The Best Questions For A First Date

April 20th, 2011 by Christian Rudder

First dates are awkward. There is so much you want to know about the person across the table from you, and yet so little you can directly ask.

This post is our attempt to end the mystery. We took OkCupid's database of 275,294 match questions—probably the biggest collection of relationship concerns on earth—and the 776 million answers people have given us, and we asked:

What questions are easy to bring up, yet correlate to the deeper, unspeakable, issues people actually care about?

Love, sex, a soulmate, an argument, whatever you're looking for, we'll show you the polite questions to find it. We hope they'll be useful to you in the real world.

First—define "easy to bring up"

Before we could go looking for correlations to deeper stuff, our first task was to decide which questions were even first-date appropriate. I know each person has his own opinion on what's okay to talk about with a stranger. I also know that if I had to wade through hundreds of thousands of user-submitted questions like these verbatim examples:

If you were to be eaten by cannibal, how would you like to be prepaired?
do u own 3 or more dildos in your room?
Do you hsve a desent job?

I would go fucking insane. The basic currency of the Internet is human ignorance, and, frankly, our database holds a strong cash position!

So, instead of judging each question's first-date appropriateness subjectively, I turned to statistics. I decided our candidates were the ones that (a) most people were comfortable discussing publicly, and (b) were mathematically likely to tell you something you couldn't just guess. I sliced OkCupid's question pool like this:

That blue rectangle is our highest-quality, least-invasive questions, and we next examined each of them for interesting correlations. (If you're interested in knowing more about the above graph, you can drop-down an explanation here, complete with an interactive scatter plot that took me forever to make.)

Now let's get right to the results. This is the shallow stuff to ask when you want to know something deep:

Okay, if you want to know...

Will my date have sex on the first date?

Ask...

  • Do you like the taste of beer?

Because...

Among all our casual topics, whether someone likes the taste of beer is the single best predictor of if he or she has sex on the first date.

No matter their gender or orientation, beer-lovers are 60% more likely to be okay with sleeping with someone they've just met. Sadly, this is the only question with a meaningful correlation for women. For men there are a few others:

predictive question implied odds
of first-date sex
Q: In a certain light, wouldn't nuclear war be exciting?
'yes'⇒83%
Q: Assuming you were in the position to do so, would you launch nuclear weapons under any circumstances?
'yes'⇒82%
Q: Could you imagine yourself killing someone?
'yes'⇒82%

First, I have to give guys credit for logical thinking: in the post-apocalypse, THERE ARE NO SECOND DATES.

Also, I will never look at fingerless gloves the same way again.

If you want to know...

Do my date and I have long-term potential?

Ask your date (and yourself!)...

  • Do you like horror movies?
  • Have you ever traveled around another country alone?
  • Wouldn't it be fun to chuck it all and go live on a sailboat?

Of all questions appropriate to a first date, the three listed above were the ones couples most often agreed on.

Here's how we know...

When someone deletes their OkCupid account, they have these 3 questions correlated best to a real-world relationshipthe option of giving us a reason, and if that reason is 'I met somebody on OkCupid,' they can give us their significant other's username. Many hundreds of people a day go through the trouble of doing this, so we've compiled an excellent dataset of real-world couples. Agreement on these three questions correlated best to an actual relationship.

In fact, 32% of successful couples agreed on all of them—which is 3.7× the rate of simple coincidence. These questions as a trio even out-performs OkCupid's top three user-rated match questions.

Turistas: the best date movie of all time?

If you want to know...

Do my date and I have the same politics?

Ask him or her...

  • Do you prefer the people in your life to be simple or complex?

Because...

We were very surprised to find that this one question very strongly predicts a person's ideas on these divisive issues:

Should burning your country's flag be illegal?
Should the death penalty be abolished?
Should gay marriage be legal?
Should Evolution and Creationism be taught side-by-side in schools?

