How do you like your gyrau? How can we make a gyaru series

have them hunt shotas

File: 1438963139353.jpg (394KB, 1282x1649px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 1282x1649px

Aspiring to become a gyaru.

>>151321745
Gyaru gets thrown into past Japan where she ends up at Yoshiwara and works her way into becoming an Oiran.

File: 03.jpg (639KB, 1280x1875px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 1280x1875px

>>151321745
I like them medium rare.

File: plebian taste.png (461KB, 1115x624px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 1115x624px

>>151321774
>hunting shotas

>>151321745
The only thing that can surpass Galko ks a second season of Galko.

>>151322932
Which one is the swimsuit?

File: C0NFFxuVQAAxNtH.jpg (161KB, 1200x989px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1200x989px

>>151322964
The Bikini.
Duh

File: 36769728.jpg (1MB, 1054x1565px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1054x1565px

>>151322932
>that cross
She better be pure.

galo sengen

File: hajimete no gal.jpg (277KB, 1114x1600px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1114x1600px

>>151321745
>How can we make a gyaru series to surpass Galko?
Like this.

File: 6HZgE2kdXiOW6rJ8JfbMsn2XvWkwL.jpg (215KB, 601x851px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 601x851px

>>151321745
You make Citrus, a lesbian gyaru series.

>>151323687
Yuzu could do so much better than Mei. It's upsetting.

File: 1463769668863.jpg (118KB, 675x960px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 675x960px

>>151323950
It's fine. Mei is what she wants, and for all her tsun behavior, Mei knows she doesn't deserve Yuzu, and in her limited way is doing her best to make up for it. They've made a lot of progress, especially in the most recent chapters.

Gyaru was originally a feminist rebellion against the prevailing patriarchal society of Japan in the late 80s and 90s.

>>151324477
Or a fashion fad.

>>151321745
>How do you like your gyrau?
With fat tits and their lips around my cock.

>>151324528
Which lips?

>>151324551
Both pairs, at the same time.

3D gyarus are intensely disappointing. 2D gyarus are great.

>>151324551
Both.

>>151324676
>3D gyarus
>3D
I think I found the problem.

File: olivia.png (74KB, 200x409px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 200x409px

Did you know they added a gyaru to Pokemon?

File: 1477801764993.jpg (348KB, 907x1920px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 907x1920px

>>151324743
Looks like an islande nigga too me rather than a gyaru.

>>151321745
Here's an idea: mahou shoujo gyaru.

File: 1454693206393.jpg (289KB, 1269x1209px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 1269x1209px

>>151321745
I think the middle ground between Galko (pure, kind, friendly, helpful) and her sister (lewd, flirtatious) would be ideal. As far as personality goes anyway. Their bodies are both perfect.

>>151321774
Great idea for a survival horror anime. Will there be a nice Onee-chan protecting the purity of shotas?

>>151325136
Fucking this.

>>151325136
>her breasts grow everytime she transforms
>they don't shrink back to their original size
>gyaru has to defeat the big bad before she becomes immobilized by huge tits

>>151324885
There's no difference. The Gyaru tan tries to recreate the tribalistic look of savages. That means furs, dark-skin, and gaudy jewelry (made of gold instead of clay or w/e)

Maaaaan that recent gyaru hentai was so disappointing. I had such high hopes.

>>151321875
What, like a gyaru version of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

File: 2282df0f87ead78a8fddd7f1d6f25983.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>151325305
Sounds familiar.

>>151325478
If that involves a red light district and courtesans then sure.

Are there gyaru with small boobs in anime?

>>151325136
Gyaru student council president

File: 69f80e452afa7751f7fe39b788be4c1f.jpg (740KB, 850x1189px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 850x1189px

the more they look like a prostitute the better

File: 20140310.png (342KB, 400x612px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 400x612px

>>151321745
>How can we make a gyaru series to surpass Galko?

It's not impossible nut it's hard. But what I really want is more gyarus in moe/harem anime. The lack of attention they get now is sad.

>>151324477
>>151324509
It's both.

File: d8379fae64a8b78df76b8e3f6d5bab0b.png (1MB, 853x1101px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 853x1101px

>>151321745
This gyaru is a miracle of the universe.

File: 1414131943094.jpg (212KB, 1280x2031px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 1280x2031px

Gyaru tomboy or Gyaru OL?

>>151325869
OL's are a miracle of this universe.

>>151323459
GO GO GO GO GO GO

>>151325869
Wtf, just because she has tan she isnt a gyaru.

That's my accounting personell, btw. Hands off her.

>>151321745
(male)
By not being about a dumb girl and instead being about a superiour fuckboi.

File: 1480101358592.png (952KB, 1123x1920px) Image search: [Google]

952KB, 1123x1920px

I like thicc meaty gyarus.

File: 1437429607463.jpg (651KB, 635x900px) Image search: [Google]

651KB, 635x900px

>>151325869
Gyaru OL elf

>>151321745
Left: Too trashy.
Right: Not trashy enough.
Center: Just right.

>>151321929
Seriously that middle girl is cute as heck.

Thread theme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EKTw50Uf8M

>>151325933
>tan
>fake hair
>fake eye color
>short dress

Actually she fits the quite wide umbrella term - gyaru - perfectly.

>>151324743
>>151324885
When did Pokemon get this lewd?

>>151326032
I need this in my life.

File: 10 year old slut.png (390KB, 500x700px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 500x700px

>>151326232
Episode 1

>>151326459
Who is this semen demon?

I guess I was just too young to look at Misty in a sexual way.

File: 9b5.jpg (141KB, 1202x1500px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1202x1500px

>>151326232
You're out of the loop, Anon.

File: breastgrowthmassage.jpg (555KB, 1280x1803px) Image search: [Google]

555KB, 1280x1803px

Is there any story about neet guy who dies and reincarnates as a gyaru?

>>151324676
There's tons of great gyarus in JAV, just don't expect the giant tits.

what is essential gal-core fashion? for me it's

>sexy/no underwear
>light hair
>piercings
>tramp stamps
>hotpants or miniskirt

I'm not a fan of the jk gal look with cardigan tied around waist.

>>151326651
>gyarus in JAV

[JEWELRY CLANGING NOISES INTENSIFY]

File: hmm.png (464KB, 595x1121px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 595x1121px

I like my gyaru to bully younger nerds, but also to have a big sister vibe.

I like gyaru, but if I'm being honest, I much prefer the gyaru's distant cousin, the yankee.

>>151326959
gonna need source of that

>>151326828
Wearing a bikini at all times, or having your bra visible at all times is a must.

>>151326828
condom skirt

>>151321774
...pretty sure there is a H-game like this.

