Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Is Owning a Car Still Key for a Date?

posted by on Saturday February 11 2017, @12:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the what-does-betteridge-say? dept.

Phoenix666 writes:

Autotrader reports a study:

Canadians looking to impress on their next romantic date might want to stay clear of on-demand car services, taxis or even public transit, according to the findings of a recent autoTRADER.ca survey that explores the role of the automobile in modern-day dating. In fact, a whopping 92 percent of Canadians say they find it appealing when their date shows up with their own ride. And don't even think about "borrowing the car" for the occasion – close to half of the population surveyed (48 percent) reported that they would find a borrowed vehicle unattractive or "embarrassing beyond words."

While it is unsurprising a publication called Autotrader would find car ownership is necessary for romance, do the study's claims track? Do today's humans really prefer being picked up for a date by someone who owns a car? Is being picked up on a motorcycle really the least attractive?

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Is Owning a Car Still Key for a Date? | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 56 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1) by j-beda on Saturday February 11 2017, @07:28PM

    by j-beda (6342) on Saturday February 11 2017, @07:28PM (#465856) Homepage

    I'd argue it's much more dangerous in the city. In the country, even though it may feel dangerous being 'alone' that's actually safety, because it's extremely unlikely there is any genuine threat lurking in the darkness. In the city there are people everywhere - and some of them are inevitably aggressive and/or unwell. Any sense of greater safety there is an illusion.

    Possibly depending on your defination of "dangerous" your argement seems to be wrong. I think the illusion is mostly the other way around. Murder rates seem to be higher in the rural regions, on a per capita basis:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/big-city-crime-murder-rates-are-higher-in-rural-canada-1.1204349 [www.cbc.ca]
    According to a 2010 report by Statistics Canada, the murder rate is higher outside big cities, and has been for at least a decade. The study measured homicides in the country’s 34 census metropolitan areas (CMA) — urban areas with a population of 100,000 or more — and found that in 2010 the average murder rate was 1.5 per 100,000 people. For non-CMAs, which encompass rural areas, the rate was 1.9.