In each case, complexity-preferrers are 65-70% likely to give the Liberal answer. And those who prefer simplicity in others are 65-70% likely to give the Conservative one.

This correlation is for a nationwide dataset; it won't be as useful in places where one ideology is much more prevalent than the other. For example, in New York City there are lots of people who like simplicity and yet have Liberal politics.

If you want to know...

Is my date religious?

Ask...

  • Do spelling and grammar mistakes annoy you?

If your date answers 'no'—i.e. is okay with bad grammar and spelling—the odds of him or her being at least moderately religious is slightly better than 2:1.

As someone who is not himself a believer, I found it rather heartening that tolerance, even on something trivial like this, correlated with belief in God, although I should've figured out that religious people are okay with small mistakes. Next to intelligent design, what's a couple typos?

It's also nice when two completely independent datasets corroborate each other. Last summer, we analyzed the profile text of half a million user profiles, comparing religion and writing-level. For every one of the faith-based belief systems listed, the people who were the least serious wrote at the highest level.

Proper spelling and grammar. Teach teh controversy!!!

231 Responses to “The Best Questions For A First Date”

  1. knight says:

    dude i LOVE these cupid stat things, they’re so awesome and informative

  2. Tara says:

    Yes morei you are “missing something”… *face palm*

    Try actually reading the article. If you AGREE with the other person on those three questions, then you are very likely to be a good match.

    Gosh, when I saw the figures about grammar I about laughed my ass off. Grammar is super important to me. If a girl’s profile is riddled with “i am a simple girl”, “i am a down to earth girl”, etc, I won’t message them back.

    I’m an atheist and I’m a stickler for grammar.

    Glad I’m not a stupid outlier.

  3. Steve says:

    First of all: Tyler and Matt, your sarcasm detectors are broken.

    Second: don’t read too much into the writing level vs. religious beliefs study. The method OKCupid used to decide the “grade level” of the writers is seriously flawed — it really doesn’t account for proper spelling or grammar whatsoever. They simply used a formula that views the use of longer words and/or longer sentences as indicative of greater writing proficiency. Therefore, an individual who spells horribly but throws thesaurus words into gigantic run-on sentences could have an astronomically high writing level, according to this method.

  4. Ko says:

    @morei – I believe the correlation between the questions and long-term potential is that both users had matching answers, not that only users who answered ‘yes’ on all three have more potential than those who did not. It makes sense – if you look at the questions, they give decent insight as to the user’s way of living (namely in how they assess risk). For example, someone who doesn’t like to take risks wouldn’t be very compatible with someone who takes many. Of course, this doesn’t mean that if two people don’t have the same answers for these questions (or, for that matter, similar ones) have no long-term potential, it just means that their potential is significantly lower, at least according to these statistics.

  5. nick says:

    Dear morei, “agreeing on these questions” does not impy that any of the answers is “yes”.

  6. Bolsterdash says:

    Remember, it’s not that any religious group as a whole has better command of the English language. It’s which groups WITHIN OK CUPID have better or worse grammar. The percentage breakdown of religions with OK Cupid don’t necessarily reflect the breakdown of the US. Not to mention the subset within religions of who would most likely join OK Cupid. One can’t necessarily extrapolate any conclusions outside of OK Cupid. And 9th grade, WOW. Settin’ the bar high…
    BTW, morei:
    It’s not that you & your mate LIKE those three things. It’s whether or not your answers AGREE with your mate’s answers.

  7. Suzy says:

    I LOVE the taste of beer!

  8. A.H. says:

    Religion and God are two different things. Religion is politics-control and really has nothing to do with God. Maybe these stats are accurate, most God fearing people are less “book smart” then a faithless Athiest or Agnostic. So what if an Athiest has better grammar, big deal!! It does not mean that they are wiser then a believer in God. You do not learn how to be wise by going to college, you learn to be wise by going through tough life experiences and using your faith to get you through. That is why the meek shall inherit the Earth.