>>151321745
>How can we make a gyaru series to surpass Galko?
Just don't make them fuck niggers and we're good

File: pg_038.jpg (883KB, 1280x1848px) Image search: [Google]

883KB, 1280x1848px

>>151326959
The best kind.

File: 1481646983134.jpg (246KB, 1114x1600px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1114x1600px

Chubby or fit?

>>151321745
>How do you like your gyrau?
To actually act like a gyaru and not just another generic waifu with a gyaru design

>How can we make a gyaru series to surpass Galko?
Make the Gyaru have a gyaru's personality and it's done. Maybe newfags who don't know what makes a gyaru so good will cry that it's not like Galko but who cares.

>>151328222
One of each. Gyarus travel in pack anyway.

File: 044.jpg (563KB, 1280x1851px) Image search: [Google]

563KB, 1280x1851px

>>151328409

>>151323600
I like the main girl but every other character is a piece of shit

File: bd_ori_ami1.jpg (89KB, 630x450px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 630x450px

>a gyaru will never give you happy paizuri

>>151321745
Gyrau are for /ss/
So are Christmas cakes.
Also ara-aras

What happened to ganguro? Did gyaru kill them?

>>151329297
I feel like gyaru is a slightly more subtle style of ganguro.

>>151323600
Better than Galko, but still leaves improvements to be desired.

>>151321745
best gyarus are tanned and lewd

File: gyaru sleepy.jpg (4MB, 3335x2748px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3335x2748px

>>151330497

>>151330497
Well yes, that's what a gyaru is. The non-tan kind shouldn't even be called gyarus

>>151330575
100% agree, yet i still have to use both the gyaru and dark skin tags on sad panda
as an addition, they should also have heart pupils

File: image_4.png (41KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 128x128px

>>151323459
>show about highschool girls that charge up during the day and then power up after school
>their hair turns blonde, they get faster, they get stronger, and their boobs get bigger when they go super gyaru
>girls who have this power have typically used their power for evil and hunting shotas
>but THIS spring...
>one Onee-chan has had enough of the culture
>she uses her powers for good to protect her little brother and his group of friends as they try and stay pure after school through their middle school careers
>Every episode she gets into high energy catfights to protect her brother and his friends on their walk home
>Will this Gyaru with a heart of gold manage to fight off her classmates and protect her brother?
>Or does she have an ulterior motive that maybe even she doesn't know about?
>Tune in and find out on... I don't know what to call this

File: 6fc6c4e8f9354bfbab786e456de15518.jpg (839KB, 840x1200px) Image search: [Google]

839KB, 840x1200px

>>151327048
pls respond

>>151330905
"I can't believe my gyaru sister is protecting my virginity!" is the title. Something longer would be better actually, since it's obviously a LN.

How do I deal with the fact that I'll never _be_ a cute, big tittied gyaru?

>>151331033
ahobaka, girls form vol 10

>>151321745
Getting married to oji-san.

>>151323687
anime when?

>>151326459
Without the overall straps she's actually essentially wearing hotpants and short top. Trendy, even by today's standards. Probably want to replace the bottom of the shorts with a torn style like Hilda's instead of folded over.

>>151321875
I'd watch it.

>>151328343
It's the same people who like moe delinquents, honestly. All of the intimidation factor, sexiness, and strange allure of the underbelly of Japan with almost none of the baggage and a normal personality underneath.

That said, if a gyaru acted more gyaru like outside of of a manga centered around that culture, no one would really like thT character.

>>151321745
Well, Galko wasn't even a true gal series. A show about that would more than likely be about the fashion of the culture and the people who enjoy it. Like Super Gals, I guess.

But if you wanted an ecchi about loose gyaru I don't think that would get made.

>>151326651
>tons
Meh, Aika seems to be the only good one.

>>151321774
Yes, I wanna be their prey

>>151326865
>implying jewelry clanging isn't the best part

Have them hunt shotas.
On a train.

For Discrete high intensity sexual interaction.

>>151321745
>>151321929
Every time I see this picture posted I just can't decide between the tanned gyaru or the black-haired girl.

Huge brown titties, hoop earrings and blonde hair+blue eyes is some good shit, but that "bad girl" the other girl has gets me erect as fuck too. Plus that fucking choker, holy fuck.

File: gyaru wife.jpg (500KB, 1280x1876px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 1280x1876px

Pure gyarus are the worst. There's no point to them if you aren't taming them with the power of the dick.

>>151337265
Gyaru are for getting married to ojisans twenty years their senior.

File: img256_t_jk2_anna03a.jpg (56KB, 439x1293px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 439x1293px

>>151337265
Taming a slutty gyaru would probably produce a more loyal wife then a "pure" girl.
Think about it; a slut has tasted and felt plenty of cocks and knows yours is her favorite and the best whereas some girl who's only ever been with you is going to be curious to find out what other cocks are like.

File: 30.jpg (3MB, 1708x2500px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1708x2500px

>>151337265
This.
Taming is the best part.

>>151337265
based tamagoro draws the best sluts

>>151324885
pokemon is not that slutty yet
I recognize that artsyle, it's shindoL aka ''da hootch''

>>151337553
his gift is also a curse because he can't draw anything except sluts.

File: d87a546098ab6ef5c5a9ad9668495392.jpg (248KB, 638x899px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 638x899px

>>151337753
How could that possibly be a bad thing?

>>151337956
iqdb

File: 1225421344312(1).png (953KB, 910x872px) Image search: [Google]

953KB, 910x872px

Will you help her /a/?

>>151337956
https://vndb.org/v16269
https://vndb.org/v19740
https://vndb.org/v20353
https://vndb.org/v19734

File: 3623623643.png (258KB, 1102x234px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1102x234px

>>151337753
It's not necessarily a bad thing.

A group of gyaru go to a tanning salon but in a freak accident die and get transported to a fantasy world. Will their bitchy attitude and indenpendent fashion sense pull them together and through their new surroundings? Or will they fall victims to the environment and inhabitants of the strange land?

File: prmrate.jpg (331KB, 1223x1541px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1223x1541px

>>151337517


Thats empirically false though; science clearly indicates that with every sexual partner above 0 that a girl has prior to marriage, the chance of disunion increases geometrically.

File: 1436154682933.gif (611KB, 300x304px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 300x304px

>>151321745
>How can we make a gyaru series to surpass Galko?
I wonder.

>>151338708
Some of these charts make no sense. Top right marriage stability? It's a chart of the pecent of women who are sexually active over 30 vs the number of partners they've had. This says nothing about marriage stability. It just says that for the women sampled that women who have had more non marital sex partners were found to be less sexually active in middle age. This could quite literally mean anything from women choosing to settle down in their old age to women being unable to find a man to settle down with. It says nothing about the actual direct instability of a marriage or relationship.

The other conclusions are similarly statistically illiterate. This is some /pol/-tier data interpretation.

