Kinda bordering a strawman here, but if I said
why are men attracted into the airhead type?
there would be bunch of dudes saying they are into intelligent women, and that it’s just hollywood.
(Sidenote props to the artist for drawing all those people one by one)
Men are attracted to the “airhead type” because those women are good at making men feel good about themselves and keeping up lively conversation; and though people usually prioritise companions who have the same interests as them, they enjoy talking also to a lively conversation partner, perhaps someone as-different-from-themselves as possible: someone who surprises them.
Many men feel that all women have the “airhead” quality - no, not as in they’re all stupid, but as in they’re lively and conversational in that stereotypical way that disrupts the man-to-man conversation; and though they do not speak to men as equals (preferring to talk over them or jerk the conversation off on some other tangent, perhaps, or dwell on uniquely feminine topics which baffle/disinterest the male listener), this is seen as no big loss, really. For women are different to men, and their presence in our lives is welcome precisely because of that rather than in spite of it.
The important thing to remember is that people change overtime and every person is more multifaceted than massive media would have us believe - so yes, that is “just Hollywood.” Who’s to say why a man likes an “airhead,” she probably has more depth to her than you know about.
Edited to change one comma into a colon, and formalise grammar in final sentence
Incelligence is a heck of a term.
Implies intelligence is measure monetarily which, when you put it that way, is obviously wrong.
Ah yes, how to succeed in life in a fundamentally broken society that values exploitation over everything else. Couldn’t think of a better metric for choosing a partner.
Yes, it is. Someone who can do well in society and their lives while being generally good to those around them is often considered a good catch.
Thinking that anyone who succeeds in life in our society must be one of the like, less than 10% who are ghouls is odd.
Beeing generally happy and doing well while simultaneously profiting from a society that is build on genocide, exploitation of natural resources and imperialism is such a twisted concept. Even if not part of the 10%.
Gotcha. So would you rank yourself as mostly unhappy, destitute and unwell?
Can you think of anyone in our society who’s doing alright within the confines of a broken system, or do you think that everyone’s existence is inseperable from the context of that existence, even if the means of changing it or it’s impact are outside of their reach? Somewhere in the middle?
I met a guy who helps manage a homeless shelter and food bank. Stand-up guy. Makes ends meet, is doing what he can where he can. Generally happy guy with a family. Pretty twisted right? Or my former coworker who let his gardening hobby get out of hand and ended up running a community garden that retrofitted two houses to donate to families in need.
People exist in their circumstances, but they’re not defined by them. How you react to those circumstances speaks to your character, not that you exist in them.
How you react to those circumstances speaks for your character
Being able to ignore the bigger picture because you can change your own privileged surroundings IS the problematic reaction that speaks for your character
Gotcha, so doing good where you can makes you evil unless you’re mired in torment over things beyond your control? By that metric everyone in the world is evil.
I can’t fathom an ethical system that requires you to be unhappy about things beyond your control once you’ve done the good that you can.
What constitutes “good character” to you? What constitutes “success”?
Yes it is called empathy, it’s nothing you can buy yourself out of by doing good things. If you are somehow interested in the well being of the people it just doesn’t magically disappear after helping some of them. It doesn’t make you evil but it’s certainly not a good sign to weigh these things against each other. The ability to feel good while seeing the world suffer seems to me problematic.
Gotcha. So when was the last time you were happy? I take it you simply do not do things you enjoy?
And when did I say anything even remotely like not feeling empathy for suffering, or that caring for people disappears after doing a good deed? Empathy isn’t an ethical system.
I’m actually curious what behavior you think would be non-problematic, and if any human actually does that.
Also, this is just plain wrong.
Some women are attracted to intellectual minds.
Some women are attracted to physical strength, some women are attracted to maternal instincts, so on and so forth.
The problem is this question is usually being asked by someone who thinks that responding to every factual statement with an inflammatory counterpoint qualifies as intelligence.
Also, this is just plain wrong.
A greentext that’s wrong? Highly unlikely.
Nobody is attracted to intelligence. Don’t say you are because you aren’t. You’re attracted to the body. And whoever you’re with is attracted to your body. That’s romantic love. If you’re upset that people don’t love you for your brain, you suffer from body dysmorphia.
i’m asexual-ish but not sex repulsed. i don’t care for the body, i care deeply about the mind
For sexual people, it’s about the body and the problem with Internet nerds is that they’re hyperintelligent and hypernegative and think their bodies suck and want people to be sexually attracted to their brains. But their bodies don’t suck, and they’re not physically ugly.
I can guarantee you every guy here who’s moping about being lonely has dozens of women masturbating to the thought of them every night. And their not masturbating to thought of them programming in C++.
You could just go to therapy instead of advertising your mental issues publicly.
Oh man, I am so sorry I told everyone here that they’re physically attractive. Okay. You win. I’m insane. You’re right. You’re all ugly monsters who will never find love.
You’re not even trying to understand why everyone disagrees with you. In fact, you’re refusing to even acknowledge that you could be mistaken in your premise that people aren’t attracted to intelligence, and instead lash out.
That is why you need therapy.You’re not even trying to understand why everyone disagrees with you.
That’s fine. They’re not even trying to understand what I was saying.
In fact, you’re refusing to even acknowledge that you could be mistaken in your premise that people aren’t attracted to intelligence, and instead lash out. That is why you need therapy.
Are you being serious? Or just attacking me like the other person? Because I’m pretty sure if I go to a therapist and I show them these exchanges, they’re not going to say that I’m the one who needs therapy.
No, they will.
You unilaterally claimed that nobody is attracted to intelligence, that everyone is just pretending and they’re really only attracted to physical appearance. Even as hyperbole, that is a wildly unhealthy thing to believe, and you absolutely called yourself out.
No, they will.
No they won’t.
You unilaterally claimed that nobody is attracted to intelligence, that everyone is just pretending and they’re really only attracted to physical appearance. Even as hyperbole, that is a wildly unhealthy thing to believe, and you absolutely called yourself out.
What’s wildly unhealthy is loving the person you’re fucking in the same way you love your mother and sister and grandma. I’m not the one calling myself out.
everyone except me is hiding the truth about what they really feel, but I know the truth!
That’s the position you’re going to double down on, in the face of everyone correcting you? No, the therapist won’t think you’re crazy at all.
You think you’ve found a gotcha, but you’re still just outing yourself. You think that a romantic relationship involves a single type of attraction, and that a single type of attraction affects sexual arousal? If I believed you capable of long term romantic relationships, I’d pity your spouse.
If that was even remotely true then the entire idea of seduction wouldn’t exist. Convincing someone who didn’t want to sleep with you to sleep with you wouldn’t be a fucking thing, you absolute moron.
you absolute moron.
Jesus Christ! Friendly fuck, ainch ya. This proves my point about the hypernegativity. I’m telling everyone here, they’re good lookcking, and the response is I’m fucking moron. Damn.
To address what you’re saying about seduction: You can’t sell a bald man a comb. A woman isn’t going to be romantically involved with you if she doesn’t want to. You have a spooky level of cynicism regarding this.
Look at your responses and your downvotes. Obviously nobody agrees with you. If you weren’t a moron you’d maybe look at this as an opportunity for self reflection and growth.
It all goes to prove the OP meme’s point. You’re all too god damn smart.
LMBO Some say he’s still in the burn unit to this day
If “succeed in life” means significant intergenerational wealth to achieve a strong head start, great genetics for height and facial symmetry, and strong black triad traits, then sure. Let’s convert the word “luck” to “intelligence”, regardless of how bad that fit may be.
I mean, there are exceptions among women. But the correct term is called “outliers” for a damn good reason.
