Intercourse and Intelligence (and Feminism?)

Post Reply New Topic

Guess it depends on one's taste.
I worship love, not mere sex.

Not if you believe in the "catch and release program"...I feel it is more human,but each to their own hearts be true and I did eventually find one worth keeping as a pet.

sorry, I was being facetious, I know it is never done here, but I took a chance.

Merle

From my experience, the "lower standard" girls I dated were definitely smart, and had interests, jobs, or hobbies to indicate that, such as psychology, arts, books, etc. In fact, my friends even compliment me on the fact that I never dated a girl who wasn't intelligent. My "lowering of standards" refers mainly to looks, although it can also include specific personality traits. For instance, if she's really plain-looking and hates trains, I still give her a chance if she shows interest in me. After all, there's a possibility for a really nice relationship, and I might not get another chance for a very long time. Most importantly, I simply can't afford to be picky, with my repulsive looks and abysmal pick-up skills, so unless something is a major deal-breaker (such as she's been unfaithful in past relationships), I always give a girl a chance.

Now, some of you might say I lower my standards to use vulnerable girls for sex. That's not true! A quick roll in the sack isn't worth hurting someone's feelings. I lower my standards so I can find a girlfriend and not be alone (although sex will surely be a part of the relationship). When all I want is sex, I see an escort. It's quick and simple, there's no manipulation involved, I get to be with a hot girl for an hour, and I walk away smiling. But when my goal is a relationship, I do what I described above. I hope I cleared everything up.

"thru to the keeper" - lol

Jainaday, a philosopher who never read "1984"? That's pretty bad, of course it was a knock-off of "We" by Zamyatin but nevertheless, a good little book.
I agree with you that guys who think they're very, very smart but aren't getting dates are... well, obviously doing something wrong in their interpersonal dealings. I have no problems with that. I like dates, particularly if the girl turns out to be as interesting as I thought she would be the first time I made her from across a room...
Second, yeah, I think girls that are smart become somehow more attractive. I'd rather get a geek girl with a nice body than a drop-dead gorgeous girl that was brainless, any day.
Third, this thread is great. The discussion has become rather interesting I think.
Fourth, it seems to be the old r vs k selection debate from evolutionary ecology rearing it's ugly head in...WP forums? Have a few offspring that you invest heavily in (k selection) or have a bunch of them that you invest next to nothing in (r selection). The komodo dragon takes the second to the extreme: they literally begin eating their offspring as soon as they're born, the ones that run to safety survive, the others don't.

Intelligent people have lower sex drives. This ties in with the first option; that there are more interesting things than sex.

If you have a high sex drive, then your mind will be preoccupied with things sexual and physical. If you have a low sex drive, you will find other things to think about.
I don't know if "Intelligent" is synonymous with being a geek... I'm more the artistic type and I don't consider myself overly intelligent.

No, this is not my goal. Sex does not require love. How does that make me a bad person?

EDIT: I would just like to clarify, I've had a friends with benefits thing with one girl for about 2 years now (when outside of relationships). I basically sleep with her when I feel like it, and she sleeps with me when she feels like it, and we do regular things like shop and stuff together. I have to admit it's been one of the best (and only) unconventional relationships I've ever had. Come to think of it lately, I don't know what my life would be like without her... it's definitely something for me to think about. :/

Yeah I think its called autism in the case of many WP members.

Just for you Alicorn. Here goes. Anyone wanting the back story on this, I made a mammoth post a couple of pages ago, this is my response to his response.

Item 1: I hadn't wanted to be too blunt about this before, but I am a hot woman. If you'd payed close attention, you may have noticed that that I'm actually not having a hard time finding dates; I'm having a hard time finding dates I want. Both of the men I mentioned have been in the last few weeks. Am I- whoever, uh, Jennifer Garner? Angelina Jolie? No. Physically attractive, in a non-surgical, 30% body fat sort of way? Yes. I base this solely on the number of people who have wanted to have sex and/or relationships with me in my life, and the percentage of them who I consider to have particularly attractive bodies. I could get into gory details about cup size and measurements as a fitting model, but that's not a pissing contest I'm willing to have.

So- if I'm a hot woman no one will care. If I'm a hot woman, I could be, or not be, anything else, and no one will care. So says Vogue; so says Cosmo. And so says Alicorn, so it must be right.

My proffered correction; no one will care- if they are the sort who only cares that I'm a hot woman.

