your target population is afflicted beyond what you care to deal with at the present time. 1.4 million.

S&M: Wikipedia again gives us some statistics; out of that rather random pile let's go with 20% (as we're doing U.S., here, and assume some slight correlation with your other requirements). 280,000.


So 280k still sounds like a lot of men, but I haven't addressed your last concern, frugality coupled with a long term domestic partnership with kids (I'm going to guess gender equality isn't a huge concern with the target population you've already built). Also keep in mind the men we're discussing are probably concentrated in a few places-- or at least ones who are public about being atheists into S&M. If you're not in those places, and if you're not actively trying to find these 280k men (who may or may not want kids/longterm partnership/have frugal habits)... that is, if you're not spending time in communities where they would show up- welp, can't find what you're not really looking for.

And we haven't counted that some of these men are taken, and that there won't be mutual interest for most of the single ones anyhow. Again according to Wikipedia, childfree status is not high (<7% among women, couldn't find anything on men), but in your target population it could be higher.
posted by nat at 11:00 PM on February 16, 2009

Lets be conservative and say 100K men; this would be the most conservative estimate of all the responses. This guy would be 1 out of 416 TOTAL people. Narrowing down on the men, it would be about 1 out of 205 men.

Don't overestimate your experience. Keep looking!
posted by hal_c_on at 11:08 PM on February 16, 2009

Taking a quick look at the U.S. census figures (and making the assumption that the numbers are similar in Canada . . . ) it appears that 15% of the population is atheist, 50% in the 20-40 age group are male, and 27% in the 20-40 age group.

Multiplying those three basic numbers together (15% * 50% * 27%) it looks like 2% of the population is your starting point.

That doesn't sound like many but the population of US + Canada is 334 million so 2% of that is 6.8 million.

Wikipedia gives a high-end estimate of 1.8 billion English speakers worldwide and 2% of that is around 36 million.

The rest of your criteria are a bit more sticky because I think there are a lot of linkages there--which is good because it helps your odds.

Like I seem to recall people with higher IQ are at least slightly more likely to be atheist/agnostic, people who are higher in intelligence plus irreligious and frugal may be more likely to also believe in gender equality. People higher in intelligence and frugal may be more likely to be in good health. Etc.

The point is, unless you know the exact linkages you can't just keep multiplying the percentages--obviously 50% of the population is more intelligent than average, 50% is more frugal than average, 50% is healthier than average, and so on. And if you keep multiplying enough percentages then eventually you will get to a very small number.

But if there are any linkages there--say more intelligent people are also more likely to be frugal and healthy--then your actual pool will be much larger than multiplying the percentages would indicate.

In short, I'd say 36 million is your base population (English-speaking, male, right age group, irreligious), some fairly decent proportion of those--10%, anyway, or maybe more--fit your other main criteria (reasonably healthy, hetero or bi, available for a relationship), and that should be a more than large enough pool for you to troll for people who match your other personality-type qualifications.

It's certainly way more people than you could ever hope to meet in person--in that sense, truly a "sea" of people.
posted by flug at 11:16 PM on February 16, 2009

Taking Sgt.Grumbles estimate to the next level would give you 499,610 males between the age of 20-40 in your area. (I'd link to the data but that would disclose your location, it's from the community profiles page of your government's census site).

499610 * 0.5 = 249805 with above average intelligence.

249805 * 0.95 = 237315 who are heterosexual with above average intelligence.

237315 * 0.229 = 54345 who are not strongly religious or atheist and have all previous attributes (data from another page that cites the census data).

54345 * 0.58 = 31520 who are single, divorced or widowed and have all previous attributes (Data from the census page).

So 31520/499610= about 6.3% of men between 20-40 are somewhere close to what you're looking for, but this estimate is a travesty of statistics. So let's carry on.

31520 * 0.8 = 25216 who will not experience a significant mental illness in their lifetime (rate from another government page).

25216 * 0.89 = 22442 Who won't have trouble with addiction or alcoholism (rate from your public broadcasting company who was reporting about a major medical journal's findings.)

22442 *0.5 = 11221 Who are more frugal than average.