>>151339305
Not to mention the axes on the graphs are fucked up in some cases. How the hell are you going to go by ones and then jump to grouping by 5s? These graphs look like someone took a list of data matching sexual activity to number of lifetime non sexual partners by age group and then attached their own thoughts to whatever they could cook up in excel.

>>151339305
Learn to read, dumb fuck
Everyone sampled was a sexually active 30+ woman and the percentage given were ones who had a "stable marriage" defined as being in their current marriage for five or more years
Maybe if you read the brief instead of just looking at the colorful picture like an ape you could comprehend the information
>>151339453
Statistical sorting, there were less sampled that had those given qualities i.e. if they had one bar for each it would have stupid shit like 100% stability for 16 partners because only one person answered that or 0% for 19 partners because two answered and weren't stable as defined

How can you be this retarded?

>>151339305
>>151339453
It's a troll chart. For fucks sake the "data" is from 1995.

It just exists for /pol/ style shitposting.

>>151339305
>This is some /pol/-tier data interpretation.
That's because it's a /pol/ chart. Made by /pol/. To shitpost.

>>151338708
>/pol/ chart
>3D statistics
You need to go back.

>>151339558
>from 1995
>implying today's women aren't less slutty

>>151337265
I prefer my gyurus slutty but the occasional pure one is a nice change of pace.

>>151339525
The brief defines what a stable marriage is for the study but that quite literally says nothing about how stable a union is. It doesn't consider unions under 5 years which can be happy for those with higher sexual partners or unions under 5 years for those with less or no prior sexual partners that may be unstable or unhappy.
Furthermore, it fails to explicitly specify in the chart that the data presented is sorted or filtered to pull information which specifically applies to the topic being discussed. And in the event this actually occurred, then the next question is how small did that sample size become? It's clearly a subset of the larger data sample so any conclusions drawn from this subset is going to be a bit suspect. Additionally, I'm not finding information stating that the CDC's National Survey of Family Growth kept track of information pertaining to topics including stds, depression, or "being less happy". It seems to be a survey keeping track of the number of people in families/marriages with some participants voluntarily handing over information including number of lifetime sexual partners, so the dataset is ultimately incomplete and suspect to draw larger conclusions from.

Lastly, the image seriously fails to present the data in a professional manner. Not trying to whiteknight here, but it screams agenda. It just rubs me the wrong way looking at it.

File: Awakening to a higher existance.jpg (56KB, 1282x722px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1282x722px

>>151321745
>How can we make a gyaru series to surpass Galko?
As a mere human I don't want to know, Galko is already boner inducing enough as it is.
I'm not ready for that kind of ascension, and I don't want to leave my mortal existence just yet.

>>151321745
I prefer my gyaru well done, don't tell /ck/ though or else they will throw a shit fit.

>>151339525
>statistical sorting
Is a great way to manipulate data.
The blurb you're talking about says nothing about how the data was cut or sorted. The graph being discussed is still clearly showing a relationship between sexual activity and number of sexual partners. If the data was cut to show only women in "stable marriages" then it's showing 100% of women in stable marriages at all ages vs their reported sexual activity. It's not saying anything.

It's retarded.

>>151339525
You're supposed to look at the colorful picture. That's why it's there. To visualize the data. If the brief tells a different story from the picture or the dataset itself, something is up.

File: 1466192595609.jpg (228KB, 640x1349px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 640x1349px

>>151326088
You can't tell your left from your right can you anon.

File: 1433896660124.webm (348KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 1280x720px

>>151340608
Best girl

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wD62dKveg5U

File: linear.jpg (32KB, 563x274px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 563x274px

>>151339609


Im just looking out for you anon-chan; i don't want you to get hurt in the kokoro because you decided to enter a relationship under false assumptions expecting something you're not gona get.

>>151340681
The problem with charts like these, even assuming for a second that it's accurate and not bullshit (which it probably is) is that it's worthless data only good for shitposting.

There are a ridiculous number of factors to consider when looking for a prospective mate and many of them are not quantifiable. Number of sexual partners is only one such factor and focusing too much on that can lead you to make poor decisions.

It's not a videogame where you look at stats and pick what's best. You don't min-max love.

File: and of course every loner is a scumbag.png (62KB, 728x522px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 728x522px

>Find a gyaru hentai artist whose style (of drawing gyaru) really gels with you.
>All of them are about as-unattractive-as-possible old men raping them.
Alas, there is no accounting for taste.

>>151340819


Number of sexual partners would be a highly 'loaded' metric, which in itself would imply a host of those selfsame factors that would all lead to that state of affairs.

>>151340681
This is still a chart which doesn't provide enough information.
It covers a wide age range and shows that among families who self reported that a larger number of the wives currently in their first marriage responded claiming that they had less sexual partners on the family survey. There's a million ways to interpret that, not to mention we are still looking at questionably designed graphs and data that's sorted from a larger group that currently has an unknown sample size. It doesn't say that more sexual partners ensures relationship instability or anything of the sort.

>>151340990
A leopard doesn't change its spots.

Sun shines, grass grows, and sluts slut.

>>151341053
>people never grow or change

Only kids believe this.

>>151341053
I spent a day as a leopard once, and my spots changed every few hours. Probably best trip I've ever had.

>>151341117
Of course people change; pure lolis turn into saggy roasties.

>>151340951
>All of them are about as-unattractive-as-possible old men raping them
that's the best part
gyaru are almost always shota hunters or after experienced fat old men with monstrous phallic members

>People desperately trying to explain away statistics with bullshit

Oh wait I forgot liberals are the pro-science group, unless they don't like it then it's just /pol/ science and /pol/ charts.

>>151340952
I don't necessarily disagree with you but we're not dealing with a blind date situation where you see a bunch of attributes and pick what you think is best.

Each individual relationship has to be handled on a case by case basis.

I mean if I was confronted with a choice between a girl I had good chemistry with who had a couple of exes or a virgin girl who I didn't really like all that much, I wouldn't go for the virgin just because some chart I saw on 4chan told me that she's statistically less likely to cheat on me.

Remember that people usually cheat because of issues in the relationship, not because they're "naturally slutty" like in your doujins.

There are too many factors to consider, you can't just go adopt a "If a girl isn't a pure kissless virgin then she's a dirty slut that will give me STDs and cheat on me" type of attitude.

>>151341186
>Post shitty charts that anyone with a working brain can tell are worthless
>FUCKING LIBERALS TRYING TO CORRUPT MY SOCIETY TRUMP WILL FIX THIS

>>151341186
>explain away statistics with bullshit
Where? All I see are anons questioning the validity of the conclusions being drawn with the statistics.

>>151341205


>Remember that people usually cheat because of issues in the relationship

And that issue is usually pedistalization.