That wasn't so much the crowd I was aiming for. In fact, it expressly excludes the crowd I was aiming for. Over-application of the categorical imperative, my friend. Not everyone is you.


Item 2: Obsession with appearance and being "sexually attractive to one's partner"

I'm not advocating the abandonment of basics. Basic hygene is great.

Unfortunately, in a similar vein to our abandonment of the intellect, our current culture has an exaggerated fixation on appearance. I live in a student apartment with girls who spend as much time putting on their makeup as I spend studying every day.

Even this would be OK, though perhaps still a little disturbing- if it were really optional, without strings. It is the consequences of forgoing the current norms of appearance that most trouble me. The current norm is for mate selection based initially on appearance only. This means that when I leave the house wearing no makeup and dressed in an unconventional way, I'm sexually/romantically invisible to a huge segment of the population. Under the same circumstances, I garner harassment from various people around me.

Most importantly, it excludes me from the society of women and men who might otherwise be my friends.

One is socially required to maintain an appearance that reflects the values of the mainstream if one is to interact with mainstreamers in such a way that they might choose one for a friend or mate.

This would be quite sensible, except that mainstream values need changing. Even most mainstreamers will admit this. Unfortunately, the admission doesn't stop most people from helping to maintain the status quo, which, at this time, is a loud, clear message that "If you're a hot woman, no one cares about anything else."

I don't know if anyone will ever get this, but intellect is sexually attractive to some of us- intellect is physically attractive, to some of us. Is it the only thing that's physically attractive? No. To be physically attractive to me, someone has to hold some combination of physically attractive traits that together reach a certain level. Health and appearance are but two of these qualities.

If I were to somehow find the man of my dreams and he had a beer belly, he would still be the man of my dreams; if he really wanted me to shave my legs, whatever, sure. The time I would put into it would probably be worth it if it were to please someone who had a legitimate stake in the matter. The point is, it should be my choice- and to the degree that I choose to make it so, my partner's choice. I would expect the same in return.

I accept excessive grooming and appearance rituals as legitimate and sometimes interesting hobbies- but they should be just that, hobbies, rather than essential prerequisites to full participation in society. There is nothing implicitly attractive or feminine about shaven legs. It's time consuming and reduces some kinds of sensation, which strikes me as decidedly un-sexy. If it is someone's preference to shave their legs, so be it- but anyone should be able to walk down the street without hearing comments about it, either way.


Item 3: The behavior of the last man who showed interest in me-

Shock, no. Disgust, yes. I used the example because I thought it represented a reasonably common pattern; chances are good that if I had been exhibiting mainstream appearance/ grooming, he would have reacted quite differently to me.


Item 4: Standing up for someone you are attracted to.

First: I don't know where you are, but this is happened in virtually every science class I've ever been in, and a fair variety of other classes as well.

Second: Yes, the sixties did happen, as clearly evidenced by your advice that I should "suck it up and take it like a man."

I don't recall stating a need to be protected; I believe the suggestion of standing up for a woman came in the context of suggestions for those who
a)wished to be attractive to intelligent women, and
b)wished to make the world a more comfortable place for intelligent women and women who find intelligence attractive
That they might better obtain sex, or perhaps even fulfilling relationships.

I will make no arguments on behalf of chivalry as it has been practiced; the relevant matter is not even chivalry as it should be practiced.

The attraction in being stood up for is not always about feeling protected; in this case, the act is about sending a different message to someone who has just been told displaying intelligence is unacceptable. That's the most basic level. If I felt a man- or another woman- in my presence were on the receiving end of similar injustice, I would speak up just the same. On a romantic level- if one is romantically interested in the individual involved- it simply sends the message that one is on their side.

There's also a good argument to be had that a woman's desire to be protected- in a country where domestic violence and rape aren't particularly well prosecuted, and where women still earn only three quarters of what men do- is quite legitimate, and that interdependence in a relationship is also sometimes a good idea. Another thread, perhaps. This deals with enough topics already.


Item 5: Examples of intelligence that comes across as patronizing and disrespectful.

Sadly, this is one of those things that one has to learn to feel out. It goes both ways between the genders, as well.

The only rule I know for it is this: keep the ratio of conversation positive.