11221 * 0.25 = 2805 Who like BDSM (estimate on the high end from wikipedia)

2805/ 499610 = 0.56%

Even if you cut it in half again twice, that's still more men than you could date in your lifetime in your metro area.
posted by 517 at 12:02 AM on February 17, 2009

I know one guy that pretty much hits everything on your list. But he's taken. Seriously though, what you are asking for is really not that uncommon, if you are truly having such bad luck I hope the perfect person falls into you lap soon!

All my statistics came from Stats Can, mostly from the 2006 census except mental health and addiction stats came from CAMH.

There are 4,606,000 twenty to forty year old men in Canada. You didn't mention their current relationship status but 51% of the population of 15 has never married, although 22% of 25-29 year olds are currently living common-law, so I would estimate about 25% are not married or living common-law - roughly 1,151,000 men between the ages of twenty and forty. Of them, 966,840 speak english, 920,800 are non-religious (264,730 atheists) and 920,800 have no mental health or addiction problems. I can't tell you about frugality because Stats Can is very confusing to me when it comes to economics and a lot of their statistics are distorted by student loans (so it is hard to see whether the debt to income ratio is because of credit card debt or investment in their education). Of those single men, 1,127,980 are heterosexual, I can't access the 2004 General Social Survey (GSS) that asks about bisexuality. Many 20-40 year men I know are pretty open to BDSM with the right partner so that shouldn't be too much of a barrier. Currently 71% of men living common-law or married do housework (doesn't that seem low to you?) but I am not sure how equitable it is.

My estimate after pouring through all these statistics? I think there are about half a million men in Canada that hit most of your criteria. That looks like plenty of fish in the sea to me.

To the other posters - Canada and the US are not the same. Statistics that are applicable to the US simply do not apply up here. For example atheists are 12% of the US population but is closer to 30% in Canada. /hops off pet peeve soapbox
posted by saucysault at 3:42 AM on February 17, 2009

I think what may be more important to you is the likelihood of you meeting someone who meets you're requirements, which is different than how many of them are there. That depends mostly on you.
I'll adress the S&M factor here because it seems like the hardest qualifier to fulfill.
Have you tried alt.com or nerve.com? Both are fantastic sites for finding exactly what you're looking for.
There are some very (what my mom would call) high quality men on these sites. You may have to wade through many that don't have what you're looking for, but I can say that when I was using these sites, I met very well educated, sane, non addicted, looking for a relationship, etc. men. I think that you may have an advantage over someone looking for a more vanilla relationship, because in my experience, there are more men looking for someone like you than women looking for someone like them. I think that there is in general a sense of relief when men are able to find women who not only don't look at them sideways because sexually they want something different from the norm, but are right there next to them looking for it as well.

Although at first glance, alt.com seems to be mainly focused on the sexual aspects of S&M, or the extreme aspects of S&M, it is a great source (possibly only source) for otherwise ordinary people who like a bit of kink in their lives to find like minded mates. Every single guy I met through alt (with the exception of one schmucky guy who essentially lied about everything in his profile) was just truly impressive and above board in every way.
There are tons of people who are looking for exactly the same thing you are, unfortunately, without going to extremes (meaning the bdsm parties), there are not many opportunities to meet others with the same interests.
posted by newpotato at 5:03 AM on February 17, 2009

All the calculations above assume all variables are independent--for example, that religious beliefs have nothing to do with intelligence, age, or gender.

Conditional probabilities are what make that problem interesting and difficult.
posted by mpls2 at 5:29 AM on February 17, 2009

but I want to know the realistic odds of me ever marrying/settling down based on those being my limiting criteria

You're asking the wrong question. The real question is how of them would want to marry settle down with someone who's over-thinking things to this extent. Not trying to be cruel, but your questions comes off as "She's got issues, stay away from her!"

Your previous questions tell that you're Canadian, yet what if this perfect guy is in England? America? A Canadian solider currently assigned over seas? A Nigerian man who learned to speak English? How does that factor into your calculations?

