[zombiejimmorrison]

"Contrary to popular belief, two parents of higher IQ will not necessarily produce offspring of equal or higher intelligence. In fact, according to the concept of regression toward the mean, parents of IQ at either extreme are more likely to produce offspring closer to the mean (or average)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Science and my penis tells me to choose the dumber one

[Gosh900]

Neither of the two.
I have the same revulsion for both trophy women and ugly ones.

I'm baffled by the fact that lots of men would prefer a beautiful but dumb wife rather than happiness in their life and family.

P.S: this topic also contains a very strong stereotype which is that girls can be either beautiful but dumb or ugly but smart. That's not true at all. There are tons of girls both beautiful and smart.

[Marmite]

I'm assuming that the question posed is purely a looks over intelligence debate, so I would have to choose the attractive, well maintained girl over the frumpy one. Since higher IQ people tend to have less EQ, a girl of average (ish) intelligence will overall most likely be a more loving mother.

[Blackhawk]

The problem with the high IQ woman on the right is she's older, and whatever supposed benefit of her academic achievements are, are offset by the higher risk of mental retardation from having stale eggs. Men should ignore IQ and only pay attention to age, in which case low IQ but less chance of retard wins.

If we're going to play "Hot or Not" on IQ alone, the experiment first needs to fix for the age variable.

IQ is notoriously fickle of a measurement, and tends to average out with age. When people say they were measured with a high IQ, they generally mean in 4th grade where developmental issues create more diversity in results. By age 30, the cluster returns back to the average of 100.

So IQ 90 is going to improve in measurement as she appoaches age 30, increasing to 100, while the supposedly higher IQ on the right is still riding on the coat tails of her 4th grade testing results and if retested now at her current age would find out she's just an average 100 for her age bracket now.

I do find it hard to believe the dystopian totalitarian government behind this actually gives me enough agency to have a last minute choice. People have kids for green cards and other bureaucracy all the time. So if they give me more soylent green rations, more soma, or whatever their dystopian reward system has to offer, I'm sure I can knock up either or both of them for the glory of Big Brother. At least high IQ's outfit is slightly more feminine than the usual state provided Chairman Mao outfits we all otherwise wear while working in the fungus mines.

And as to IQ 90 being a fast food worker while IQ 135 being an academic professor... if you looked at professorial salaries lately, you'd see both jobs earn the same pay. Which again questions how valuable a high IQ really is if it can't even provide more material resources.

[SteveMcMahon]

(12-21-2014 06:58 AM)Gosh900 Wrote:  

Neither of the two.
I have the same revulsion for both trophy women and ugly ones.

I'm baffled by the fact that lots of men would prefer a beautiful but dumb wife rather than happiness in their life and family.

Depends on how you define "happiness" and also how you define "dumb".

For me, boffing a fine-looking woman makes me happy.

Most "smart" girls are just smart enough to be annoying. They vastly overestimate their own intelligence. They fancy themselves to be "critical thinkers", so naturally regurgitate whatever liberal talking points they last saw in the news.



Give me an intellectually average but sexy girl over an intelligent shrew any day. I don't want challenging conversations about politics or art or science with girls. I don't care if they have a Masters degree. I'm not interested in their opinion on quantum superstring theory.

I just want them to look good, treat me like a king, and be fun to be around.

When I'm watching the greatest thespian of all time, Nicolas Cage, act his heart out in Ghost Rider, I don't need a woman to roll her eyes and tell me I should be watching a documentary about global warming instead.



And as Forrest Gump's momma said, stupid is as stupid does. A sweet, sexy girl with an IQ of 90 might prefer talking about kittens to talking about intersectional feminism, but who's really the dumb one?

The happy-go-lucky girl who concentrates on pleasing her man, or the one who's smart enough to talk herself into believing feminist conspiracy theories that make her angry and miserable?

[Marmite]

Now if there was an 'attractive and intelligent' option...

Rachel Riley

[IvanDrago]

(12-21-2014 08:56 AM)SteveMcMahon Wrote:  

Depends on how you define "happiness" and also how you define "dumb".

For me, boffing a fine-looking woman makes me happy.