File: 1448377227194.jpg (11KB, 265x188px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 265x188px

>>151340635
Last update 24 November 2014

>>151341284
I've never heard that term before.

>>151321745
Left

>>151341249
>>151341249
>Stats literally from the CDC
>Worthless

>HURR ANYTHING I DISAGREE WITH IS FAKE NEWS WRONGTHINK FUCKING HILLBILLIES

File: 20011909).jpg (96KB, 303x519px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 303x519px

POST GYARU
NOT DUMB STATS

File: 1474749643766.png (1MB, 850x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 850x1200px

>>151341249
>>151341365
No one cares.
Post gyarus

>>151341365
There's a difference between using real data to draw a valid fasifiable conclusion and manipulating the presentation of real data to support to an invalid conclusion. The first is science, the latter is a propaganda method which often has visible holes in the logic and goes against all standards of data presentation.

What's best? Slutty gyarus, pure gyarus? Or slutty gyarus that turn pure?

File: P0111.png (3MB, 1280x1931px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x1931px

>>151341384
>>151341406
OK

>>151340608
Anyone have that image of Galko?

>>151341437
And I'm sure the ones you disagree with are always the bad ones right? Makes everything nice and easy.

>>151341624
>he didn't watch MeowLove

>>151321745
an anime about gyaru bullying senpai.

File: 0004.png (152KB, 844x1200px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 844x1200px

>>151340635
lol

>>151341608
Yeah they usually are. Scientific standards tend to disagree with them too.

>>151341902
wooosh

File: k39.jpg (190KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1280x720px

>>151341869
Stop that

>>151325825
>>151324477
>Western Feminism brings us suffering
>Eastern Feminism brings us Gyarus

Why are the Nips so based?

File: She sees your shota dick.jpg (902KB, 1416x1170px) Image search: [Google]

902KB, 1416x1170px

I want Galko to take me in as her shota and give me daily paizuri for being a good boy.

>>151341988
What happens if you're a bad boy though?

>>151341921
No woosh.

File: 1468002071798.jpg (608KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

608KB, 1500x1500px

>>151342028
You prepare your butthole.

>>151342167
Gyarus make everything better.

>>151342167
Was thinking the same thing

>>151342167
Yukinon doesn't work, but that Yuigahama is delicious.

>>151342253
>roastie

Stop using the word. Hate sluts because they'll never, ever have sex with YOU if you must, but how much sex a woman has does not change how her vulva looks. Using it just throws a harsh spotlight your eternal virginity.

File: 5b27a758991455fa56a72b2620f72ccd.png (3MB, 2480x3845px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2480x3845px

>>151342465
Good thing I'm a priest.

>>151342536
Priests don't have to be virgins but that's a good job to have if you are going to be a permanent one anyway.

>>151342253
>>>/r9k/

File: 0e4.jpg (126KB, 1067x600px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1067x600px

>>151341328
>>151341869

>>151342536
>not being wizard master race
you'll class change once realize your mistake

>>151342578
>Priests don't have to be virgins
>non marital sex
>priest being able to marry

>>151326088
the middle one looks fucking trash Tbh.

>>151342649
I'm fine with healing.

>>151342661
Are you stupid?

>>151342759
you fucking dickhead

File: Capture.jpg (56KB, 790x555px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 790x555px

>>151341902
>>151341437
You can literally find this shit on CDC website dude

pic related, maybe women aren't quite as whorish as initially thought, if I'm reading this correctly 25% of married women have only ever had their husband, I would have thought that number to be very close to 0

from 2013-2015

File: 54194889_p0.jpg (2MB, 2464x3480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2464x3480px

Oya, have you been a good boy this year?

>>151343051
Right. This still is self reports and it says nothing about marriage stability. Instead it says that of a sample of 5699 women, 57 percent were inapplicable or not counted, and of the remaining 2400, 35 percent ( 851 of them) have had 0 or 1 partners through their life and into marriage thus far. This again can be interpreted in several ways. This could mean a large number of unmarried women at any given time are virgins, or that a lot of women have sex with a partner that's not their husband before marriage and then continue to go on and not have sex with with husbands.

No hard conclusion about marriage stabilitity, or 'sluttiness' of women can be drawn from this.

I'm not trying to whiteknight, I'm really not, but you guys are seriously fucking statistically illiterate. Like it's shameful.

>>151343051
I hope you're not getting your opinion of women from the internet.

File: yamanba1.jpg (142KB, 599x775px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 599x775px

Are there any animus that prominently feature yamanba?

>>151343252
It's interviews conducted by a government organization with the subjects identity withheld, you are not going to get better statistical data than this short of installing cameras in people's houses.

57 were not applicable because they were not married dipshit

> and of the remaining 2400, 35 percent ( 851 of them) have had 0 or 1 partners through their life and into marriage thus far. This again can be interpreted in several ways

It says in the text directly above it to include husbands before marriage

It's not saying anything about marriage stability, it's just reporting the number of partners. The graphs on stability were constructed by these numbers vs marriages, i.e. another variable CDC keeps extensive records of.

>seriously fucking statistically illiterate.

retard

>>151342253
>3d roasties
>in a 2D thread
Anon, are you retarded?

>>151343371
So if 57 percent are not applicable because they are not married, we are dealing with an incredibly small sample size at this point which we are unsure is cleared of potential bias.
The data is still open to interpretation with 0 or 1 because you can literally have 1 partner who is not your husband, marry your husband and then not fuck your husband. That counts as 1 partner. You could conversely have sex with your husband before marriage and then never fuck him again. Or you could be abstinent and only fuck your husband during marriage.
If the CDC keeps extensive measures on stability of the particular couples being measured in these results you've posted, then post the stability measures directly. Don't post unrelated information and then tell us the marriages are unstable.

Again, you are a statistical illiterate. You are supposed to come up with falsifiable conclusions with legitimate samples of data. Not say "this is the case and it's the only way. Thats that." You are supposed to pull enough RELEVANT information that informs us that we can reject a null hypothesis. Don't pull data and say "this leads to that", prove that there is a connection.

>>151343357
Nyan Koi has a best girl that's one.

>>151343604
>we are dealing with an incredibly small sample size at this point
2400 people is a plenty significant sample size
>which we are unsure is cleared of potential bias.
literally government records
>The data is still open to interpretation with 0 or 1 because you can literally have 1 partner who is not your husband, marry your husband and then not fuck your husband.
Yeah I'm sure that incredibly contrived scenario is statistically significant
>If the CDC keeps extensive measures on stability of the particular couples being measured in these results you've posted, then post the stability measures directly
They don't keep 'stability' measures, they keep numbers on number of partners, and they keep numbers on marriages. Someone took those numbers, and put them on a graph vs one another. I don't know how I can spell this out any more plainly for you Mr. Statically Literate.