I've known my wife for 13 years, been married to her for 6 (or is it 7?) Yet she still insists on being a practicing Christian and shows no sign of stopping, despite my earlier belief that there was no way I was going to marry a religious person. And yet I'm so content and happy that the number of years we've been married doesn't really matter, it feels like forever and that's just fine.

Open your eyes, step out of the fantasy in your head and live. You'll be surprised at what you find.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:55 AM on February 17, 2009

One more thing to consider is that you are conflating things that are relatively fixed (eg native English speaker, heterosexual, not mentally ill) with things that are purely social and can be learned (eg frugal, S/M, gender equality, atheism).

What I mean is that it sounds like you are looking for a partner who is already "complete" and can tick off all the boxes on your checklist. But for most people, I think what happens is more a process where you meet someone who fulfills a few of your most important criteria, is willing to be flexible on some other issues, and with whom you are willing to compromise in turn.

And that's where it gets tricky, because a lot of the things you listed (such as language, atheism, etc) have very little to do with basic questions like "does he/she treat me really well?" and "does he/she think I'm hot and rock my world in bed?" and "every time we talk, do we find more to talk about?" I don't want to say "you are doing it wrong!" (because it's your life, and you can do it however you want), but I do wonder if you are focusing on things that you see as signifiers of compatibility, rather than looking for compatibility itself.

All that said, while we are all certainly unique snowflakes, there are so many billion people and humans are so adaptable and malleable, that it seems clear to me that there are many, many potential partners out there for all of us. But at the same time, people organize themselves in networks, and self-segregate, and cluster in groups. So even if 5% of the population matches your criteria, 50% of them may be living on the other side of the country, and the other 50% emigrated last year to Australia. There are plenty of guys out there who meet your criteria, but it is possible that you may not find them living where you are and doing the things you are doing.
posted by Forktine at 6:48 AM on February 17, 2009 [2 favorites]

I like Forktine's answer.

That list of stipulations doesn't seem that hard to fulfill if you consider you might be able to turn a guy onto S&M.
posted by zephyr_words at 7:13 AM on February 17, 2009

For the record I'm not in the market, at this time, and I'm aware that the magic of true love knows no boundries by popular understanding, and that were I looking for a partner, issuing a questionaire and then clubbing them over the head would be no measure of potential happiness (though you never can tell with some people). I'm also aware some lovers are GGG but never thought of themselves as wanting S&M, and that 'interested in S&M' covers everything from desiring illegal body modifications to wanting to give out a romantic spanking from time to time. And obviously the key ingredient in mate hunting is being attracted to each other, but even less picky people have to factor this into their search.

I just like being able to see the numbers, because I'm literal minded and I dislike vague but motivational statements like 'you can do anything you want' without math attached.
posted by Phalene at 9:23 AM on February 17, 2009

Now that we have estimates, I'd like a reverse metric on how many women 20-40 are looking for exactly what you're looking for--if the proportions are as overbalanced as I'd expect I can safely guarantee to my mom that's I'll be able to give her grand-children before she dies and that would be quite a comfort to the old gal.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:55 AM on February 17, 2009

One problem with treating this as a Drake's Equation exercise is that some of the variables are likely correlated. Just looking at intelligence:

with addiction: IQ was significantly related to length of addiction career; the higher the IQ, the shorter the career (Smart people just as likely to get hooked, but more likely to kick the habit sooner) Also, the higher the IQ, the later in life the initiation of drug use, or conversely, the lower the IQ, the earlier the initiation of drug use.

with religious belief: plenty of support for this one, including Of men [with IQ > 140], 10 percent held strong religious belief, of women 18 percent. Mean SAT scores for 'strongly anti-religious' 1148; for 'religious' 1022.

I'd also feel pretty safe in suggesting, sans evidence, that there's a likely correlation between intelligence and a belief in gender equality (because, well, duh) and possibly even frugality (because smart people can figure out what compound interest means).

There are probably lots of other correlations that could be made -- the good news is that all the ones I've found so far would tend to increase your dating pool; the bad news is that it'd be very difficult to sort out by how much.
posted by ook at 10:44 AM on February 17, 2009 [2 favorites]