Most "smart" girls are just smart enough to be annoying. They vastly overestimate their own intelligence. They fancy themselves to be "critical thinkers", so naturally regurgitate whatever liberal talking points they last saw in the news.



Give me an intellectually average but sexy girl over an intelligent shrew any day. I don't want challenging conversations about politics or art or science with girls. I don't care if they have a Masters degree. I'm not interested in their opinion on quantum superstring theory.

I just want them to look good, treat me like a king, and be fun to be around.

When I'm watching the greatest thespian of all time, Nicolas Cage, act his heart out in Ghost Rider, I don't need a woman to roll her eyes and tell me I should be watching a documentary about global warming instead.



And as Forrest Gump's momma said, stupid is as stupid does. A sweet, sexy girl with an IQ of 90 might prefer talking about kittens to talking about intersectional feminism, but who's really the dumb one?

The happy-go-lucky girl who concentrates on pleasing her man, or the one who's smart enough to talk herself into believing feminist conspiracy theories that make her angry and miserable?

Roosh never mentioned you would be having a relationship with this woman other than sharing custody in a three way with her and leviathan so feel free to Cage away.

Let's assume you will have no personal interaction with the woman and the lower IQ woman's genetics will have minimal impact on the intelligence of your offspring. Would you rather have your children be raised by the lower IQ, attractive kitty lover or the empowered, intelligent nut holding the "I need feminism" sign?

There are too many variables missing for me to waste time rambling on about this but I am still choosing 90. I know plenty of women with well above average IQs, but none use it to produce anything of value beyond what a slightly below average person produces. My experience shows they just use it to manipulate.

I can't remember where I read this joke, but I base my interaction with women on these words.. "What is the difference between a hot 22 year old waitress and a female with a masters degree? A female with a masters degree will blab about her masters degree for 15 minutes before she goes back to posting selfies on Facebook."

I am not buying Gosh900's assumption that having a family automatically makes one happy. This is rubbish. I am quite happy being a bachelor and vastly more happy than the legion of guys that have wifed up maniac controlling landwhales, moved in to mcmansions and are in debt up to their eyeballs just so cupcake can consume and consume and consume. Get the fuck outta here with that shit man.

[iknowexactly]

(12-20-2014 05:23 PM)Kamikaze Wrote:  

(12-20-2014 04:43 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

However, height is something that in my limited knowledge of genetics is going to be one of the more easily customizable traits once DIY, or minimally doctor approved consumer genetic engineering takes hold.

I wish you were right, but I'm not that optimistic. Progress in biology moves very very slowly. It's about to be 2015 and we still haven't been able to clone hair to 'cure' male pattern baldness.

If we ever do see DIY babies, I'll be too old to have any. Most likely I'll be dead though.

You've got a good point, making wet living stuff work properly is hard work!

Maybe that's why it took a billion years of chance to get where we are.

I wasn't actually thinking that OUR kids would have Consumer Genetics Height Options, I was thinking one or two more generations out. Fire Hydrant girl's grandchildren might get her brains but a better body.

In other words,

Maybe
short fat and smart--> tall, thin and smart

is an easier genetic remake
than

tall, thin, and dumb--> Tall, Thin, Smart

I really am guessing, I don't know anything about the genetic transmission of intelligence.

[Gosh900]

(12-21-2014 08:56 AM)SteveMcMahon Wrote:  

(12-21-2014 06:58 AM)Gosh900 Wrote:  

Neither of the two.
I have the same revulsion for both trophy women and ugly ones.

I'm baffled by the fact that lots of men would prefer a beautiful but dumb wife rather than happiness in their life and family.

Depends on how you define "happiness" and also how you define "dumb".

For me, boffing a fine-looking woman makes me happy.

Most "smart" girls are just smart enough to be annoying. They vastly overestimate their own intelligence. They fancy themselves to be "critical thinkers", so naturally regurgitate whatever liberal talking points they last saw in the news.



Give me an intellectually average but sexy girl over an intelligent shrew any day. I don't want challenging conversations about politics or art or science with girls. I don't care if they have a Masters degree. I'm not interested in their opinion on quantum superstring theory.

I just want them to look good, treat me like a king, and be fun to be around.

