From FiveThirtyEight's Culture section. Be warned of a lot of statistics talk.
More charts and stuff at the link.
At least, thats what I thought until I saw the programs remarkably poor score according to IMDbs user ratings when I analyzed the data history of HBO. Sex and the City has an overall rating of 7.0 on a scale from 1 to 10 the average score of an English-language television series with 1,000 or more ratings is 7.3. So why did a show roundly considered seminal in the now ubiquitous genre of driven-New York-women-make-a-go-of-it programming score so low?
Yeah, its men.
Nearly 60 percent of the people who rated Sex and the City on IMDb are women,1 and looking only at those scores, the show has an 8.1. Thats well above average. Male users, though, who made up just over 40 percent of Sex and the City raters, assigned it, on average, a 5.8 rating. Oof.
But looking at these extremes, another pattern emerges: The most male-dominated shows are very skewed, while the most female-dominated shows are less so. The 25th-most-male program has 94 percent of its ratings from men. The 25th-most-female show has only 75 percent of its ratings from women.
Apparently it's not because female entertainment is worse, but because guys are more judgmental when it comes to female entertainment. lolBut the data doesnt support the contention that female-skewed programming is inherently worse: Women gave their top 100 shows, on average, a 7.8 rating, about the same score they gave the top 100 male-dominated programs, 8.0. But heres where that Twitter eggs perception might come from: Men gave their top 100 an average score of 8.2 but gave the top 100 female-skewed shows a mere 6.9 average ratings. Shows with more than 10,000 ratings are inherently popular and yet men thought the programs in that group that skew female were below average.
More charts and stuff at the link.