  9. Jared says:

    I do love a good OKTrends stat-a-thon, but I wonder if this one can’t see the forest for the trees. Yes/no questions make sense online, but they’re hardly the best option once you’re on a date.

    Don’t talk so much. When you do, ask open-ended questions. Pay attention. Use your intuition. Smell each other if you have to.

    There are many things brains can do on the fly that powerful computer analysis cannot do. The most direct example I can think of is bees’ ability to visit a given number of randomly arranged flowers in the shortest possible distance (“the traveling salesman problem”). Of course they don’t “solve” this problem despite poor reporting to the contrary; it’s just conditioning. But more to the point, they can do it with a tiny speck of brain, and we require algorithms and supercomputers. Brains can recognize shapes far more easily than any computer; you’ve noticed the way we prove we’re human online is by re-entering slanted overlapping letters into a form. I’m no technophobe, but if computers can’t read letters, I wouldn’t use them to judge something as irrational and mysterious as romantic chemistry. Even the brain isn’t the best organ for that.

  10. Herm says:

    @morei:
    The whole point of those three questions was that if you answer the same to those three questions as your date then you are more likely to have long term potential.
    If you hate all three, then you will (according to these statistics) be more likely to have long-term potential if your date hates all three.

    ~

    It’s particularly frustrating how people have decided to be offended by trends, statistics, and repetition.
    OkCupid is not telling religious people they’re stupid. There is no level of opinion here. It’s purely statistical.
    OkCupid isn’t saying religious people are worse with (or care less about) spelling & grammar; the religious people are demonstrating that for themselves.

    As well as this it’s fairly irritating that people think that disagreeing with this information, or having experiences that differ to this information, makes it all incorrect.
    This is 1 versus 776 million (approx.) !

    Personally I do not go on dates, and if I did (or ever do) I wouldn’t dream of using these questions to ascertain whether or not this date is right for me. But then you’re not being told to do that anyway.
    All information has been supplied in a hypothetical context, based on real-life trends. It is something you can look at with intrigue (if it intrigues you) or just discard from your life experiences as not being applicable to you.

    I will say one thing though;
    Liking beer correlated to having sex on the first date?
    What you’re really saying is “If I get you drunk, will you do me?”
    Haha!

  11. k says:

    yes you’re missing something: what matters is that you get the *same* answers as your date for the long-term potential, not that you answer yes or no.

  12. kjs says:

    morei,

    The key is that their answers for those questions agree. So if they both answer “no” each of those 3 questions, they’re statistically more likely to have long-term potential as a couple.

    Moving on to other items …

    The statistics on religion & writing proficiency are interesting, although there are a lot of issues behind them that aren’t being discussed. I looked back at the post OkCupid is referencing for this data, & they claim to have used the Coleman-Liau Index to determine writing proficiency. This index doesn’t account very well for grammar or spelling. The following sentence —

    “I liek riding humpback wales while stingrays sing under the peer and I where my wetsute whenever I do that.”

    — obtains a CLI of 10.7 (10th grade), which is higher than the average for any of the different groups in OkCupid’s lovely little chart. By contrast, this sentence —

    “Please send me a message if you like what you see.”

    — only scores 2.4 on the same index. OkCupid doesn’t mention what, if anything, they did to correct for this. It should also be mentioned that one cannot strictly draw a correlation between CLI, which measures *readibility*, & any individual user’s actual writing proficiency. Presumably the writers of most elementary-level textbooks, for example, have a much higher writing proficiency level.

    Those are just a couple of issues. There are a lot of other factors that should also be taken into consideration, such as the distribution of age, income level, & educational attainment across different the religious groups. Or it might be noted that one would expect to see lower scores for Christian groups simply because of their sheer numbers in the primarily English-speaking North American population that uses OkCupid. The same kind of phenomenon is likely to appear among Hindus in India (approx. 80% of the population) or non-religious in Japan (approx. 84% of the population).

