The natural selection theory about how women chose their mates goes in two flavors:
The first is that women are attracted with the most fit and healthy men so that their offspring are also fit and healthy. This seems to be true to some extent, athletes generally have wider sex lives than couch potatoes.
The second flavor is that women are attracted to social status. Social status in bulls is associated with combat efficiency, just like lions, gorillas and many other mammals. Humans and some monkey species however seem to go beyond the combat efficiency side of social status. Social status in those species seem to come from a form of popularity contest, brutes are no longer the de facto leaders. This comes from the fact that we have evolved using our intelligence has a survival tool and weapon. A human vs a lion and the human will most likely die. However a human skilled in bows and lances is probably capable of killing a lion. So did we really go beyond the combat efficiency? It seems not, it is more like combat has evolved with our intelligence. But what about leadership? Leadership seems to go, in time of war or crisis, to the most efficient strategist, the man who will lead the tribe through wars, famines and disasters or in time of relative peace will lead it to more prosperity to feed the children. Please bear with me here I'm not talking about modern politics but to who the people instinctively turn to when they want to maximise their survival. It seems like the best generals enjoy wide popularity.
Alexander, Caesar, Gengis Khan, Saladin, William, Joan of Arc, Napoleon, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln all have two things in comon, they won a lot of wars or important ones and they also enjoyed HUGE popularity. In the american civil war even ulysses s grant and lafayette enjoyed huge popularity growth by being good generals.
People that can win wars, resolve conflicts and make you prosper will always enjoy huge popularity. This is where humanity has evolved, however in this time of relative peace between the major powers caused by the nuclear era meaning that conflicts cannot be resolved by force anymore and also the fact that no one wants to let go of their piece of the pie which is Earth, Great and prosperous leaders are nowhere near the horizon.
With this disillusion, intelligent people have come to give up on war because of course, nuclear warfare is not advisable, the cold war which was long and ended in a minor victory for the US with millions of casualties and billions of damage brought us in a new era of Humanity where major powers can't win prosperity through sheer force alone except in very uneven and dishonorable wars.
But the fact is war is still in our instincts! Of course being a soldier is not advisable since you are simply a meat shield, but it is still doing your part in whatever the government wants you to accomplish, and since governments are all about prosperity on a nation-wide spectrum(and some individuals stealing from tax payers)soldiers end up doing their moral part(be it useless or minimal for real prosperity).
Altough I might seem pro-war from all this, I'm actually pretty liberal and i consider myself center-left. The fact is from this blog post anyway that not only in war and love everything is permitted, but that war and love are, in a way, connected, that the leadership ability is your ability to lead a group of other people under your command to prosperity, and that is what chicks dig(generally...).
Then why are intelligent men not so popular with women? Well for one they are more liberal, ie less competitive by morals on a prosperity market. Also they dedicate themselves to fields that only a minority of people really understand the value of, physics, computers, mathematics, all fields that people think aren't imporant in life but are the very reason our society is where it is, that is the information and nuclear era, who were litterally invented by computer science nerds and physics nerds.
mardi 3 avril 2012
Physics nerds are chick magnets
Everybody knows that physics get all the chicks!
Newton and Einstein, the most famous physicists ever, where not popular with the female gender.
Newton was almost asexual and Einstein, who became famous before he died, didn't have a spectacular sex life like some other famous people seem to have like movie and music stars. In fact it was pretty mundane.
Isaac Asimov the famous(in total geek circles) robot author was also far from a don juan.
A lot of people seem to think that women like successful men. In the case of physics and natural sciences it doesn't seem to be the case.
The programs in universities with the highest IQs, namely physics, mathematics and computer sciences with an average iq of 130, are also the least lets say glamorous. Why is it that smarts aren't off the charts?
One explanation would be that those three fields are full of men, women are myths that men dream about. Since there is so much less opportunity, they have less sex, right?
