Intercourse and Intelligence (and Feminism?)

Post Reply New Topic

Nah. Not most interesting. But, it's pretty
enjoyable. Maybe more so than more interesting
things.



I WISH I could pay attention to such analysis.

I disagree. Oh sure, from an evolutionary standpoint,
but I don't like the idea of continuing life. And I'd
certainly be opposed to inflicting another soul with
such.

On the other hand, I'd still go with B, as I can't imagine
finding time for too much meaning in sex with so many.

The perfect solution is probably somewhere in between
though. Enough partners to fill ones memories, all loved
(or do we need to have some experiments to learn the
value of love? Whichever). Ah, and NOT just one partner
at any given time - that's way too boring.

This thread really, obviously needs a rational female voice.

Yes; smarter people are going to be more careful about the risks.

Yes, in a culture where women are shamed for doing the chasing, where women are shamed for having a sex drive, and shamed for being intelligent, and are percieved as being less intelligent than they are- in such a culture, more women are going to be manipulated or to otherwise choose to have sex early with guys less intelligent than them selves. If you examine the reasons 13 year old girls give for loosing their virginity, you find a lot of insecurity and a lot of regret. Do you really wish you had slept with a 13 year old?

Yes, intelligence in western- and especially American- culture has become passe, gauche, even- distinctively unpopular.

However, if you think it's hard to get a date as a "smart" guy, please consider that there is equal trouble finding a decent one as a "brainiac" girl. It is far less socially acceptable to be literate, numerate, or rational as a woman than as a man. Furthermore, being a woman who would rather spend her time reading War and Peace than shaving her legs is considered to be doubly criminal; I'm guessing few or none of you understand what the girl who rejects obsession with appearance faces in attempts to get a social life.

The last two guys who displayed romantic interest in me were both much better looking than myself. One was a philosophy major who had never heard of, let alone read, 1984. The other, drop dead gorgeous and apparently used to this sort of thing, told me I was beautiful within minutes of meeting me and obviously expected me to be so grateful and insecure that I would allow him unfettered access to my body. This took me about four and a half hours to figure out and left me feeling slimy from his (fairly casual) touch into the wee hours of the morning.

So, yes, I could be having sex whenever I wanted to. If I did, though, it would be strictly physical; not my thing.

There have been times- many times- when I would have given just about anything simply for a decent conversation with a man who could read on my level. If you want girls like me- who would really, really, really rather have a smart guy- to come out of the woodwork, I recommend the following:

1) Dating websites-not always better than meat markets with some myspace surveys thrown in- might not be the place to look.

2) Try standing up for us. This means, the next time some jerk tells a girl her question was dumb, or that she shouldn't have been asking questions at all, in physics class. . . stand up for her. Yes we are capable of standing up for ourselves- the fact that we always have to is what makes us think you (smart guys who, ostensibly, want a smart girl) don't exist. The loudest voices generally end up representing a whole population.

3) If you are smart, and having a hard time getting dates, maybe it is because you lack other interesting qualities. Smart doesn't always make for decent conversation; if you aren't genuinely interested in thing outside you field, you are probably not interesting to talk to about things outside your field- and there are few fields that cover enough conversation to be the foundation of a romance. Possibly philosophy. . . but you get the idea. Also, regardless of how short/ugly/overweight you think you are, there are things you can do to be more physically attractive, if that's what you want to do; kindness and empathy can likewise be developed.

4) Try respecting us. What seems like "just being intelligent as usual" to you might very reasonably come across as having no respect for the intellect, opinions, or reasoning power of the woman you are with. . . a serious turn off.

5) Try a little less hypocrisy. It's hard to take seriously complaints about how women don't find smart men attractive on a thread where "lowering one's standards" and hiring a prostitute stand uncontested as good solution for the poor "smart guy" who can't get laid because those stupid women don't know what's good for them.
Particularly disturbing about this is what "lowering one's standards" implies- specifically, that for you, Aspie 1, lowering your standards means you have "no right to insist on dating good-looking girls". . . I notice you aren't complaining that any of these "lower standard" lovers aren't smart enough. I'll give Aspie1 props for being straight up about what he wants, but to the more general audience here, if intelligence isn't what you find attractive, what are you talking about when you complain that others don't find it attractive in you?

