- cross-posted to:
- 4chan@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- 4chan@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
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.
Allow me to make an inflammatory counterpoint to demonstrate my intelligence: this text isn’t green YOU BUFFOON!
Got em
😰
Not on this Internet!
We need a new internet
Is it still under warranty?
Ah, damn, we might have to ask the US military…
or worse…
T H E F R E N C H
It would be like claiming it contained misleading statements and was not heteronormative.
wrong and homosexual, as per usual
Chance in a million!
Now I don’t know if that means it has to happen (if it’s exactly 1000000:1, according to Pratchett) or if the front fell off.
Well, I was thinking more about the other ones.
The weird definition of intelligence they are using (how to succeed in life) does kind of cover that. The definition of what success is, and the millions of ways of achieving it covers just about all variations.
From what I’ve observed, intelligence doesn’t count for much when it comes to “success in life”, whatever that might be.
True, in today’s times much higher chance of success is having wealthy parents and not having problem exploiting other people, but it wasn’t always like that.
Though given that it is 4chan, I agree with responder that OP mixes incelligence with intelligence. I’m not convinced that sitting on a forum full of memes and Nazi ideology is something that an intelligent person would be interested in.
Incelligence is a heck of a term.
Should be word of the decade.
!brandnewsentence or however to link a community
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)
Zach is like Randall Munroe for people who prefer eyes to not be attached to heads 🤩
Is this an egg meme?
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
At least OP said women and not “females”.
At least OP said women and not “females”
Weaponised schizophrenia
So success in life means actual intelligence? I disagree with that.
Success ≠ actual intelligence.
Plenty of very successful people who are complete morons.
Women are attracted to success, regardless of actual intelligence.
And of course this is a generalization. Women are not a monolith.
It’s more that intelligence implies success rather than success implies intelligence.
Actual intelligence boosts chances for success, but it is not required for success.
The way the world is going, intelligence is playing less and less of a factor. You’re either born into it, or you’re a wage slave struggling for life.
Guess that depends on where you are. Many places in the world have very high social mobility along with solid welfare and pension systems.
Maybe somewhat less that 40 years ago, but certainly much better than the last thousand years overall.
Intelligence is working out that you don’t have to struggle. UK example, don’t move to London “for the jobs” if you are only finding minimum wage work.
Success looks different for different groups of people, unfortunately. A slave could be considered more successful than another, while remaining a slave.
Intelligence is actually slightly negatively correlated with success by a lot of metrics (earnings, years of life, health) and the best predictors are general big 5 attributes like openness to experience, low neuroticism, high conscientiousness (hard working), and extraversion. Those characteristics are way better predictors of life success.
Do you have any references for this? As far as I know the literature, the debate about “what matters more” is still ongoing with some research arguing in favor of personality and other research in favor of cognitive ability. Regardless of this, the relationship between cognitive ability and various life outcomes seems to be consistently positive, and I am not aware of any convincing evidence to the contrary.
I guess I was referencing the original 2016 study by Borghans, Golsteyn, Heckman & Humphries that’s since been replicated and refuted. You’re right that it’s not settled academically right now so we don’t know for sure.
“…conscientiousness (hard working)…”
Yeah, surely, if you define working hard as just receiving your father’s or grandfather’s wealth (or at least, part of it) as your inheritance.
When you actually look down at this rabbit hole, you find that the entire premise where these supposedly “predictors” rely, the meritocracy, is actually just a scam, maybe the biggest one. Because social movility is totally broken because prices, rents and taxes are going crazily up while salaries are dropping dramatically, and meanwhile some fucking bank takes your money as a monetary rescue for a fucking son of a bitch billionaire which movement caused an economic catastrophe.
Yeah, I took it more as analysing and adjusting to one’s current situation, as opposed to going conspiracy nut.
Neither magic crystals nor PUA courses are what someone struggling to budget 2000$ for candles needs
What is success? Being surrounded by people you love and trust? Living life without regret? Sitting on hoards and hoards of money? Planting an endangered tree?
It’s just correct enough for the tiny quipy descriptor to get to the real takedown after.
Also this is 4chan, grade on a curve.
