3 ms·
In the 2010 census, the female population of Seattle was right at 50%. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/5363000.html http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd
by ulysses 11y ago
In the 2010 census, the female population of Seattle was right at 50%.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/5363000.html http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/5363000.html
- xxpor 11y agoThe 2010 census is fairly useless for Seattle at this point. Almost 100,000 people have moved here since then (16%)
- ulysses 11y ago2015 estimate: 662,400 2010 estimate: 608,658 Assuming every one of those 53,742 people was male, the ratio would go from 50% female to 45.9% female.
- zardo 11y agoIt if I can't blame my dating troubles on demographics I might have to consider that I am less desirable a mate than I like to imagine.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ahh 11y agoTry breaking that down by age and marital status. See for instance: http://jonathansoma.com/singles/#1/3/2/0 http://jonathansoma.com/singles/#1/3/2/0 It certainly isn't 2:1 - that was hyperbole - but it's bad. And it doesn't actually take a large absolute difference to produce huge changes in behavior. A standard economic model of this fact is explained nicely here: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/02/revisiting-the-marriage-supermarket.html http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/02/rev... In the efficient market limit, an arbitrarily small perturbation in the effective gender ratio produces arbitrarily large changes in outcomes.
- civilian 11y agoIDK, looking at that singles page, it looks bad in all major cities.