You're not wrong but I actually specifically chose things that aren't very correlated.

Yes, overweight comes down with age so the 70% is high, it's probably closer to 60% for that age bracket but I didn't bother to be highly accurate.

Also, non white women tend to be fatter so that 75% for similar race/culture preference might be too low given how we're factoring in non-fat people.

However, for percentage of single women who weren't mothers, I used the appropriate age category but again, probably more non-white single mothers.

For disabled women for example, I also used the appropriate age category; however, it's likely that more overweight women are disabled but it's also likely that most disabled women are single which skews the single women data so overall it might be a wash. Might be more white disabled though because we likely wouldn't let in immigrant disabled but it's likely not a huge difference.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying even when you calculate how everything interacts with one another, the number I came to is close enough. It's not much better than that.

We didn't even factor in looks besides weight, personality or anything. The numbers really are this bad.

You're not wrong but I actually specifically chose things that aren't very correlated.

Yes, overweight comes down with age so the 70% is high, it's probably closer to 60% for that age bracket but I didn't bother to be highly accurate.

Also, non white women tend to be fatter so that 75% for similar race/culture preference might be too low given how we're factoring in non-fat people.

However, for percentage of single women who weren't mothers, I used the appropriate age category but again, probably more non-white single mothers.

For disabled women for example, I also used the appropriate he category; however, it's likely that more overweight women are disabled but it's also likely that most disabled women are single which skews the single women data so overall it might be a wash.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying even when you calculate how everything interacts with one another, the number I came to is close enough. It's not much better than that.

We didn't even factor in looks besides weight, personality or anything. The numbers really are this bad.

You're not wrong but I actually specifically chose things that aren't very correlated.

Yes, overweight comes down with age so the 70% is high, it's probably closer to 60% for that age bracket but I didn't bother to be highly accurate.

Also, non white women tend to be fatter so that 75% for similar race/culture preference might be too low given how we're factoring in non-fat people.

However, for percentage of single women who weren't mothers, I used the appropriate age category.

For disabled women for example, I also used the appropriate he category; however, it's likely that more overweight women are disabled but it's also likely that most disabled women are single which skews the single women data so overall it might be a wash.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying even when you calculate how everything interacts with one another, the number I came to is close enough. It's not much better than that.

We didn't even factor in looks besides weight, personality or anything. The numbers really are this bad.

You're not wrong but I actually specifically chose things that aren't very correlated.

Yes, overweight comes down with she so the 70% is high, it's probably closer to 60% for that age bracket but I didn't bother to be highly accurate.

However for percentage of single women who weren't mothers, I used the appropriate age category.

For disabled women for example, I also used the appropriate he category; however, it's likely that more overweight women are disabled but it's also likely that most disabled women are single which skews the single women data so overall it might be a wash.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying even when you calculate how everything interacts with one another, the number I came to is close enough. It's not much better than that.

We didn't even factor in looks besides weight, personality or anything. The numbers really are this bad.