>>49269
>image boarder
Bernd!
>questions anecdotal evidence
>approves authority (wikipedia)
Patrician.

>>49269
>>49270
>anecdotal
>Aren't all stories or conversations anecdotal? At what point does it become fact or general consensus?
Anecdotal evidence is still evidence, but not something to build generalizations on. For that a statistically significant sample is needed. Let's say a questionnaire filled by 1000-2000 verified women from all age groups and various backgrounds, etc. etc. might be suitable for current discussion.
I wonder if those pornsite and searchword data are reliable. I saw Bernd raising the problem that they might be trannies, however if high enough number, it's impossible to have that many of those. Also these things needs registrations where they ask the user's sex/gender, no? I can imagine clueless normie women registering on porn sites (I know, my imagination isn't statistically significant).
I just wanted to interject for a moment, don't let me lead the discussion to other tracks.

>>49271
Wrapping (not unwrapping) sounds more like it.