  13. Davii says:

    I’d love to know whether the correlation between religion and writing level also – or instead – has a connection to the browser used, since, for instance, Chrome alerts for spelling mistakes. Does the data show that less religious people are more likely to use Chrome? Is the correlation actually just between God’s sheep, and Microsoft’s sheep?! ;-)

  14. kjs says:

    Sorry if this posts twice, but I’m not familiar with the commenting system here, so I don’t know if comments go into a moderation queue & are released later, or if they show up immediately. Anyhow, here’s what I had to say:

    morei,

    The key is that their answers for those questions agree. So if they both answer “no” each of those 3 questions, they’re statistically more likely to have long-term potential as a couple.

    Moving on to other items …

    The statistics on religion & writing proficiency are interesting, although there are a lot of issues behind them that aren’t being discussed. I looked back at the post OkCupid is referencing for this data, & they claim to have used the Coleman-Liau Index to determine writing proficiency. This index doesn’t account very well for grammar or spelling. The following sentence —

    “I liek riding humpback wales while stingrays sing under the peer and I where my wetsute whenever I do that.”

    — obtains a CLI of 10.7 (10th grade), which is higher than the average for any of the different groups in OkCupid’s lovely little chart. By contrast, this sentence —

    “Please send me a message if you like what you see.”

    — only scores 2.4 on the same index. OkCupid doesn’t mention what, if anything, they did to correct for this. It should also be mentioned that one cannot strictly draw a correlation between CLI, which measures *readibility*, & any individual user’s actual writing proficiency. Presumably the writers of most elementary-level textbooks, for example, have a much higher writing proficiency level.

    Those are just a couple of issues. There are a lot of other factors that should also be taken into consideration, such as the distribution of age, income level, & educational attainment across different the religious groups. Or it might be noted that one would expect to see lower scores for Christian groups simply because of their sheer numbers in the primarily English-speaking North American population that uses OkCupid. The same kind of phenomenon is likely to appear among Hindus in India (approx. 80% of the population) or non-religious in Japan (approx. 84% of the population).

  15. saudade_taco says:

    It seems worth noting that the essay doesn’t mention intelligence for religious or non-religious individuals. Instead, it’s about our respective tolerance for poor spelling grammar. I have a low tolerance, which is more about upbringing than skill.

  16. joshua says:

    i’m surprised that being a dog or cat person wasn’t more predictive.

  17. Person says:

    @ morei

    No. According to this analysis, you are statistically likely to have long-term potential with a date who AGREES with your answers to those 3 questions. You have a higher probability of long-term potential with someone who also dislikes horror movies, prefers not to travel along, and thinks that living on a sailboat is a terrible idea.

  18. Eric_RoM says:

    One thing all these comments prove: hardly anyone comprehends statistics.

    Or, in words they might use:

    “I’m a shining unique snowflake so your data is wrong. And mean.”

  19. Andrewdoull says:

    @more: If you answer no to these questions, your best long term match will also answer no to these questions. They’re the best way of measuring long term compatibility if you only had 3 questions to ask.

  20. dave says:

    Morel seems to have misunderstood the long-term relationships question. It doesn’t matter whether you say yes or no to each question, just that your answers are the same as that of your partner. Some couples get a thrill from taking risks, but others both shy away from anything slightly risky.

  21. David says:

    Hey OKTrends man, what percentage of women like beer?

    And have you ever thought of making this a public (anonymous) API so the nerdier of us can dink around with stats?

    Thanks!

  22. The Dud Abides (yes, that was on purpose) says:

    Tyler says [February 9, 2011 at 3:34 am]:

    [quoting duckumu (Feb. 8 at 6:13 PM): “This can’t be true. I’m a devout Christian and very, very smart so my personal experience wholly refutes this data.”]