Yeah, I’d say humor is the better indicator. It boils down to the ability to connect ideas in creative ways, as well as keeping a longer context window in conversations
It’s not a direct 1:1, but what is intelligence really? There’s many types, and they’re all a combination of domains
That’s not what I was referring to. Intelligence is basically a combination of working memory, recall, cognition, and metacognition
The combination of these domains together produce the foundation for the “types” of intelligence, which might be more accurately described as abilities
Humor demonstrates these qualities socially. It’s not a direct relationship, more like a demonstration. Like how dancing demonstrates physical ability, humor demonstrates the factors underlying intelligence
(But you could also just be a good or bad dancer)
Speaking of juicy mammoths, who’s the lady in the picture?
Some thirst trap which is ironic since she’s holding a drink
Probably what he considers his bottom in terms of women he’d date.
Why are dudes like this.
Women are individuals who’s preferences differ from person to person. But forget all that for a second. Women are just not attracted to men who are DUMPY RUDE ASSHOLES. NOBODY IS. These dudes make so many excuses to not work on themselves.
why are dudes like this
Dudes are individuals whose personalities differ from person to person.
I’m guessing that was the joke
I always assumed “dude” is gender-neutral word. We even have a saying “dūdiņa” in my language which is like sweet-talking “dude” word meant towards women.
It depends on context. It gets used gender neutral sometimes, but it also gets used as a masculine descriptor too.
women are people with choices
they make different choices
Impossible. If women had choices, then they’d have a diversity of off-spring with a wide spectrum of forms, traits, and behaviors.
We know that can’t be the case, because all men are identical and perfectly interchangeable, except for a tiny variance in peak performance which they use to sort themselves from Sigma to Omega for the purpose of obtaining Da Big Sequesy to produce more Sigma clones.
😭😭😭
Dude lamenting women not being attracted to intelligence checks out as he use a picture that clearly focuses on a woman’s intelligence.
I mean, that’s a fun take but realistically there are plenty of women who put a lot more stock in looks (just as men do) an immediate financial ability.
That jock who got a job that’s physically demanding might be making more out of high school, but the IT nerd who went for they education and got a good tech job was likely on a slower burn path to self-improvement with better pay, possibly improving looks over time (or at least less of a beer belly). At least before AI started killing the tech sector again, so maybe the jocks will be coming out ahead for awhile.
Also, there’s also nothing wrong with being a good dude with average intelligence who works hard. Just don’t pick an red-hatred idiot. And intelligent nerds who don’t learn social skills can absolutely still become nasty incels.
I wouldn’t put too much stock into the jock versus nerd stereotypes.
Life isn’t an RPG with stats that come at the cost of other stats. Being bad at sports doesn’t make someone more likely to be good at school (if anything, the correlation might run the other way). And charisma, ambition, intelligence, physical appearance, athleticism, work ethic, are all distinct factors that sometimes feedback on each other, and feed into things like wealth, happiness, attractiveness, etc.
Life isn’t an RPG, but there has definitely been a push by certain groups to value looks and strength or martial prowess over intelligence and education, particularly in North American culture. Yeah, somebody can be an athlete without being dumb, and as another person pointed out there actually a lot of high-speed decision-making that requires intelligence to pro-sports.
At the same time, there are people who very much lean towards looking buff, tough, but not too bright as they categorize intellectuals as losers or socially unwanted. Similarly, there are girls or women who will emphasize their looks and actively hide their intelligence. Il This over time leads to a willful ignorance that IMO is worse than simply being of lower IQ or lacking education.
I’m not aware of any culture in which hiding one’s strengths is a common response to one’s own surroundings. Placing value on a particular characteristic does not imply that a completely unrelated characteristic is undesirable. Plenty of beautiful smart people out there, and even in a society where beauty is prized above all else, why would someone beautiful hide their intelligence?
For whatever it’s worth, in my circles (urban white collar millennial professionals in dense cities), most people are both athletic and intelligent. There are plenty of finance bros and tech bros who have Ivy League degrees (sometimes Ph.D.s, M.D.s, J.D.s) that represent real academic achievement and can also turn around and dominate on a basketball court or in a fighting gym. Lots of smart people like gyms, whether we’re talking resistance training, Olympic lifting, CrossFit/Hyrox, endurance cardio sports like marathon running or biking, winter sports like skiing, etc.