I don't know why this is so hard to get across, but women don't like sex less than men. We just like all of sex, rather than just the physical end of it.

Some of us have a very, very hard time dealing with only getting parts of it at once; as only parts of it are what most men have (or want) to offer, yes, we turn it down more. That doesn't mean we have it easier. Perhaps we have more complex drives, or perhaps the drives we have are the same but strong in different proportions than those of men.

In terms of meaningful relationships, I don't know how much lower one's standards could possibly get than prostitution. I guess rape, although I don't wish to imply that you would ever go in that direction.

For "smart people," I would guess, the possibility for a real, intense connection on physical, emotional, and intellectual levels could be even more enticing than the simple possibility of physical sex is for those with less inclination to restrain themselves for practical reasons.

Lastly, for Hockey Junkie-
In response to your suave and charming quote that so clearly describes why any woman, ever, would even think about looking at you for long enough to see if you might be attractive, I have this to say:

If I stay home, at least if I'm the only parent who stays home, I give up most opportunities for intellectual stimulation; if I don't have to go to war, at least I (personally) can honestly say I devote a fair chunk of my time to making sure you don't have to either. Statistically, I'll live longer- but, by the same statistics, I'll spend all of those extra years and then a few bedridden, basically accomplishing nothing, and with the highest depression and suicide rates found outside college freshmen. I do want a "nice guy"- or rather, a MAN, who is compassionate, intelligent, able to handle my intensity, thoughtful, courageous, funny, real, honest, and especially kind. If I've "given it up to the creeps," it is due in part to youth and inexperience, but mostly to the fact that such men as I would want to sleep with, now that I know better, are in massively short supply. Is it so wrong to want a high IQ and high emotional content in a relationship?

In short, I have good reasons for all the things you whine about- but as you are so obviously a creep, I wouldn't expect you to understand.

One of the biggest mistakes I ever made was trying to fight against Nature. It doesn't work, really. Mother Nature is holding all of our leashes. We can either follow her, or be dragged by her.

But if you don't want to have kids that's fine. Less competition for my desendants.

I'm going to go along with most people... and assume sex is one of the most entertaining things out there.

Humanity has strayed so far from nature, that there are almost
no vestiges left. We are naturally hunter/gatherers. The whole
of society is built on something which simply is not in accord
with nature. I think the problem has to do more with instituting
rapid change, than anything against nature.

Now, I would make a terrible parent. I don't like children.
Add that to my moral belief in not inflicting harm by helping
to either overpopulate this planet (an unnatural state, if there
ever was one), and to avoid bringing more suffering into being,
and we're talking something far more imperative than whatever
desire there might be not to slay my children, should they arise.




I wonder what it matters though. Why do you identify with some
future creatures, carrying some bit of the same genetic patterns
as you do? Like I said, there are evolutionary reasons why one
desires to pass these genes on, but they're simply a matter that
life couldn't exist without such reasons. Neither a good nor a bad.
Seems that humans would be able to reason, rather than be driven
by base instinct.

If you're a hot woman no one will care. Actually you could a a serial killer and if you're a hot woman no one would care... probably.



Ok here is where things break down for most intellectuals. Part of mating is being sexually attractive to your partner. Men often think "but I'm such a great guy"! Yeah but that 'great-guy' has one nasty beer gut, or has no job, or etc. etc..

Yes appearances are often deceiving, but they aren't always deceiving. Often physical beauty is an indication of health. How often do we see porn staring cancer patients?

If you want to be someone's friend, then focus on the mind. If you want to be someone's mate, then you're going to need that sexual component; and that means you'll have to be sexually attractive. So guys, lose the beer gut; and ladies, shave those legs.



Well the book sucked so no biggie there.



This somehow shocks you?



