Dating site punchline these dating books internet premium
The first episode revolved around a crossdressing man/trans woman (unclear/conflated in the show) with all the wonderful humour that comes with normative perspectives on gender expression. We all need something to decompress, and pretty much every piece of media we have to consume is problematic in some way. There’s just something insidious and sad about humour and jokes that amplify problematic attitudes and reenforce norms. It is not without it’s faults (there’s a fat-shame-y episode that isn’t great…), but a bunch of it’s humour is around dismantling stereotypes and exploring unique characters and relationships.The second episode centred on a dating service and was no better. The Fool mocks the king and the court, not the peasants. RH: Honestly, I found the humour a little offensive. TV: gay joke tranny joke fat joke gender sterotypes cis white het norm 1: You didn't like it? Of course, you want to end up with the person who ranks 1st — let’s call this person X. And as n gets larger the larger timeframe we consider, this probability will tend to zero. It means out of all the people you could possibly date, let’s say you foresee yourself dating 100 people in the next 10 years (more like 10 for me but that’s another discussion), you should see about the first 37% or 37 people, and then settle for the first person after that who’s better than the ones you saw before (or wait for the very last one if such a person doesn’t turn up)How do they get to this number? Let’s say we foresee N potential people who will come to our life sequentially and they are ranked according to some ‘matching/best-partner statistics’.This is essentially the same reason why we are encouraged to go on multiple dates when we are young: to find out the type of people we attract and are attracted to, to gain some good understanding of dating and living with a partner, and to learn more about ourselves along the process.You may find more optimism in the fact that as we increase the range of our dating life with N, the optimal probability of finding Mr/Mrs. As long as we stick to our strategy, we can prove a threshold exists below which the optimal probability cannot fall.
The visual lines below will help clarify the 2 scenarios above: So what’s the final punchline?In real-life people do sometimes go back to someone they have previously rejected, which our model doesn’t allow.It’s hard to compare people on the basis of a date, let alone coming up with a statistic that effectively predicts how great a potential spouse a person would be and rank them accordingly.And we haven’t addressed the biggest problem of them all: that it’s merely impossible to estimate the total number of viable dating options N.If I imagine myself spending most of my time chunking codes and writing Medium article about dating in 20 years, how vibrant my social life will be?
Our next task is to prove the optimality of our strategy and find that minimum threshold.