When I'm watching the greatest thespian of all time, Nicolas Cage, act his heart out in Ghost Rider, I don't need a woman to roll her eyes and tell me I should be watching a documentary about global warming instead.



And as Forrest Gump's momma said, stupid is as stupid does. A sweet, sexy girl with an IQ of 90 might prefer talking about kittens to talking about intersectional feminism, but who's really the dumb one?

The happy-go-lucky girl who concentrates on pleasing her man, or the one who's smart enough to talk herself into believing feminist conspiracy theories that make her angry and miserable?

Yes man, I agree with you in this.
If we have to choose among an average smart girl but gorgeous and an above-average smart girl but ugly, it's better to go with the former (everything else being equal)

Also, if we have to choose among the same girls for a ONS the average (but even dumb) girl wins hands down.

But if I had to look for a girl to marry and create a family I would give importance to a lot of other things than just beauty alone.
A beautiful girl than don't know how to raise children, isn't caring, supportive and is a gold digger would finish way below a less beautiful girl that embody those characteristics.

That is what I was trying to say in the message above.

Anyway, I wanna repeat it, there are lots of girls who are both smart and beautiful so this is just an abstract problem that doesn't reflect reality.

For "smart" I didn't intend a girl who is a "nerd", smart girls, at least to me, are those who know and understand the world, have social intelligence and have a vast array of interests that can serve a family good...

P.S: I wanna make it clear here, that I absolutely don't like feminist and the like, they disgust me and I would never marry or have a child with one of them. They often are ugly women that feel resentment and contempt toward men because they don't approach or validate them the way they want.
As I said above, my association of a smart girl has nothing in common with a feminist

[DjembaDjemba]

Smarter higher earning woman of course. Preferably not that ugly one in the picture, but I'd still reproduce with the higher earning woman.

Dual income of two professionals is a better life overall. Preferable she makes roughly equivalent coin.

Stay home moms don't do it for me. I live in Alberta, where women make 30% of what men make on average. There's no shortage of stay at home moms here, and cute girls who just want a sperm to fertilize their egg, cook for their man, clean the house, and do all that womanly shit.

Until after kid number 2 they fleece their single breadwinner husband because they got bored, divorce and take half his shit. Their lack of income means maximum payout. I know dudes pulling $200,000-300,000 average per year and they still NEED to work because they're supporting 2 or 3 former stay at home moms, and 5 kids total.

God bless you if you pick a trophy woman who can't cook, clean, or work. Recipe for disaster, especially when she slams into the wall.

[michelin]

Having to choose one of these women is pure torture. I would definitely try to HACK that computer system in order to improve my options!

[TonySandos]

(12-21-2014 08:28 AM)Blackhawk Wrote:  

And as to IQ 90 being a fast food worker while IQ 135 being an academic professor... if you looked at professorial salaries lately, you'd see both jobs earn the same pay. how valuable a high IQ really is if it can't even provide more material resources.

Your excellently provocative post made me realize much about our current state of social values.

"Which again questions how valuable a high IQ really is if it can't even provide more material resources."

This is a reasonable assumption. This isn't the first time that I've heard this idea said and it's far from the opinion of only a few. The assumption is that in this scenario, those of higher intelligence would choose material self fulfillment over socialized benefit if they actually carried the traits of greater intelligence.

I'll provide a counter argument to this by saying that it's also plausible that the higher IQ individuals see a greater benefit to social civility than immediate personal fulfillment, regardless of promised monetary hierarchal status or greater social classification.

It's possible that intelligent people are able to see the long term benefit of continually grooming man into civility instead of letting him revert to ape, rather than rule over the beast with currency that would be become useless for the sake of being the lord... even if only of the flies.

[Latan]

To me IQ is totally non relevant.
I believe intelligence is gained by experience and training, not genetics (of course some are born genius, but it's a so small percentage).

Mixing my genes with a fugly thing would revulse me.

[Deluge]

University professors make the same as fast food workers? Come on. It's a lot less then what that 135 IQ person could've made in medicine/law/finance but I've seen the payscales for lecturers in Australia and they clear $100k with experience, compared to a full-time fast food worker making $30k something with stagnant wages.