First of all I've never personally seen anyone ever make such a comment to a female in any class I've ever been in. Maybe the speech codes here are just stricter or something.

Secondly, the 1960's happened and you're equal now: it's time to suck it up and take it like a man. Equality means standing up for yourself. If a man stands up 'for you' he is a sexist who is implying that you can't do it for yourself. A big part of chivalry wasn't just men being courtious to women, but women also accepting a subserviant role. That's just one reason why I'm glad chivalry is dead.

Yeah yeah, I know women want to 'feel protected'. Well guess what: you can't both be in need of protection from someone saying something you don't like AND be independant at the same time.



Oh! You do get it. Good for you.



Examples?



Just because a man possesses a quality and values that in himself doesn't mean he wants it in a mate. Personally I want a woman like Audrey Hepburn because I think her personality would 'balance the equation' with my own. She had an empathy that, while I would never want for myself, I can admire in someone else.



Oh look, feminist shaming language! Everyone saw this coming right? As soon as I saw "rational female" I could smell the Andrea Dworkin perfume. But I'll let hocky-guy fight this one...

Do you really believe that IQ tests or grades are an accurate measure of intelligence?There are more than one kind(academic)intellegencs that could be measured and I think Einstein flucked out of school?Looking at the link it appeared that females intelligence and sexual activity was not linked and one theory for this was that testostrone could be one factor that would account for the sexual/intelligence ratio.

I thought it was interesting that the people who were getting the most sex were in the "average range" of intelligence,neither to high nor to low.Having sex does not account for having "stupid verses safe sex"and I think it should.I would love to have had a relationship or sex with more intelligent guys through out my life, but they weren't asking me out.Dumb guys are evidently smart enough to ask. It;s also one thing to be intelligent and another to be able to communicate your intelligence in an interesting and thought prevoking manor.The first is pretty worthless when it comes to get a date(you cant just pull out an IQ test and ask someone for sex.)

I do think that having passionate intellectual interestes can lead someone into prefering researching over the chit-chat required to get a date.It's also possible that not being able to get dates will lead someone into having more time to study your interests(if the interestests happen to be more then playing video games,watching American Idol or searching for porn on line...),it could improve your intelligence.I have seen some intelligence from some of the males on this site, but I have also seen a basic immaturity in the attitudes towards females.I think it is the latter that makes it more difficult for them to get dates(as well as a lack of enthusiasm...wait for marriage,ha.)Women respond to passion and desire not apathy and hostility.It's a good thing that the responders arent interested in having sex because I dont see it coming your way any time in the near future.

Actually, I'd find that a turn on.



You're suggesting porn stars are particularly
attractive?


I wouldn't settle for a mate who was
only attractive. Or only a good match
in conversations. Or only caring. It has
to be all.




Maybe, but I couldn't imagine being with someone
who couldn't carry on a conversation, nor enjoy
the same things as I do, because of a lack of
intelligence.

I can be attracted to someone's mind. Actually, an idiot is definiately someone I can't be attracted to.

Looking for a mate is largely an activity for my brian... then my heart takes over and tells my brain what to do. All the while my libido just waits patiently, in anticipation of my brain and heart sorting everything out.

Given that other studies have shown that women are more intelligent than men, this could be true.

However I think the difference between MIT and community colleges may be reflective of cultural/education/wealth differences.

I'd love to see the lolcat for that caption.

*shrugs* It depends on the guy I guess. I'm smarter than average, and I engage in sex very regularly. And it's not always with the same person. I usually sleep with a girl by the third date, and I've done it... well, lots of times.

Sex is about opportunity and inhibitions.

put the opportunity and any thing that losens hibitions and watch the sparks fly.

one of the best things that losens the 'hibitions' is intellectual attraction and a relaxation of cultural and moral objections to the actual physical contact. (If that includes the blessings of both families and a religious ceremony, so be it.) your milage may vary.

Merle

And this is your goal?

Because, if not, maybe you should
try tactics which get you keepers,
instead of little flings.

you're supposed to KEEP them??

Merle