    Typical ‘I’m right, and everyone else is wrong’ thought process of any other christian. Once again denying science and test results. You’re just made because you know it’s true.

    I’m pretty sure that duckumu was being sarcastic.

    And since when does knowing something to be true make one a member of the Mafia? Oh, you meant “mad”, not “made”.

    /hoping HTML tags work at this bulletin board

  23. Cidolfas says:

    @morei: It’s not saying that you have to put yes to all of them to be compatable, it’s saying that agreeing with your partner on all of them is a strong predictor of compatability. Finding an American man who feels the same way about those three topics as you do indicates a better chance at you working together as a couple.

    And remember: it’s just statistics! There is nothing keeping two people who disagree on all of those questions from staying in love for decades!

  24. lecti says:

    @morei
    ” SO DOES THIS MEAN I HAVE NO LONG-TERM POTENTIAL…? ”

    No, it means you are likely to have a long-term potential with guys who has the same answers to these questions as you do. Don’t worry.

  25. Naughty says:

    Say, can you do one involving kink? I’m trying to figure out if someone likes to be tied up in bed…

  26. Rick says:

    Back in college, if I was unsure and just had to ask if my date would sleep with me, I figured being TOO direct would get an automatic “NO!” By veiling the same essential question in more palatable terms, I had a better shot. The magic question?

    “What would you like for breakfast?

    Mind you, this question is a bit odd when asked at 1:00 AM, but it’s just subtle enough to not turn her off and still goes for closing the deal. I wish I could say I used it hundreds of times, but, alas, it was only posed 8 or 10 times in the course of my entire college career. Worked every time except once–she replied that she rarely ate breakfast, then promptly followed up by asking what kind of coffee I had…

  27. Jean-Marie says:

    @morei:

    Yes, you’re missing something. It’s not whether you like to do any of the things covered by the three questions, but whether you and your date *agree* on the answer to those questions. Because according to the data in this study, those three questions are the ones people with long-term potential can agree on between themselves.

    So following that logic, if you find someone who agrees with you about those questions, chances are better that you have long term potential.

    Or something like that. Your mileage may vary.

  28. theminimo says:

    Yes, morei, you are confused. Couples usually AGREE on these questions, either yes or no. Either they dislike the same things, or they like the same things contained in these questions. Your perfect match is probably going to dislike those three things just like you do.

    I think those three questions sound like awesome indicators. I’ve had some high matches on here who were huge solo travelers and thought it odd that I would come up as a match to them at all. I thought that was a really important question. Turns out, it is! Maybe I should make sure that I’ve actually answered those.

  29. Maria says:

    @Morei

    It’s not whether you answer yes or no to those questions, but whether you and your date have the same answers. So, for you, someone who answers no to all 3 questions would have long-term potential.

  30. SIMON ....!! says:

    yesssssssssss..!! you are missing the adventure notion of life .. this questions doenst need to be taken literaly, its just a way to see how outgoing you can be at some point ino r any situation in life ……… !!! i leave you with that tought…!!

    Regards..!!

  31. jeldaeb says:

    I remember reading an article that showed that people who didn’t beleive in a god had a high correlation with people who had a low emotional quotient. It re-inforces the stereotype that athiests are grumpy old men.

    Also, people tend to prioritise (yeah, I know plenty of people here already touched on that subject), so adding a) tolerance, b) more focus on understanding people than getting idetails right and c) different standards of “honor” and self acceptance (I don’t feel a crushing need to prove myself by having my writing matching perfectly) yeah I can imagine “religious” sorts to result in a lower literacy rate.

    Though I would ask – is it exagerated by a problem with the algorithm used? I know especially in protestant circles terms like “Rejoice!” or “God Bless!” (both incomplete sentences) would be pretty common. If this is seen as a grammar mistake we’d be penalised for what is really a cultural usage of language. In comparison such statements by Athiests are a lot less common (like “Stop!”).