In most math, physics and computer science classes men outnumber women, in my experience, at least 4 to 1. The reality is more like 7 to 1 and in some classes it might be closer to 15 to 1.
In those classes, men have the choice to compete with a platoon of men, abandon sex forever or search for other activities where women are more present.
Newton and Einstein, the most famous physicists ever, where not popular with the female gender.
Newton was almost asexual and Einstein, who became famous before he died, didn't have a spectacular sex life like some other famous people seem to have like movie and music stars. In fact it was pretty mundane.
Isaac Asimov the famous(in total geek circles) robot author was also far from a don juan.
A lot of people seem to think that women like successful men. In the case of physics and natural sciences it doesn't seem to be the case.
The programs in universities with the highest IQs, namely physics, mathematics and computer sciences with an average iq of 130, are also the least lets say glamorous. Why is it that smarts aren't off the charts?
One explanation would be that those three fields are full of men, women are myths that men dream about. Since there is so much less opportunity, they have less sex, right?
In most math, physics and computer science classes men outnumber women, in my experience, at least 4 to 1. The reality is more like 7 to 1 and in some classes it might be closer to 15 to 1.
In those classes, men have the choice to compete with a platoon of men, abandon sex forever or search for other activities where women are more present.
The sex of intelligence
Fortunatly for me, intelligent men seem to have more children than intelligent women. If there is a correlation between sex life and number of children(which i'm sure there is) it means intelligent men have more sex than intelligent women.
However, this seems to come from the fact that women are difficult. They are in search for a male worthy of them and thus they simply won't stay or be with a man that is visibly less intelligent than them. While stupid women are not more promiscuous, they have a wider range of males to choose from and thus have more children.
On the other hand, men are less difficult and will simply take the best, or whatever, they can get.
This seems to indicate that women have more standards and are less likely to lower them. Of course I speak in general.
There are blogs out there of tall women asking for tall men to not go out with short women or to short women to stop getting the tall men. I've even seen one saying there should be fines to short women dating tall men and they go on by saying men are insecure and can't stand having a woman fit for them and must feel powerful.
Similarly, I've found a blog of a woman that dates only intelligent men that are geeks and computer savy. She also said a similar message to the tall girls: please, if you are a man, don't settle for the dumb ones. Her pool of available men was smaller because she, herself, was intelligent.
There also seem to be a trend like this in med school, girls won't stand for anything less than a guy med student when a lot of of those guys easily settle with nurses. The girls go on to say the men shouldn't settle for dumb chicks and are afraid of intelligent women.
So for women it seems to be a problem of standards. My advice is to do what you want. Having standards is not a bad thing and not a problem and if you can live with those standards then please do.
However, this seems to come from the fact that women are difficult. They are in search for a male worthy of them and thus they simply won't stay or be with a man that is visibly less intelligent than them. While stupid women are not more promiscuous, they have a wider range of males to choose from and thus have more children.
On the other hand, men are less difficult and will simply take the best, or whatever, they can get.
This seems to indicate that women have more standards and are less likely to lower them. Of course I speak in general.
There are blogs out there of tall women asking for tall men to not go out with short women or to short women to stop getting the tall men. I've even seen one saying there should be fines to short women dating tall men and they go on by saying men are insecure and can't stand having a woman fit for them and must feel powerful.
Similarly, I've found a blog of a woman that dates only intelligent men that are geeks and computer savy. She also said a similar message to the tall girls: please, if you are a man, don't settle for the dumb ones. Her pool of available men was smaller because she, herself, was intelligent.
There also seem to be a trend like this in med school, girls won't stand for anything less than a guy med student when a lot of of those guys easily settle with nurses. The girls go on to say the men shouldn't settle for dumb chicks and are afraid of intelligent women.
So for women it seems to be a problem of standards. My advice is to do what you want. Having standards is not a bad thing and not a problem and if you can live with those standards then please do.
Startup
This blog is about the relation between intelligence and sex. It is not a blog on sexuality but rather a blog on the eternal enigma that is: why geeks don't get chicks?