>
Again, you are a statistical illiterate. You are supposed to come up with falsifiable conclusions with legitimate samples of data. Not say "this is the case and it's the only way. Thats that." You are supposed to pull enough RELEVANT information that informs us that we can reject a null hypothesis. Don't pull data and say "this leads to that", prove that there is a connection.
retard

>>151341495
Still haven't made a decent VN since Teisoukannen ZERO.

>>151343751
Wasn't that getting translated?

>>151343141
Yes, but I wanted to be naughty.

>>151343778
I don't think so. Nobody translates eroge. Unless you meant doujins that feature the same characters.

File: thiccosplayers.jpg (460KB, 1280x1780px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 1280x1780px

All those statistics make my gyaru brain hurt. Take responsibility for it and cure me with sexiness.

File: 005_1472311934.png (719KB, 715x1013px) Image search: [Google]

719KB, 715x1013px

>>151343864
I really prefer the version with the chubby female teacher.

>>151343896
This manga gets me so horny, the way he draws the girls is so delicious.

>>151343841
>Nobody translates eroge.

They do, but it takes a lot of of time and effort. It can be a big pain in the ass for no compensation.

>>151343730
How are we sure 2400 is a significant sample size? Who are the people left in the sample? Are there any unaccounted for relationships between them? Sheer size doesn't make it valid alone, otherwise you could sample people by standing outside of a gas station until you get the numbers you want while disregarding the fact that your study only consists of patrons of X gas station.

>government records...
Government records are government records. It's a collection of data with no conclusion. The conclusion you guys are drawing about sluttiness or marriage instability is all your own and in many instances not a valid interpretation or slicing of the data.

>incredibly contrived scenario...
You can't say for certain that "contrived scenario" is all that contrived because we don't have any detailed information on the personal lives of the people sampled.

>someone took those numbers...
If they don't keep stability measures or "sluttiness" measures then I guess we can't come to conclusions about stability or sluttiness. Furthermore the fact that you have to reduce the argument to "someone took the numbers and made a graph" means you have no idea what you're saying or what the graphs say. You're not taking responsibility for outlandish claims made early of women being slutty or numbers implying marriage instability.

Again anon, you have proven yourself to be a statistical illiterate. If I were you, I'd go pick up a high school stats textbook, because you're looking dumber than a 10th grader right now.

File: 1480431104861.jpg (1MB, 1204x1700px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1204x1700px

>>151344028
Can we not do this right now.
At least post Gyarus with that mess

>>151344028
>How are we sure 2400 is a significant sample size? Who are the people left in the sample? Are there any unaccounted for relationships between them? Sheer size doesn't make it valid alone, otherwise you could sample people by standing outside of a gas station until you get the numbers you want while disregarding the fact that your study only consists of patrons of X gas station.
Yeah I'm sure that the CDC doesn't know how to conduct a statistical sample.

You are reaching so hard it's laughable.

>Government records are government records.
Yeah they're definitely pushing an agenda alright

>You can't say for certain that "contrived scenario" is all that contrived because we don't have any detailed information on the personal lives of the people sampled.
lol

>If they don't keep stability measures or "sluttiness" measures then I guess we can't come to conclusions about stability or sluttiness.
Reach harder please

The graphs are made using the records they keep, the CDC does not make graphical comparisons for every single combination of the dozens of variables they record. But luckily they make that data publicallly available for anyone who wants to make such comparisons, which is exactly what the person who made those graphs did.

>Furthermore the fact that you have to reduce the argument to "someone took the numbers and made a graph" means you have no idea what you're saying or what the graphs say.

Making a graph comparing 2 variables it too complicated for you apparently. Sad

>Again anon, you have proven yourself to be a statistical illiterate. If I were you, I'd go pick up a high school stats textbook, because you're looking dumber than a 10th grader right now.
retard

>>151344028
kek, this denial

I'd like to see you produce any statistics regarding how sluts have normal/stable marriage then. It can be as shitty as the ones in this thread. Go ahead, I'm waiting.

File: 001.png (556KB, 1055x1500px) Image search: [Google]

556KB, 1055x1500px

Are gyaru lamias fine too?

File: time to fap.jpg (116KB, 780x831px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 780x831px

Nice thread guys, never change /a/.

>>151344028
>How are we sure 2400 is a significant sample size?

Stopped reading there. Take ANY high school or intro stats class in college before spouting nonsense.

File: 1425355.jpg (97KB, 447x683px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 447x683px

>>151344351
>A full serving of your perverted fetishes!!

File: example_001.png (603KB, 2000x1519px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 2000x1519px

>>151344183
The CDC knows how to conduct a sample, but it doesn't make sense to take that sample and then cut 57 fucking percent of it to extrapolate data without resampling. The problem is not the CDC. The problem is you using retard pulls and cuts from the data to tell a story anyone with a brain can easily question.
>the rest of your post
Reread above
>>151344190
If you are fine a nut ass conclusion thats as shitty as the other ones in the thread then consider the following using this post, bottom left
>>151338708
31.95 percent of women with over 21 partners reported being in an happy marriage. This means around 70 percent were in an unhappy marriage, but more importantly, 100 percent of the women in the sample were actually *in* a marriage. This means that either women with a larger number of partners are more inherently loyal than women who have no prior partners and are more likely to stick around despite having higher frequency of unhappy marriage, or their husbands are trapping them and won't let them leave.
Regardless of how you interpret it, the graph is clearly showing that a sluttier wife will be more loyal in the long run despite not necessarily being happy.


You'll probably find holes to point in this logic because it's flawed on purpose, just like the other idiotic conclusions in this thread.

>>151344434
Sheer numeric size is not indicative of a quality sampling. You can poll 2400 people by going to a walmart.

Imagine if studios decided what anime got produced by going to a Walmart in Mississippi and asking people what they wanted to see on TV until they hit 2400 people.

>>151344697
you're confusing sample size determination with sampling method

>>151344636
>31.95 percent of women with over 21 partners reported being in an happy marriage. This means around 70 percent were in an unhappy marriage, but more importantly, 100 percent of the women in the sample were actually *in* a marriage. This means that either women with a larger number of partners are more inherently loyal than women who have no prior partners and are more likely to stick around despite having higher frequency of unhappy marriage, or their husbands are trapping them and won't let them leave.
>Regardless of how you interpret it, the graph is clearly showing that a sluttier wife will be more loyal in the long run despite not necessarily being happy.

literally reaching

>The CDC knows how to conduct a sample, but it doesn't make sense to take that sample and then cut 57 fucking percent of it to extrapolate data without resampling. The problem is not the CDC. The problem is you using retard pulls and cuts from the data to tell a story anyone with a brain can easily question.
You're dismissed, it's clear you are desperately trying to save face

Keep ignoring everything that doesn't agree with you, it's all "fake news" I'm sure.