    Then if you want to throw in some old king james bible quotes with “the’s and thou’s” and the older used language – if the dictionary doesn’t hold all these terms often used in certain religious circles of course we’ll be penalised for spelling (and a few grammar erros taken from old english – or from quoting a verse that may just be part of a sentence).

    That is the problem with statistics – having said that, taking it with a grain of salt, it’s an interesting article.

    p.s. some people here don’t get intelligent design? well, I’d say it makes more sense than what I’ve heard of evolution, but that’s my opinion ;)

  32. Joe says:

    @morei, you and your date just have to have the SAME answers to those three questions. Not that the answer has to be YES. It could be NO to all three questions. Get it?

  33. Troy says:

    You should let us filter on these questions then!!

  34. answa says:

    @morei

    If the answers match (you said no to all 3 and so did your date) THEN you’re compatible. Them being in the positive is not needed.

  35. AlexandraSTX says:

    morei – What the study was saying is that you need to look for a man who will answer those three questions with the same answers you would give and that will give you the best shot at long-term compatibility. You can both hate all three things or both love all three things or hate/love the same combination of the three.

    I happen to be a sailboat Captain living in the Caribbean and have traveled dozens of countries alone and like the occasional well-made horror flick. Now to find a man who likes all three…

    Oh, I like the taste of some beers but am not seeking first date sex. And yet in all honesty and self-analysis, with enough conversations before flying to meet someone… you just never know. I met my 2nd husband on Match.com and we had to fly to meet each other and it did get intense quickly. We also got engaged a week later. When you click, you click. He is now deceased, so back to online dating on the slight chance that lightning can strike twice from a similar venue.

    I am an Atheist and tend to be irritated by bad language skills. I do qualify for Mensa as do most of the Atheists I know. Embracing logic and reason in the age of Science and eschewing the brainwashing and superstition of Religion is a big step to take in a society that is run by religious crackpots.

  36. bean q says:

    i’m so glad you guys don’t charge. i love this information.

  37. glass_rabbit says:

    morei- it was not saying that you don’t have the potentiality of finding a long term relationship… it is only saying that if you and your date AGREE on the answers you have potential.

    and for the rest of you that think things like:

    being religious means you have bad grammar
    not drinking means you won’t get laid
    or
    that these results define us as individuals…

    get a clue.

    i will refer you to marc’s statement in regards to outliers- you’ll also need to know about; averages and means. if you need more information on how statistics work i will encourage you to take a class at your local community college or use wiki.

    with that said, you will conclude at the end of such class that with the right data staistics can correlate anything. what must be done after the number crunching involves critical thinking. you need to ask yourself whether or not the correlations are valid (in the philosophical sense of the word) and if they are, why.

    as a sociology major i learned that people who are homogenous (meaning they have the same ideals and belief systems) are more likely to have longer and more stable relationships than people who are heterogenous. which explains why peole have long term potiality with those who MATCH their answers.

    i also learned that alchohol is often used as a prequel to sexual escapades but is not neccesarily essential for it to occur.

    and here comes the whopper- althought there are people who are very religious, superb readers and grammatically advanced (outliers), there aren’t very many (mean). which in turn drags down the average. so, okcupid is not saying that religious people can’t read or spell it’s just saying that people who are more religious tend to share the opinion that grammar is not as important as non believers think. it is also saying that religious folks as a whole read at a level that is less complex than than their non religious counter parts. need i remind you that the average newspaper is written at a fourth grade reading level while kirkegaard (a religious philosopher) wrote at a level where even some people with ph.d’s cannot comprehend.

    and FYI everybody makes type o’s regardless of your reading level or love for grammar.

    imho, i think it’s a gross philisophical fallacy to negate someone’s argument because they mistyped a word or two. we are all human and none of us are perfect (typer’s) so focus on whats trying to be conveyed and not so much on the messanger and we’ll all be better fo it.

    p.s. i didn’t mean to make this post so long. i guess i had alot of explaining to do…
    p.s.s. great article okc!

