Creating a functioning intercourse wand

Here is a great tiding for the post phallo-amputation intercourse enthusiast: the tissue engineered rabbit penis!

A link to the latest abomination unto nature

My article is complete!

Dear Readers,

It is with great joy that I announce the completion of my newest article, as promised on the weblog post dated 8/24/09. Its title is "A Calculation upon the Frequency of Intercourse", by Dr. A. Gentleman Scientist. Enclosed is the full text of the article, which I have submitted to various Intercourse Journals, such as "Juggs", "Doggystyle", and "A** Blasters". Enjoy!

-The Gentleman Scientist

----------------------------------------------------------

A Calculation upon the Frequency of Intercourse

by Dr. A. Gentleman Scientist

The purpose of marriage, arguably, is so that both parties involved may enjoy the wanton fruits of their lust in a state-sanctioned relationship. It allows each partner access to the reproductive organs of the other at regular intervals, barring headaches, old age, and wiener-gout*. However, what can we say about the intercourse habits of the non-married, non-engaged population? Is it possible to give a quantitative description of the frequency of "getting it on" in the populace of single folk? This article will present a discussion as to the habits of such a population, and it will present a probability distribution for the frequency of hopefully-non-baby-making-sex that the males of such a population achieve.

Before deriving this frequency distribution, let us consider the plight of the average male. Poor thing, wretched thing, horrid thing he is indeed. "Bachelors" exist as a smelly, unwashed group; by and large they are beta-males** who have very little luck with the opposite sex. These "men" in general want sex quite often, but their efforts seldom fall on fertile soil. Thus the phrase "getting lucky". If it were up to unmarried men, the frequency of sex would approach infinity; society as a whole would inevitably cease to function in such a world. For the limiting factor, therefore, we must look to the fairer sex.

For women, the frequency of sex comes close to how often they would want it. Granted, there may be times where they wish for it and the male is unable or unwilling, but this case cannot make more than 50% of attempts by women at sex. Upon informal discussions with my female scientific peers, I have concluded that on average, outside of a formal relationship, a woman will intercourse with a man between once every two weeks and once every month. Such a startling revelation to find this! Of course, this claim may be subject to scrutiny, and as such I intend to study it more in depth. However, upon the calculations that follow, you will see it matters little whether it is twice a month or twice a year!

Assume for the time being that we have settled upon an average frequency for the single woman: once per month. It then follows that the average man has the same frequency. There is the confounding effect of "threeway intercourse" on the counts, but the number of times this has happened is negligible compared to the overall effect***.

Astute reader, I'm sure you see the inherent contradiction in such a series of statements. How could it possibly be the case that the average woman finds a partner in the horizontal mambo every month, yet the average man cannot seem to find a cave for his eel for years on end? The way out of this quandry is by realizing that there are a very few single alpha-males who have as much sex as they want. How much sex is this? Piles and piles of sex.

There is a man who's name remains a Mystery to me who has claimed a certain rule about such males. It is the 90/10 rule: 10% of men have 90% of the sex****. Egads! Harrumph!

Let us take this claim at face value to explore its implications. There will be math ahead, so those with weak eyes may wish to avert them now.

Imagine that there is a distribution of how often men have sex. The x-axis will be a percentage corresponding to the amount of the male population than which a man has more sex. For instance, if a man has sex more than 60% of single males in the population, you would place him at .6 on the x-axis. The y-axis will be the frequency of sex in the units of penetrations per month. Our frequency distribution f(x) will therefore be defined on the domain from 0% to 100%, and the range will be from 0 to some (hopefully not too) large number. Here are things we know about this distribution:

1. f(0) = 0. There are men in the world who are virgins.
2. The integral from 0 to 1 of f(x) = 1. Once per month is the average rate at which women have sex, so the average rate at which men have sex must be once per month.
   
3. The integral from .9 to 1 of f(x) = .9 of the total integral from 0 to 1. This is the Mystery rule, stated above.

What sorts of distributions can satisfy these requirements? I posit that the result will be a polynomial distribution of the form f(x) = a*(x^b). We can check that this satisfies rule 1.

f(0) = a*(0^b) = 0. Chizzeck.

Now, we must set a and b such that 2 and 3 are satisfied. From rule 2, we get:

Int(0,1) ax^b = 1
a/(b+1)*x^(b+1)|[0,1] = 1
a/(b+1)*1 - a/(b+1)*0 = 1
a/(b+1) = 1
Therefore, a = b + 1.