>>151344727
When you cut down an existing sample, you have to start from scratch and reconsider what constitutes an effective sample.

>>151344727
Anything he can use to try to distract from the fact that he's wrong.

>>151344636
>The chart covers all sexually active women.
Kek, fucking try again. Again, show me another study where it shows sluts have stable marriages.

>>151337265
This has been on my backlog since forever but if that's the ending it'll be on the forefront now

File: 1467684093564.jpg (851KB, 2039x2039px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 2039x2039px

What fetishes are gyarus made for There are the obvious shotas and NTR, but how well would gyaru femdom work?

>>151344745
What makes that any more of a reach than the other conclusions posted in this thread?
>>151344799
Show me where the flaw exists. What exactly makes the conclusion I posted wrong?

>>151344835
NTR gyaru is the most fuckin entry-level pleb trash possible.

>>151344835
>how well would gyaru femdom work?

You tell me, you seem to already know about gyaru/shota.

>>151344785
Okay... so say >>151343051 doesn't list the fact they tried to survey 5699 women in total but only listed the responses of the 2400 they actually got data from. That doesn't therefore mean the data is not good. If they conducted the survey in an acceptable fashion, then it doesn't matter how many people they tried to survey.

And don't you dare respond saying that the CDC doesn't know how to conduct a survey. you already said in >>151344636 that they do.

>>151344846
We get it, you've already convinced yourself that it can't be right and are in the process of rationalizing it as "fake news" we've seen this act a million times before. Don't worry, because you said you don't trust the sampling method (even though it's from the CDC and they post their methodology on their website) you can tell yourself and your liberal friends that you are better than the rednecks

>>151344846
Are you seriously retarded? here's what you wrote.
>31.95 percent of women with over 21 partners reported being in an happy marriage. This means around 70 percent were in an unhappy marriage, but more importantly, 100 percent of the women in the sample were actually *in* a marriage.

The chart doesn't even consider if they are currently in marriage or not. It only says ~70% who had 21+ non-marital partners are less likely to be happy. So you just read what you want, and can't even understand the graphs.

>>151344910
But the shota is supposed to dom the gyaru.

>>151344968
to add on this
>This means that either women with a larger number of partners are more inherently loyal than women who have no prior partners and are more likely to stick around despite having higher frequency of unhappy marriage, or their husbands are trapping them and won't let them leave.
the whole conclusion is therefore false

>>151344990
I agree wholeheartedly, however gyaru femdom on shota is fine sometimes too.

File: 00002.jpg (664KB, 1280x1909px) Image search: [Google]

664KB, 1280x1909px

Jesus fuck, find another thread to argue in.

>>151344940
The CDC knows how to conduct a survey, but the survey was conducted to pull baseline information the CDC wanted to see, not this nonsense about slutiness. The CDC conducting a proper survey does not mean that you can cut and omit parts of the data to draw conclusions with.

That would be like taking 5000 different apples from several apple trees in an orchard to get a sample of the quality of the apples in the yard. You decide to get rid of all the apples in the sample that aren't granny smith apples. You are left with only the apples from your granny smith tree to use to try and draw conclusions on the full orchard. You find the granny smith apples are diseased and so you go ahead and cut down all the trees in your orchard because they all must be diseased according to your conclusion.
In actuality, it was just the granny smith tree, and it probably would have been smarter to maintain the full sample size as intended to draw conclusions about the entirety of the orchard.

>>151345148
>yfw Methonium's gone legit
>the days of thicc porn are now over
It happened to Uno Makoto, it'll happen to Methonium too.

>>151345181
Except you can do that, which is exactly how political polling can break down demographic preferences without doing 20 different samples.

>>151325218
>I think the middle ground between Galko (pure, kind, friendly, helpful) and her sister (lewd, flirtatious)

Is her sister that lewd though? She only seems to be super lewd with her boyfriend. Not everybody.

>>151344968
>>151345020
>The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) gathers information on family life, marriage and divorce, pregnancy, infertility, use of contraception, and men's and women's health. The survey results are used by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and others to plan health services and health education programs, and to do statistical studies of families, fertility, and health

They only sample women in marriages or women that have been divorced. It is logical to assume this is a sample of women who are all married. Unless they are mixing and matching attributes, in which case it's impossible to conclude that married women with less partners are happy, because the data actually includes divorced women, and it could actually be the case that divorced women with fewer partners are happier.

Data interpretability can be a messy thing, and it's seriously important that you be statistically literate before drawing conclusions about data.

>>151345317
You literally cannot make conclusions about the entirety of a laarge sample based on a smaller subset which is clearly biased to favor one attribute of the sample.

>>151345439
>They only sample women in marriages or women that have been divorced
They literally don't, which you would know if you actually read their data or hell, even just looked at that table posted earlier with 3000+ unmarried women on it.

>You literally cannot make conclusions
They literally do that for every single political poll when they single out demographics.

You are the one who isn't statistically literate, dumbass.

File: 1476976776792.png (136KB, 320x371px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 320x371px

>>151345295
>Uno Makoto
New work fucking when you futamotherfucker.

>>151345148
Thank you for making a statistically significant post

>>151345181
Now you seem to have moved on to arguing the conclusions rather than the method of getting the information and how much information one would want to gather.

You can come up with long winded examples all you want to try and rationalize this, it doesn't change the fact that you don't have a good understanding sampling and what that data is then used for.

It is not a situation where the inapplicable data has been thrown out because it doesn't fit a narrative of what the CDC was trying to observe, it simply means that the data points collected didn't pertain to what they were trying to observe. Whether it is because it was someone that wasn't married or the the person surveyed answered "spaghetti" to the questions, it means that data point isn't applicable.

File: dumbass.jpg (34KB, 785x351px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 785x351px

>>151345439
Here, I'll make it nice and simple so you don't make a pathetic attempt to weasel out.

>>151345502
You can look at demographics of a sample but that doesn't tell you absolute stats on a demographic for the entire population. If you want stats on a demographic, you sample that demographic, not sample the general population with the intent of collecting general population stats through means that give information on the general population and then subset it to look at a particular demographic.
>>151345516
Except several of the graphs in this thread aren't official CDC graphs. They are graphs you don't find anywhere on the CDC website. They are data points which have been cut and omitted without regard for the CDCs original intentions.

>>151345658
>not sample the general population with the intent of collecting general population stats through means that give information on the general population and then subset it to look at a particular demographic.
And yet, that is what is done in polling, to a high degree of accuracy.

>Except several of the graphs in this thread aren't official CDC graphs. They are graphs you don't find anywhere on the CDC website. They are data points which have been cut and omitted without regard for the CDCs original intentions.
Except those graphs do use CDC data and only omitted what was not applicable

Look, it's obvious at this point you've taken a HS stats class and think you're hot shit, but you're really just embarrassing yourself.