It is not intended to be scientific but pseudo-scientific or rather empiric and observation-dependent where the only observer is me. I will cite some studies but I highly doubt I'll remember any doctor's name or let alone university.
The observations or theories I will write will be vastly unverified and unequivocally vague and incomprehensible. Let it be known that this blog is not supposed to be taken seriously unless you wish it so. Also, I might do a lot of syntax, ortograph, grammatical and logical errors in my writing, the causality of those are explained by the fact I don't really care about writing efficiency because I, like Einstein, at a very young age, decided that language was way below my intellectual level(Allow me to boast about my intelligence because seriously, I'd exchange a few points of iq for more, let's say , sexual gratification) and that english is not my maternal language, but this last reason might not be a good one since in cegep, a level between college and high school here in quebec, I was in remedial level french(a class level that means you're in the left part of the bell curve) and advanced in english. So in english class I was with people with bilingual parents and I had to write a 600 word formal essay and in french, my maternal language, I was with a bunch of goofs and i needed to write a 500 word report, 250 words of which were only describing the plot and thus needed no intellectual effort. But anecdote aside, lets continue:
With the disclaimer out of the way we can go into the meat of the matter, which is sex. Or rather why intelligent people are less attractive. While I do not doubt that some girls like geeks, or that some men like intelligent women, what I am talking about is the fact that:
A: Intelligent people are less fertile. This is not bad genes however, it is the "you have less children thus you are less fertile" definition that wikipedia use in the fertility and intelligence article. It doesn't mean that intelligent people have less numerous or strong sperm, in fact, on a large scale(meaning not individual) there is a small correlation between intelligence and sperm quality and quantity. However, this isn't flattery. As we all know(ahem), male alpha gorrilas(aka greybacks) have a very low sperm count and a quite small organ. The fact is that since he is in the vast majority of cases the only male that can breed, his sperm doesn't need to be potent because he will end up breeding with every female he wants anyway because of his alpha status. On the other hand, bonobos, who have a limited but still existent social strata(compared to alpha-dominated groups like lions and gorrilas) breed all day with everyone(real hippies!) and have larger organs and very potent sperm since the competition for offspring is mostly a sperm war. I think we(humans) are in the middle of both examples, more like chimps. We don't breed all day but there are no alpha male who take every female either. It is more like more attractive males have a wider selection but not exclusive. Also, like chimps, we are more warlike, since bonobos resolve most conflict with sex when chimps do it with displays of power and aggression. Chimps are also a lot more prone to genocides and murders than bonobos.
B: Intelligent people have less sex. This isn't in wikipedia but I still read an article(or two) that describe that not only we have less chidlren, we also have less sex and less sexual partners. This is the most important reason why I write this blog: I want to find out why, how and what can we do to change it if it is really a problem.
Here are a number of explanations some people(citation? oh wait its not wikipedia) have came up with:
Intelligence is simply not sexy: This is the saddest explanation like EVER!!!! I mean this jacket is soooo last year!!!! But glitter and pleather are SOOO cute!! Omg <3. No, but really, it is sad if it is indeed true. There is this theory that people are attracted to averageness because people who aren't average are results of mutations which means they probably have mutations less visibles that inhibits health and overall fitness. It would be like a rule of thumb of evolution, the less unique a person is the less genetic "surprises" he has. This reason would be (litterally) dumb selection, since intelligence is correlated with income, survival, creativity(yes there is even a correlation with that) and even oppenness. It is proven that intelligent people are more liberal by 6 iq points. The 10 most intelligent states vote democrat and the 10 worst vote republican. It is fact.
Use of preservatives: While it is proven that intelligent people use preservatives more efficiently (from 11% failure rate for low iq women to 3% for high iq) and that intelligent people also use more abortions, preservative efficiency doesn't explain why we have less sex and less sexual partners overall!
