So girls with any intellect have always thought that while the quarterback is drool worthy, the captain of the chess team was by far more date worthy if there was ever any hope for a conversation. Finally, science proves that women really aren’t as shallow as everyone seems to think. Albeit, we still would probably pick Mr. Muscles for a one night stand, but intelligence is definitely making a come back. And why not? Trying to talk to an attractive dim wit gets old after he asks you to explain the meaning of every word over two syllables. Suddenly he loses his appeal, and you want an excuse to run in the opposite direction. Or when they can’t seem to follow you. When you mention the word science or politics and they think of a monkey named George…well they weren’t too far off.
The article is about a research study showing that women are obviously more attracted to men with intelligence than stupidity. Who would have ever thought, huh? I mean, they have to be good for something other than opening pickle jars.Biologically speaking, this is because the intelligent man would have better luck with helping a family survive. Not to mention passing those smart genes down to future offspring.
Personally, I’m drawn to geeks and nerds. When a guy can “use big words” and make a logical point based on facts, my heart melts. Being able to discuss things in science, politics, literature, art, anything that would make my brain work seems to produce more oxytocin than if we had spent the past hour in bed. This is especially if they can manage to kick my ass on Counter Strike or Halo, or any RPG or RTS for that matter. And being a fan of Star Wars or at least another awsome science fiction show/movie. That’s what this nerd looks for, a fellow nerd who can discuss intellectual topics just as well as he can wield a controler or mouse.
Comments
RSS
Digg!
Stumble
Tweet
[...] Random Feed wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptTHE Article So girls with any intellect have always thought that while the quarterback is drool worthy, the captain of the chess team was by far more date worthy if there was ever any hope for a conversation. Finally, science proves that women really aren’t as shallow as everyone seems to think. Albeit, we still would probably pick Mr. Muscles for a one night stand, but intelligence is definitely making a come back. And why not? Trying to talk to an attractive dim wit gets old after he asks y [...]
I am a smart guy and I got bitc#es all over me!
I remember seeing this before, but I’ll post the same thing I did then:
“More than 200 women watched a series of these videos before rating each man’s intelligence, attractiveness, creativity and appeal for a short-term or long-term relationship.”
Who they rate highest on a survey is not who they usually end up dating. Empirical analysis would be more useful.
haha
Definitely mr(s) web. There are a whole lot of factors in this, including the Hawthorne Effect and other psychological factors. “What would be the best option, objectively?” compared to “What do I get off on?”
Think critically about what you’re reading.
Now do a study of hundreds of women who aren’t in university, who never made it there, who aren’t as intelligent as those who are in university. it makes complete logical sense why women in university would want to have someone they can talk to intelligently. the study is biased and doesn’t show that “women” (as a general term) are starting to like geeky guys. it shows that women IN UNIVERSITY like smart men.
And this “women go for the hunk” crap? what is “the hunk”? …that’s obviously subjective. i know, there are features that are “commonly” described as “attractive” and “desirable” but personally i find those like… brad pitt, …and whoever is supposed to be a “hunk” these days…i dont even know. im so out of touch… to be seriously unattractive. I like unique looks, even for a one night stand I wouldn’t be going for the stereotypical “hunk”.
Not to mention that intelligence does NOT mean he is a good catch. I’ve dated hyper-intelligent guys (like th ekind that start university when they’re 12) and they make the worst boyfriends ever. Their intelligence totally destroys their social skills, ability to understand emotions and thus be compassionate.
Let me first say that I am a heterosexual woman who values intelligence in a partner. Lack of intelligence is probably one of the biggest turn-offs I can think of, and I consider myself lucky to have found an extremely intelligent ( and also attractive, sensitive, kind, romantic, honest, funny, and yes, “nerdy”) boyfriend.
This article makes me understand why so many feminists find pop-evolutionary psychology sexist, fallacious, and repellent.
This quote, for example: “‘Women want the best of both worlds. Not only a physically attractive man, but somebody in the long term who can provide for them.’ ” In this day and age, that is just ridiculously sexist. Personally, I plan on providing for MYSELF, and I always have, yet intelligence is one of the most important things I look for in a partner. Do I secretly want a man to provide for me, or am I perhaps the exception to the rule? In addition to that (as Katie briefly explained above), general intelligence does not always equal financial success, nor does it equal emotional intelligence; thus, despite his intelligence, a woman might not always find her partner able to “provide” for her either financially or emotionally. And this does not even begin to explain why a woman would choose an intelligent man for a one-night stand. Is she just hoping that she’ll conceive, bear an intelligent child, and then have that intelligent child “provide” for her?
“As for picking a bed-mate, the men’s actual smartness proved a reliable indicator of their appeal for both brief hook-ups and serious relationships – which came as something of a surprise.” Oh, for Sagan’s sake! Correlation does NOT equal causation! CORRELATION != CAUSATION!
“Women are still going for the hunk,” Prokosch says. “If you had an option to pick from five different people, you would pick the most attractive one.” Attractiveness is not mathematical, Dr. Prokosch. Yes, humans tend to find symmetry attractive, but sometimes it is the imperfections that people find most attractive and endearing (Marilyn Monroe’s “beauty mark” is a good example.) Attractiveness is extremely subjective. Often, people who are merely decent-looking at first glance become far more attractive once one gets a chance to know them.
The only women that exist are ones in university Katie