Tuesday, March 14, 2006

What’s In A (Slutty) Name Part II Electric Boogaloo

Here we continue mildly interesting experiments with the Slut-O-Meter. Today we investigate the questions: Is a less common name sluttier than a more common name?

Well here is the theory: Dawn is sluttier than Amanda, Crystal sluttier than Emily, and Leandra sluttier than Jessica. It makes sense to me, passes the gut check, but of course is not actually backed by any sort of “facts”. Well, sense this is a thing that doesn’t have any real basis or grounding in any real quantifiable measure, I turn to my favorite instrument of pseudo-science: The Slut-O-Meter.

Here’s the data, with the names taken from the 1986 Social Security Online listing of popular baby names for girls. I used these 1986 instead of a more recent year, because the interest in determining the slut-factor of infant names is of less interest to me than determining the slut-factor of the names of 19-20 year olds.

Name

Popularity Rank

Total Number


Sluttiness

Jessica

1

52,594


20.10%

Sarah

5

28,093


2.76%

Elizabeth

10

19,038


7.35%

Rachel

15

15,423


-9.04%

Laura

20

14,159


0%

Crystal

25

12,685


0.48%

Erin

30

10,057


0.43%

Courtney

35

9,118


1.63%

Lisa

40

7,895


-0.79%

Alicia

45

7,010


15.37%

Kristin

50

5,997


0.93%

Jenna

55

5,410


46.18%

Cassandra

60

4,981


10.21%

Brittney

65

4,590


45.10%

Natasha

70

3,869


9.30%

Diana

75

3,655


-1%

Casey

80

3,421


1.98%

Leslie

85

3,223


-0.90%

Bethany

90

3,080


3.30%

Jasmine

95

2,985


-0.34%

Karen

100

2,791


-1.92%



So this data leads us to the conclusion of absolutely nothing. There is not a clear and discernible pattern with this data set, which points to the fact that maybe I scrap this idea that a weird name is a slutty name. I give my heartfelt apologies to all the Auroras, Dawns, Rains, and Leandras: It was wrong to assume that a girl with a name like that would just give it up. I apologize.

-1 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home