Sparcity: Intelligent people are rare. Maybe they also are difficult and need intelligent sexual partners to have brainy sex together. This would mean that it is not the majority who discriminate intelligent people but intelligent people that discriminate, sexually, the majority.
Less promiscuous: Maybe intelligent people simply have lower libidos. They have higher needs than low instincts to satisfy, like understanding Quantum Mecanics and reading Lord of the rings. Or maybe they understand the longterm consequences of sex and fear commitment. Personnaly, I think intelligent people have equal libidos than other people.
Here are reasons I came up with and thus have no scientific merit. Honestly other people probably tought about it before me:
Intelligent people are less athletic: Athletic bodies are more attractive than sedentary bodies. Even people with very good genes would look better if they did sports. Maybe intelligent people have less interest in sports and thus look worse through the effects of lack of exercise. A counterargument(anecdotal) to that is a guy that was in my high school, he was the team captain of the basketball team and was more intelligent than most, he was a self-proclaimed communist who promoted a best life for all, and also he was good looking. He also had a ridiculously void sex-life. Don't jocks get the chicks? In this case apparently not.
Intelligent people try too hard in the dating scenes: Maybe intelligent people have an intelligent and logical approach to dating and relationships and are too intelligent for something that is deemed emotionnal and irrationnal like love. Maybe they try so hard to do a very witty comment in order to show off their intelligence they forget most people won't be impressed and by the time they'll have tought about this comment the discussion is already elsewhere. For instance, some intelligent children don't know they are intelligent, and since no one wants to say something stupid they talk only if they have intelligent things to say and probably other children will not understand it since they are on another level. In another words: they overestimate the capabilities of others and take pressure on themselves to be on the same level. Inevitably, they come off as weird or even slow because they spend so much time thinking and when they do finally talk they say something out of the blue that no one understands.
People are jealous: Maybe people, when in the presence of somebody with more brain power, have a jealousy reaction that leads to denial and ignoring behavior.
A combination of some or all the above reasons and some reasons I didnt think about: I hope not but it's probably the case.
Stay tuned for more rambling
It is not intended to be scientific but pseudo-scientific or rather empiric and observation-dependent where the only observer is me. I will cite some studies but I highly doubt I'll remember any doctor's name or let alone university.
The observations or theories I will write will be vastly unverified and unequivocally vague and incomprehensible. Let it be known that this blog is not supposed to be taken seriously unless you wish it so. Also, I might do a lot of syntax, ortograph, grammatical and logical errors in my writing, the causality of those are explained by the fact I don't really care about writing efficiency because I, like Einstein, at a very young age, decided that language was way below my intellectual level(Allow me to boast about my intelligence because seriously, I'd exchange a few points of iq for more, let's say , sexual gratification) and that english is not my maternal language, but this last reason might not be a good one since in cegep, a level between college and high school here in quebec, I was in remedial level french(a class level that means you're in the left part of the bell curve) and advanced in english. So in english class I was with people with bilingual parents and I had to write a 600 word formal essay and in french, my maternal language, I was with a bunch of goofs and i needed to write a 500 word report, 250 words of which were only describing the plot and thus needed no intellectual effort. But anecdote aside, lets continue:
With the disclaimer out of the way we can go into the meat of the matter, which is sex. Or rather why intelligent people are less attractive. While I do not doubt that some girls like geeks, or that some men like intelligent women, what I am talking about is the fact that:
A: Intelligent people are less fertile. This is not bad genes however, it is the "you have less children thus you are less fertile" definition that wikipedia use in the fertility and intelligence article. It doesn't mean that intelligent people have less numerous or strong sperm, in fact, on a large scale(meaning not individual) there is a small correlation between intelligence and sperm quality and quantity. However, this isn't flattery. As we all know(ahem), male alpha gorrilas(aka greybacks) have a very low sperm count and a quite small organ. The fact is that since he is in the vast majority of cases the only male that can breed, his sperm doesn't need to be potent because he will end up breeding with every female he wants anyway because of his alpha status. On the other hand, bonobos, who have a limited but still existent social strata(compared to alpha-dominated groups like lions and gorrilas) breed all day with everyone(real hippies!) and have larger organs and very potent sperm since the competition for offspring is mostly a sperm war. I think we(humans) are in the middle of both examples, more like chimps. We don't breed all day but there are no alpha male who take every female either. It is more like more attractive males have a wider selection but not exclusive. Also, like chimps, we are more warlike, since bonobos resolve most conflict with sex when chimps do it with displays of power and aggression. Chimps are also a lot more prone to genocides and murders than bonobos.