>>151345439
>It is logical to assume this is a sample of women who are all married.
That mental gymnasium. The correct assumption would be the graph is based on the samples, and yet here you are, arguing based on your feelings. That lone graph shows that sluts are unhappy. That's it. You are the one stretching the truth to say that sluts despite being unhappy, have stable marriages. Right. Keep ignoring that top right graph where sluts have less stable marriage. Or are you going to tell how we don't know if the sluts don't have 5+ years marriages because they only sample the people who died because their 5th year of marriage?

>>151345741
died before their 5th year of marriage*

>>151345581
Great. So now we know that it includes unmarried women so the data is even messier. This might mean that women who are unmarried and have no partners or divorced with fewer sexual partners may largely be the group that is happy, while among women who have more partners those who are married are the happier ones. It can literally mean anything because you fucks are subsetting at will with no regard for how the data was collected.

We still have no indication of having higher sexual partners resulting in an instable marriage. We still have no indication on "slutty" women being bad people in general.

>>151345778
At this point I'm just watching to see how impressive your mental gymnastics can truly get.

>>151345658
The mental tap dancing that is occurring here is astounding.

You are projecting and extrapolating almost every response. no one is saying there is absolute accuracy in everything. That is why we have confidence intervals, ± X, degrees of freedom, etc. There is no level of perfect accuracy we can achieve unless why conduct a census which is almost impossible.

you are going back in forth questioning data collection, data validity, and then the conclusions. We aren't trying to draw a conclusion on the level of faithfulness in individuals who aren't married you silly goose.

like >>151345724 said, you seem to have a faint idea of the concepts, but you're failing to apply them here all together.

>>151345724
>to a high degree of accuracy
No polling method determines conclusions about particular demographics by sampling the general population and then subsetting for that demographic successfully and consistently. They sample the demographic to draw conclusions about the demographic.
>>151345741
>mental gymnasium
Not any more than the mental gymnasium conclusions drawn before it
BTW I don't actually believe it, I'm showing you how insane it is to use baseline data meant for baseline purposes to draw conclusions about incredibly specific things.

>>151345853
>No polling method determines conclusions about particular demographics
literally look at every poll run for the recent election, they will all break down demographics based on their single sample

>>151345843
Exactly, we need and use measures to improve accuracy of prediction. Subsetting a dataset without regard for things like confidence intervals on the prediction you're making is not logical.
What I'm doing is showing that the conclusions being drawn on the stability of a marriage based on prior sexual partners aren't logical or even properly designed.

>>151345918
What you're showing is that you are an ignorant HS student

>>151345882
>single sample
Thy make use of several aggregated samples, and then use resampling methods. They don't just get raw data from a single sample and chop it to look at a demographic.

>>151345853
Except the conclusions you provided were based on baseless assumptions. If you think these conclusions are wrong, then why don't you go find a study that shows the opposite? I've been waiting for a while now.

>>151343671
dick purifies her in like 2 episodes
>>151343357
so no

>>151345853
This isn't specific. So now you're on again about the size of the sample.

You need to take a look at 3 things...

1. Sampling method
2. Sample size
3. Conclusion

In any of the posts you back in forth questioning at least one of them. you're proven wrong, then move onto a different part of the overall picture. stop doing that. bad silly goose.

>>151345918
The conclusions are not definitive like you are implying. that would go against the very nature of statistics. You can take a very large sample (using simple random sampling) and then sub-set it based on demographics. It would be a problem if the sample size was too small yes, but that is the ONLY limiting factor.

>>151345929
And you're showing that you blindly believe in infographics about demographics posted on 4chan taken from baseline government data meant to give baseline population informstion instead of questioning the infographic's validity in data partitioning, sampling, levels of significance, and presentation.
All the conclusions in this thread are reaches without hard numbers indicating whether or not we are seeing significant information.

We literally have nothing saying we can reject null hypothesis. Which is that number of partners and marriage stability are unrelated.

>>151321745

ANNA TOP SLUT

>>151345969
It's not about finding a study that shows the opposite. It's about finding a study that can lead us to not assume the null.

>>151346010
I give this performance a perfect 10! You should consider a shot at the Olympics!

File: 1472905138335.jpg (219KB, 990x1400px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 990x1400px

Posting gyaru in your statistics fetish thread. You're lucky that I wasn't a girl during my high school years, I'd bully you, nerds.

>>151345939
Literally wrong

Here, have a random example
http://www.people-press.org/2015/08/13/continued-bipartisan-support-for-expanded-background-checks-on-gun-sales/

File: 24100554.png (67KB, 698x922px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 698x922px

It didn't have to be like this.
I want my thread back.

>>151346001
The absurdity of my happiness example was meant to show the insanity of similar conclusions drawn at the start of the convo.
>the conclusions are not definitive
Which is my overall argument. Not only do we have conclusions which are not definitive, we have conclusions with no indication of their statistical significance or clarity in their validity on data partitioning. We have no reason to reject the idea that number of partners and marriage stability are unrelated.

>>151346043
So what shows that we can reject the null? What affirms that we have proper partitioning and resampling within these infographics?

>>151346115
Can he stick the landing....?

HE DOES IT!

A NEW WORLD RECORD!

File: Thats_like_your_opinion_man.png (70KB, 220x220px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 220x220px

>>151346124
Yeah I'd probably resort to strawmanning too if I couldn't explain my bullshit infographics.

>>151346145
The irony, it's so, so sweet.

Mmmmm just delicious....

>>151346094
The absurdity of your example does not mean that the original conclusion is also absurd as you have totally failed to prove your point with the mind bending logic you had. If you can't dispute the conclusion that sluts divorce more, then fuck off.

File: genos seriously.png (94KB, 523x317px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 523x317px

Never have I seen a thread start so good and turn to such shit. You'd think after hours of arguing and getting nowhere these autists would realize there's no way they're going to convince one another of their side.

File: 1467564471598.jpg (86KB, 652x921px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 652x921px

What is the probability that a girl with inverted nipples will be a good mother?

>>151346055
Sexy bullying?

>>151321745
This nukige was so hot

>>151343864
Sauce?

>>151346190
If you can't prove with statistical significance that sluts divorce more then fuck off, there is no reason to assume there is a relation between the two.
The CDC collected data on general family stats. Not slut stats.

>>151346094
holy fuck you were almost there and then you flubbed it.

sub-setting data doesn't matter if the sample size is large enough and the sample was gathered in an acceptable matter.

The only thing in your favor here is that the wording on the graphs' titles are poor. they shouldn't use definitive language, they should say it "suggests x, y, z".

>>151346248
https://exhentai.org/g/919615/fbe8958931/

>>151346199
It's her husband responsibility to make her nipples hard enough that they pop out.