  38. M says:

    @morei: It’s not whether you answer “yes” or “no” to any of those questions, it’s whether or not you match on those questions. If you answer “no, no, no” then you will be statistically more compatible with someone who also answers “no, no, no” than with someone who says “yes” to any of them.

  39. Paul says:

    Well much though I love to stir the pot of statistical interpretation to apply a persons religeous or political leanings to intelligence I shall limit myself to I single stir. A statistical result is only as good as the data pool it pulls from. The data for this artical was obtained from a group that has a few things in common.

    1) They are single.
    2) They own a computer or have access to the internet.
    3) Their faith in technology allows them to find or attempt to find a mate online.

    I hope you can see how this might lead to a non-standard sample of the population as a whole. Although the statistical coralations among that group are interesting :)

  40. bsk1269 says:

    Interesting questions,even more interesting answers,but if the religion of “other” was the most intelligent,then all the “believe in God” couples must have been dumb? Most of your survey seems to put smoking as taboo,yet most unattached males smoke(they just do not disclose it to you)

  41. derek says:

    @morei

    No, it indicates that you probably won’t have a long-term potential with someone who would say yes to the same questions, but that you would with someone who also would say no.

  42. Boginila says:

    Morei, what you’re missing is that the post doesn’t say anything about whether the couples answered Yes or No to the questions, just that their answers were the same.

  43. Assiqtaq says:

    @morei: Yes you are completely missing the point. You are missing the fact that it isn’t if you like it or don’t like it. It is whether the person you are interested in would say the same as you, or the opposite. You have long-term potential if you are interested in someone that would answer THE SAME AS YOU.

  44. Kori says:

    @morei Read carefully. If you agree with your potential partner on all three points you have a much better chance of staying together than if you disagree. It is awkwardly worded.

    Perhaps a better way to say it would be: Do you want to know if you and your date have long term potential? If you and your date agree on the following three questions, then you have a very good chance to be a successful couple.

    » Do you like horror movies?
    » Have you ever traveled around another country alone?
    » Wouldn’t it be fun to chuck it all and go live on a sailboat

  45. J Shep says:

    “Thogar says:
    February 8, 2011 at 5:15 pm

    There is no way that removing the subliterate only took away about a seventh of the results. No way.”

    LOL!!! AGREED!!!

  46. someguy says:

    Morei,
    “Of all questions appropriate to a first date, the three listed above were the ones couples most often agreed on.”
    You could find that they might not like horror movies, travelling alone or living on a boat either, so you fit the stats perfectly.

    Even if you don’t agree on the points, it doesn’t mean very much. You could be a complete statistical anomaly and have great long term potential. Even by your own wording, “MOST american men” still allows for nearly 100 million other men in America.

    Guys dont take this stuff too seriously, just because the stats show what is most common, does not mean that it is always the case or that you NEED TO or DO fit into the graphs.

  47. peter says:

    @morei if you both give the same answers to this questions then you as a couple have long-term potential

  48. Rachel says:

    Speaking of “subliterate” (your word), you’ve got some typos here, buddy! I just combed my own profile and found a shockingly high occurrence there too!

  49. Ryan says:

    @ Duckumu

    If you were very, very smart you would realise that in most data sets there are outliers. Just because your individual case doesn’t reflect the results it doesn’t prove it to be untrue.

    Also it wasn’t suggesting that religious people aren’t intelligent, just that they were more likely to be tolerant of others spelling mistakes.

    Way to make yourself look a fool.

  50. mutorcs says:

    It’s ironic to see religious people asserting that they are intelligent in one sentence, and that this has some bearing on the article in the next. Come on guys – you’re smarter than that! (right?)

    What I’d really like to learn about is if religion correlates with poor language skills is it the religion affecting otherwise average people, or below average people seeking out / holding onto the religion?