I am reminded of a friend who recently left his wife. He's Romanian, an amazing gold bar level ballroom dancer, and a former professional soccer player. He is, in my experience, great at teaching in these areas. His wife refused to do anything with him that he was better at. She studied the Romanian language alone, refusing his help; he spent his days dancing with other women because she would not be his partner. He asked me, once, why on earth she would choose this, and at the time I had no idea. Later, though, I realized that in all the time I'd known them, neither of them had once mentioned anything she was better at. In retrospect I'm inclined to believe this was her last-ditch effort to keep their relationship from consisting entirely of conversations about his areas of expertise.

No matter how interested or insightful she is when it comes to what you're best at, if everything you talk about is what you are better at than her, the chances are very high she will start feeling as if you have forgotten her competence. If this is the case, the chances are similarly low that she will understand that that's what's going on and act well to correct it.

If you're particularly bright, you think she's particularly bright, and you have conversations that show off your intelligence- have conversations that show off hers too.

No feminist theory here, just emotional mechanics.


Item 6: Hypocrisy

Let me get this straight; do you pine for a world in which the most desirable characteristic for men is intelligence, but the most desirable characteristic for women is appearance? If so, I'm in the wrong day dream- not because I wouldn't do well under that system, but because I wouldn't want to.

I confess there's legitimacy in desiring different primary characteristics in a partner than one possesses already.
It's just that in this particular instance, it seems very distasteful to me.


Item 7: Hockey guy

By all means. Hockey junkie, if you please, have a go. In any case, thanks, Alicorn, for introducing me to Andrea Dworkin.

No, huh-uh, no way, sorry, wish I had lower sex drive, or less intellengence.

I think the thing about sex that keeps people who are more intelligent or intellectually inclined out of it more earlier in life is the fact that its a basal thing as well as the act and the game that one goes through to get themselves there. The problem is that intellect causes a degree of divorce from that reality - your not as emotionally inclined to follow your base instincts.

The trouble with our society is that there's no higher alternative, ie. it seems like we lack a way of sexually meeting on a higher plane and if you can't walk your way back down your kinda stuck on the outside of it. Mind you there are a lot of NT's with hi IQs who do fine just because they're able to ignore their intelligence at the right times, pitch it to the wind, and be more backward compatible. We have trouble doing that especially because by the nature of what AS is our handicap seems to be one of natural law, were too human and not enough animal (something we're just wired as).

Yes, I think so too. It doesn't take any brains to sleep with heaps of different people but maintaining a relationship does.

Oh boy!



I perfectly understood that you weren't getting the dates you wanted, one huge reason why could have been that you were ugly. Most people aren't willing to admit it to themselves when they are unattractive.



La la la, self-indulgent time outs about how amazing you are isn't something anyone cares about.



Oddly enough, psychological studdies back me up on this too. Beautiful people are thought to be better people. Beautiful people are trusted more. They also get out of problems with the criminal justice system more often, but I can't find that study right now.



Over-application of not using your brain, my dear. Just because I know a majority of people believe in something doesn't mean I agree with them. I know that most people believe in god, and if I should tell you that I know this, you will then make the dumb conclusion that I must also believe in god.



Again, not using your brain. At no point did I say "obsession". I gave the basic reasons why pretty people are selected as mates, and how to emulate the pretty people.



This happened at about the same time women took over the culture. The simple truth is women are their own oppressors.



I thought you just said you didn't want those kinds of people to be your friend... oh wait... I'm taking you seriously... woah, I need to stop that...



It is your choice. You can chose to not associate with people. No amount of intellectual lamenting on your part will change the main stream culture. Live in it, or live without it; the choice is yours.



If you want a man to 'stand up for you' then you want a man to protect you. That's by definition.



In other words, showing a woman you are willing to PROTECT her, will make you more attractive to her. Thank you for confirming my point.



Bull to the femnist s**t. The feminists cry about thier made up rape numbers. I'll trust the FBI instead, thanks.



Again, like the rape statistic, this is a lie as well. Here is the truth about the pay gap.



You mean the interdependance of how American culture has held on to the Victorian belief that woman are alway right and always moral combined with the feminist True Believer mentality.



There's really no point in pining for something that doesn't exist. Be it a particular social structure or unicorns. That kind of emotional attachment will only make you un-happy.



Well as Ms Dworkin said in her 1976 book Our Blood, "...every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." Matriarchy, march on!

I imagined that it was both a funny crack
AND something which might have been a
bit close to truth. Most of mine are.