Oh yeah, I get what you mean now. Because of the way percentages work, it looks more impressive going up than going down; when comparing the percentages against each other. It would have been clearer to show % of population male vs female.
Using their numbers: Qatar being the most extreme in men-heavy, has 249.9 men per 100.0 women; which could instead be displayed as 71.4% men and 28.6% women.
Moldova being the most extreme women heavy, has 85.1 men per 100.0 women; which could instead be displayed as 46.0% men and 54.0% women.
If we take the median (most countries seem to have more women than men), Uganda has 98.5 men to 100.0 women; which instead could be written as 49.6% men and 50.4% women.
The site makes it look like men are going extinct in most places, and are extremely disproportionality clustered around certain locations; when reality is not that extreme. A 0.8% population gender swing in the median country isn’t an interesting article, though; so I get why they presented it in this way.
Oh yeah, I get what you mean now. Because of the way percentages work, it looks more impressive going up than going down; when comparing the percentages against each other. It would have been clearer to show % of population male vs female.
Using their numbers: Qatar being the most extreme in men-heavy, has 249.9 men per 100.0 women; which could instead be displayed as 71.4% men and 28.6% women.
Moldova being the most extreme women heavy, has 85.1 men per 100.0 women; which could instead be displayed as 46.0% men and 54.0% women.
If we take the median (most countries seem to have more women than men), Uganda has 98.5 men to 100.0 women; which instead could be written as 49.6% men and 50.4% women.
The site makes it look like men are going extinct in most places, and are extremely disproportionality clustered around certain locations; when reality is not that extreme. A 0.8% population gender swing in the median country isn’t an interesting article, though; so I get why they presented it in this way.