From the previous and from rule 3, we get:

Int(.9,1) (b+1)x^b = .9
x^(b+1)|(.9,1) = .9
1^(b+1) - .9^(b+1) = .9
1 - .9^(b+1) = .9
-.9^(b+1) = -.1
.9^(b+1) = .1
b+1 log (.9) = log(.1)
b+1 = log(.1)/log(.9)
b = log(.1)/log(.9) - 1 = 20.85.

We will refer to this number, 20.85, as the Mystery constant. For simplicity's sake, we will round the Mystery constant to 21. This is appropriate, as it is the legal drinking age in most states is 21, and drinking is the main cause of hooking up with douchebags.

Our distribution becomes f(x) = 22x^21. What are the implications of this?

1. f(1) = 22. This implies that the upper limit to how often a man will have sex outside of a relationship is 22 times per month, or about 5 times per week.
   
2. From anecdotal evidence, most men are satisfied with intercourse 2 or 3 times per week. In terms of monthly frequency, this means men are satisfied with between 8.5 to 13 times per month. f(.95) = 8.5, and f(.98) = 13; so, somewhere between 95% and 98% of men not in a relationship are not satisfied with their sex life.
   
3. f(.86) = 1. This implies that approximately 86% of men outside of a relationship have sex less than once per month.
   
4. f(.77) = 1/12. This implies that approximately 77% of men outside of a relationship have sex less than once per year.
   
5. f(.69) = 1/120. 69% of men outside of a relationship have sex less than once per decade.
   

For full disclosure, in the years of singledom that I had before marriage, I achieved a rate of intercourse equal to or better than 54% of the male population.

What a rosy picture this paints! Intercourse saps and impurifies the bodily fluids of those involved; as such, good scientists are made from lack of intercourse.

Good day to you all, and thank you for reading my essay.

A. Gentleman Scientist, Ph.D., M.D., Board certified apiarist

*For a full discussion of wiener-gout, please see Eminhizer et al, 2003.
**For a full discussion of beta-males, please see Eminhizer et al, 1998.
***For a full discussion of threeway-intercourse, please see Eminhizer et al, 2001.
****For a full discussion of the 90/10 rule, please see Strauss, 2005, which has been read by Eminhizer et al, 2007.

A Touch of Ennui Creeps In

I fear that my enthusiasm for this "weblog" is flagging in concert with my dear wife's disregard for her own internet journal. I noted recently that it has been some months since she posted about the simple joys of bright-colored flowers, rearranging the linen cabinet, or cooking three very special meals a day for one's Gentleman Scientist husband.

How can we recapture our passion? Have our lives become...mundane?

Perhaps we should acquire another cat.

Truly, is there anything that surpasses a feline companion for restoring one's joie de vivre? My wife recently hinted that she also finds "intercourse" restorative, but I can only assume this was some kind of jest on her part. Surely no lady of breeding would enjoy such a pastime!

Harrumph!

The most vexing issue of being both at the forefront of culture and science is the unfortunate necessity to endure satire. I have labored and labored to create, to cajole the elements, to weave strands of science, art, and 19th century horror novels into a tapestry of benevolent witchcraft; this is how my public repays me?

An internet in which science is libelled

In reality, my wife looks nothing like that. Though there are some who refer to her by that name.

So Sad

Three Weeks! I was just three weeks away from gathering the results of my experiment, measuring the effect of the constant feeding of gummy bears to squirrels.

My wife - well-intentioned as always, and ignorant of the role of the rodents in my work - stuffed the squirrels inside a raccoon and baked the whole thing in what she termed a "Frontier Pie," creating a fairly gooey sort of Gummy Bear-Squirrel-Raccoon version of Turducken.

It was delicious, but I've lost six months of research.

Note to self: Catch more squirrels tomorrow. Use some of wifey's scones as bait.

Egads!

Egads! Today my wife introduced me to the act called "intercourse". When she described it to me my monocle fell into my homemade lobster bisque! I shall have to study this activity. When I am done, I will submit my findings to a quality peer-reviewed "intercourse" journal. Before I do, however, I must purchase a subscription to several such journals so that I may read the articles inside. The esteemed doctors Flynt and Hefner publish monthlies, I believe.

Egads!

Very important investigations.

Today I tested the time it took for this dog to crack.

It took 7 minutes and 34 seconds before he broke down and ate the cupcakes.

1/4 cup of drool was emitted during the experiment.

Very important conclusions to follow. Soon.