B: Intelligent people have less sex. This isn't in wikipedia but I still read an article(or two) that describe that not only we have less chidlren, we also have less sex and less sexual partners. This is the most important reason why I write this blog: I want to find out why, how and what can we do to change it if it is really a problem.
Here are a number of explanations some people(citation? oh wait its not wikipedia) have came up with:
Intelligence is simply not sexy: This is the saddest explanation like EVER!!!! I mean this jacket is soooo last year!!!! But glitter and pleather are SOOO cute!! Omg <3. No, but really, it is sad if it is indeed true. There is this theory that people are attracted to averageness because people who aren't average are results of mutations which means they probably have mutations less visibles that inhibits health and overall fitness. It would be like a rule of thumb of evolution, the less unique a person is the less genetic "surprises" he has. This reason would be (litterally) dumb selection, since intelligence is correlated with income, survival, creativity(yes there is even a correlation with that) and even oppenness. It is proven that intelligent people are more liberal by 6 iq points. The 10 most intelligent states vote democrat and the 10 worst vote republican. It is fact.
Use of preservatives: While it is proven that intelligent people use preservatives more efficiently (from 11% failure rate for low iq women to 3% for high iq) and that intelligent people also use more abortions, preservative efficiency doesn't explain why we have less sex and less sexual partners overall!
Sparcity: Intelligent people are rare. Maybe they also are difficult and need intelligent sexual partners to have brainy sex together. This would mean that it is not the majority who discriminate intelligent people but intelligent people that discriminate, sexually, the majority.
Less promiscuous: Maybe intelligent people simply have lower libidos. They have higher needs than low instincts to satisfy, like understanding Quantum Mecanics and reading Lord of the rings. Or maybe they understand the longterm consequences of sex and fear commitment. Personnaly, I think intelligent people have equal libidos than other people.
Here are reasons I came up with and thus have no scientific merit. Honestly other people probably tought about it before me:
Intelligent people are less athletic: Athletic bodies are more attractive than sedentary bodies. Even people with very good genes would look better if they did sports. Maybe intelligent people have less interest in sports and thus look worse through the effects of lack of exercise. A counterargument(anecdotal) to that is a guy that was in my high school, he was the team captain of the basketball team and was more intelligent than most, he was a self-proclaimed communist who promoted a best life for all, and also he was good looking. He also had a ridiculously void sex-life. Don't jocks get the chicks? In this case apparently not.
Intelligent people try too hard in the dating scenes: Maybe intelligent people have an intelligent and logical approach to dating and relationships and are too intelligent for something that is deemed emotionnal and irrationnal like love. Maybe they try so hard to do a very witty comment in order to show off their intelligence they forget most people won't be impressed and by the time they'll have tought about this comment the discussion is already elsewhere. For instance, some intelligent children don't know they are intelligent, and since no one wants to say something stupid they talk only if they have intelligent things to say and probably other children will not understand it since they are on another level. In another words: they overestimate the capabilities of others and take pressure on themselves to be on the same level. Inevitably, they come off as weird or even slow because they spend so much time thinking and when they do finally talk they say something out of the blue that no one understands.
People are jealous: Maybe people, when in the presence of somebody with more brain power, have a jealousy reaction that leads to denial and ignoring behavior.
A combination of some or all the above reasons and some reasons I didnt think about: I hope not but it's probably the case.
Stay tuned for more rambling
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)