That’s also consistent with what I saw in my high school. Most of the top students headed towards Ivy League or similar caliber schools were also athletes who were very good at a competitive sport for the school. The “nerd”/“jock” dichotomy we expected from John Hughes movies never really materialized, and the popular kids tended to be people who were both good at school and good at sports.
And yet where do you think the demographic that voted for the guy that shits his pants and falls asleep comes from exactly, and moreover continues to double-down on supporting him even to their own detriment? How about the people who modify their trucks to spread black smoke just to “own those pissy hybrid drivers and cyclists”?
The continued attempts to enumerate activities that would have fit on Jackass (and likely watched the same on repeat).
Never knew a pretty girl in school who got good grades but hid then and played dumb?
There’s plenty of people who embrace an absurdist mentality and openly reject anything that requires actively using one’s brain.
There’s plenty of people who embrace an absurdist mentality and openly reject anything that requires actively using one’s brain.
I think they’re old, fat, unathletic, and unattractive.
I know Trump voters. For the minority who are actually young, they’re much more likely to be loser incels who are both bad at sports and didn’t get a college degree (much less post graduate educations). It’s aggrieved losers trying to make sense of the world, who are generally unattractive on most metrics: poor, unhealthy, unathletic, not very smart.
It’s like looking at people who work in the trades. Plumbers and welders and carpenters. They tend to be in worse physical shape than, like, lawyers and doctors, who obviously have better intellectual and academic credentials.
So if you’re surrounded by losers, I’m just gonna ask that you stop being impressed with them.
“Just don’t pick an red-hatred idiot” took me a sec to parse.
It’s a typo but the intended group still fits! Love it.
Yeah I meant to your red-hatted but hatred seems to come with that package too so…
Women like beer bellies, and big forearms.
Everything men hate, women like.
The thing there is that when people say “people are attracted to intelligence” the intelligence people think of is different than the type people are generally attracted to.
Highly analytical intelligence is a type of intelligence. So is the ability to make correct choices in a variety of situations.
Almost every athletic endeavor entails being able to assess situations quickly and accurately, and know how to respond. Team sports require group coordination, training and predicting teammates behavior.
That’s intelligence, but it’s often considered a lesser sort than the analytical sort.It’s why people see the people doing work that requires the type of less prestigious intelligence as less intelligent, and see people being drawn to them as proof that people aren’t really drawn to intelligence.
To be blunt: it doesn’t matter how strong you are if can’t read or get confused by the garage door opener every day.
It’s the same as saying that people aren’t attracted to appearance because plenty of people are drawn to normal attractiveness people.
That’s actually a good point about sports intelligence. Pro athletes likely have a certain almost instinctual grasp of certain physics even if they aren’t running the actual numbers in their heads.
You can take away the qualifiers. :) and it’s not instinctual, just practiced.
The notion that athletics doesn’t require intelligence draws away from the understanding of exactly how much practice it takes to hone the skills to that level.And, for a fun reference, the typical NFL player has significantly more traditional education than the average person.
What about the women that is into pepe lore or WW2 theory?
I cant decide if there’s more or less of them than the ones that’s into 4chan incels?
What about the women that is into pepe lore or WW2 theory?
They are irrelevant, because they are both Fake and Gay
Can confirm: am a woman named Gayle “Gay” Fake who can’t get enough cartoon frog facts and FDR/Göring slash fiction.
This is true, i am the FDR
Hey there, handsome!
FDR/Göring slash fiction.
FDR foot fetish
They don’t exist. If women get into pepe lore or WW2 they grow male genitalia. It’s not well documented but it happens quite a lot. The body starts producing massive amounts of testosterone and the stress ages and disfigures the women and also effects their memory. Most of the male incels on 4chan are former super models who got exposed to pepe lore or WW2.
Taking a wild guess: I feel like there may be a few more women into history than sexism.
Hey… my Pepe folder has been collected and curated carefully for decades
“That’s a suspiciously long reply about how Hitler could have succeeded with dates and sub plans. This is all hypothetical right. Just a thought experiment?”
most women i know are more attracted to a character or intelligence than anything else. i know a couple more “stereotypical” women as well. like one girl which disagreed a potential boyfriend just because he is driving a small car. and i can see a big correlation with their background/upbringing
If you can give kindness to strangers: you are successful