>>151346190
The original post that started this shit had a fair amount of mind bending logic in it itself.

>>151346278
Subsetting does matter. It doesn't magically become okay to subset data however you want just because the larger dataset was collected in an acceptable fashion. You seriously can neglect (or purposefully include) data which has unaccounted for correlations. See Ice Cream sales and Drowning by subsetting only for ice cream sales and drownings taking place in the summer.

>>151321745
Right a best.

>>151321929
Left a best.

>>151346261
>>151346379
It's CDC's data, and you think they don't know how to sample and account for correlation? Keep saying there isn't any relation.

You're hopeless.

File: P125.jpg (736KB, 1280x1890px) Image search: [Google]

736KB, 1280x1890px

>>151346443
You have a thing for christian crosses?

>come into a gyaru thread
>halfway through it turns into an autist posting stats to justify his virginity
This board is becoming a disappointment lately.

>>151346498
The CDC knows how to sample, or at least I hope they do. The question is do the anons know how to subset when these infographics are made? We have no information on confidence intervals or any statistic printouts of the data subsets. We just take it blind that the larger sample was subset. You cannot do straight subsetting. We have resampling for that exact purpose.

File: 1471469666487.jpg (332KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 800x800px

>>151346526
That's one fat gyaru. Is it even legal to be that chunky in Japan?

File: study.jpg (54KB, 945x669px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 945x669px

>>151346573
It wasn't made by anons, it was made by these guys

File: 1465027654707.jpg (157KB, 1204x853px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1204x853px

>>151346594
Aka guys who never got laid.

>>151346594
Interesting. Got a link to the pdf? I'm hoping they have hard info on the summary statistics I can look at. Infographics just don't sit right with me.

>>151346624
google retard

It's not like you know shit about stats anyway

File: Capture.png (314KB, 693x637px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 693x637px

Going to Japan in a few months, and I'll be paying for some gyaru action.

File: 1465884545621.jpg (38KB, 225x350px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 225x350px

>>151346639
I know enough to ask if the shit we're looking at has been sampled properly, sufficiently cross validated, and properly subset instead of taking it blindfolded up the ass unlike some people in this thread.

>>151346688
Like I said, you don't know shit.

>>151346675
Do they accept gaijins? Most nip sex places/soap lands don't allow foreigners

>>151346698
>>151346594
Just Googled it. It's a chart book with no summary statistics. It's pointless and doesn't state if it's proved anything with any level of confidence. We're back at square one and cannot reject the null hypothesis.

File: lol.jpg (42KB, 852x141px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 852x141px

>>151346746

>>151346718

This place in particular is a delivery health thing, so don't think it'll be a problem if you can speak well enough to get them to come out and drop the girl off at the love hotel.

https://a.pomf.cat/nbvcow.webm

>>151346763
>jackknife
>not bootstrap
Into the trash it goes.

File: 1455747595159.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

The perfect gyaru has to be blonde pretty much like Galko but sluttier.

Inverted nipples is mandatory.

>>151346821
lol

File: OH MY GOOOOOOOOOD.gif (906KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

906KB, 500x281px

What if we doe a series thats atrst out with a raging slut of a gyaru that fucks her whole class, but a new guy comes to the school with a heart of gold, that converts her from a gyaru slut into a pure honest waifu as she falls in love with him.

>>151346835
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackknife_resampling
>The jackknife does not correct for a biased sample.
>Study subsets for biased demographic samples instead of directly sampling the demographics
Absolute trash.

>>151346870
lol

you have been thoroughly entertaining

>>151328222
Sauce? Image search shows nothing

>>151346746


>null hypothesis.

101 ways to spot a pseud: way no. 47.

>>151346887
No problem. I try my best.
Make sure to contact my supervisor and rate me.
>>151346912
Not really. You assuming nothing and go with the null before you assume anything.

File: hnk.jpg (414KB, 1746x776px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 1746x776px

Gyaru are only truly amazing when you get to see them pure before being corrupted into the filthy sluts all gyaru are. Otherwise they're just average.

>>151346936
>pure
>no cross

>corrupted
>has cross
What does it mean?

>>151346870
>i-it's biased because I s-said so!
you tried

File: alpha fucks beta bucks.png (635KB, 947x419px) Image search: [Google]

635KB, 947x419px

>>151346933


Assuming there's no assumption going on when determining what gets to be considered the null hypothesis is pure ideology.

>>151346987
Means Japan enjoys mocking our lord and savior Jesus Christ.

>>151346867
Will he make the gyaru frustrated by refusing her advances? If yes, then I need to watch it.

ギャルはきもい

File: IMG_1784.jpg (60KB, 379x500px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 379x500px

>>151347027
>>151346867
>>151346718
>>151346675

Fuck off gyaru fags, go make your own thread. We statistics here.

>>151347315
I guess wearing crucifixes in Japan is their equivalent of Western whores tattooing Chinese shit on their asses.

File: 1472905660632.jpg (263KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1280x1280px

>>151347170
>that pic
Wouldn't you do the same if you were a girl? First explore the goods at the mall and then go for the prize.

File: 1457232538753.png (728KB, 680x1031px) Image search: [Google]

728KB, 680x1031px

>>151347586
Now you understand why practically all cultures around the world except some stone age African tribes and modern Western "culture" have been patriarchal: part of creating a culture of stable and (at the very least publically) monogamous cultures is to disincentivise hoebags. In the West (and to a lesser extent Japan) it's the opposite: whores are not only incentivised but downright rewarded. In today's society it's better to be a disloyal woman than a loyal one.

What benefits the individual can very well be to the detriment of the collective. This is the whole idea behind the codification of laws in the first place.

so is the autist here a mad roastie or some cuck who married one and is trying to convince himself that he didn't make a huge mistake?

>>151346936
I hate how these games are always ntr. why can't they make one where you play as the fat old guy that turns her down the dark side?

File: 7m5rc3ke.png (787KB, 1404x1150px) Image search: [Google]

787KB, 1404x1150px

>>151347692
That game (and their others) are usually a combo of both, as well as the girl's, viewpoints. That's why some of their works are so great.

>>151347692
The autist is the guy trying to convince everyone that sluts are bad, and that it's not best to consider things on an individual basis.

>>151346936
Degeneration into gyaru is the best. Too bad there is so little of it in comparison to the number of gyaru works.

>>151347892
Yeah, it's severely underappreciated. Least there are a few groups doing good shit related to it though.

>>151347692
or "she" might be a huge slut and is cannot come to terms with "her" mistakes

>>151347797
how to consider things on an individual case by case basis.

>if she a slut? y/n

job done.

>>151347797
That's what statistics are for, retard. Statistics that proved you oh so wrong, may I add.