[ectoplasm]

I didn't link to the wrong thing. If you read that article the top cities excluding Nara are all in greater Tokyo. The max time for Kanagawa is not reported, the average time for Kanagawa is 90 minutes (for men with kids under 6). Your calculations are median / max / average of averages.

+/- 3 sigma = 99.7% of the sample, and we know 3% is > 2 hours (for all of Japan, not Tokyo). There's near the same percentage of LGBT adults in the US (~4%).

All we're arguing over is the use of the word normal. Would you be happier with "uncommon but not an extreme outlier"?

[simoncion]

> ...the top cities excluding Nara are all in greater Tokyo.

Oh. You meant "The Tokyo Metropolitan Area", rather than Tokyo. Gotcha. :)

> Your calculations are median / max / average of averages.

Mmhmm. Given that that's the only data we have to work with, I don't see the problem with it (other than the violence it should have done to the phrasing in my previous comment). I'd rather have the more detailed data, but alas.

> ...and we know 3% is > 2 hours (for all of Japan, not Tokyo).

How do we know that? The data that my 3% came from was -apparently- from Tokyo, Kanagawa, Chiba, or Saitama respondents.

> There's near the same percentage of LGBT adults in the US (~4%).

1) If that's L, G, B, and T adults in the US, I don't believe that number for a second. That stat has to suffer from under-reporting.

2) I would absolutely say that a property shared by only 4% of a population is not common.

> All we're arguing over is the use of the word normal. Would you be happier with "uncommon but not an extreme outlier"?

Based on the data, a 120+ minute commute appears to be rather uncommon. I'm uncomfortable about speaking about the nature of the outliers without knowing more about the individual points in the data set. That last bucket is potentially a very large one; who knows what its contents look like? [0]

"Normal" is... not the best term to use when trying to speak precisely.

If I have a system that only fails in a particular way 3% of the time, I could reasonably say "That failure mode is not normal.". On the other hand, if I know that it fails in that particular way 3% of the time, I can reasonably say, "Oh, that's infrequent, but normal behavior of the system.".

See the problem?

[0] I mean, obviously, we could have a few reasonably good guesses at its highest possible upper bound, but other than that...

[ectoplasm]

My 3% came from this article (which I linked, but which is fine to have ignored):

http://www.japan-guide.com/topic/0011.html

The LGBT stat came from Wikipedia. For controversial stuff like that in the US, WP is pretty good. I used to think it was 10-15%, 1 in 7 was the number I learned growing up, I guess it's 1 in 25.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_demographics_of_the_Unite...

For me, "abnormal" generally means "what is wrong with you" (the response given here), whereas "normal" can even include eye-rolling and "oh so you're one of those". The difference between 1 in 33 (3%) and 1 in 666 (0.015%, from the tail end past +3 sigma which accounts for 50% - 99.7% / 2) is really quite palpable.

But again, let's face it: it's not as common as I thought, and it's not as uncommon as you thought.