[kaotic]

Honestly I'm completely confused by all the reasoning behind who to have a child with.

I think a bit of the cloudy judgement has to do with us thinking we're actually banging the hot one, when in reality it clearly states

Quote:

you will not have sex with this woman

If we based this scenario solely on IQ and there was no pictures of the girls, I think every man would want their seed mated with the higher IQ (given no picture).

[Ingocnito]

IQ 90

Let us not forget, IQ=90 girl likely has the mental goods to become IQ=135 in intelligence, but simply hasn't needed to mentally develop that far because of her looks. Zero compensatory requirements.

But the reverse is Not true of IQ=135 girl. She'll never be able to look as good at IQ=90 girl.

The problem with good looking girls with 120+ IQs, is if they have a shred of feminist backbone, at some point during relations with them, a battle of wits will ensue.

It's at that point when you realize a woman is only as useful as her lowest common denominator... and usually when you find it, it becomes dually apparent that the 120+ IQ is fucking useless, when housed in a being containing no common sense, controlled by their emotions.

[Quintus Curtius]

I'd bang the more attractive one, the one on the left.

The happiness of my child is secondary to the happiness of myself.

[Ingocnito]

(12-21-2014 07:46 AM)Marmite Wrote:  

I'm assuming that the question posed is purely a looks over intelligence debate, so I would have to choose the attractive, well maintained girl over the frumpy one. Since higher IQ people tend to have less EQ, a girl of average (ish) intelligence will overall most likely be a more loving mother.

I almost agreed with you on this idea of as IQ rises, EQ drops and potentially vice versa.. however this got me thinking of the women I've gotten to know into adulthood (30s+ age) and I consider the EQ to be somewhat free of IQ level..... having known women with high IQs and low IQs with completely uncontrolled emotions. I consider having a high EQ to be able to show deeper depth of emotion than most, but also know when and how to control that emotion.

I'd also argue that the influx of attention women receive from social media has literally dulled the EQ, making them impossible to reason with since 75% of their decisions have an emotional basis.

[Paracelsus]

I'd have to say "neither" to both. The thought exercise presumes shared custody with the government and with the woman. If I'm going to be presumed to desire a kid, I would not want the government to have any part in its custody, care, or upbringing. Especially since if it comes to a vote, I am necessarily outnumbered in every decision: government + woman vs. my choice. Enough fathers already share custody with women and the government, and it's slowly destroying the West.

[alexdagr81]

I've known some girls who probably have a high IQ, they still didn't have any sense.

[iknowexactly]

[quote] (12-22-2014 03:24 AM)TonySandos Wrote:  

[quote='Blackhawk' pid='911435' dateline='1419168528']

And as to IQ 90 being a fast food worker while IQ 135 being an academic professor... if you looked at professorial salaries lately, you'd see both jobs earn the same pay. how valuable a high IQ really is if it can't even provide more material resources.[/quote]
This Macleans article lists full professor salaries as 115K.

http://www.macleans.ca/education/uniandc...to-lowest/

I had a stats professor explain how good he had it about 25 years ago.

He said he taught about 15 hours a week with summers off and made in the 40's, equalling a little less than a hundred now. Lower level stats don't change that much, once he had the course work established it was pretty easy.

Good pension and if you are in a marketable field like computer science you can consult on the side.

did I mention SUMMERS OFF, or, you can teach extra and make more money. Plus all those holidays and paid sick days etc.

It's far better than a 9-5 job, much more variety, summers off, and college students are generally civilized.

It does not compare on a physical exhaustion, social status, or financial level with fast food. Maybe there's some wishful thinking going on, because tenured professor jobs are very hard to get unless you are related to god.

I knew a Berkeley PhD in Social Sciences that was told off the record by the people hiring that there was no way a white male was going to get hired as a professor at their school, even though Berkeley is one of the most prestigious schools.

It is bad to be a guy, and even worse to be a white guy in government orgs, but if you can get in the benefits are good.

[Deluge]

I only know where one of my professors lived, beachside private school belt suburb, median house price currently $1.3 million. And he's in his mid 40's, no idea what his wife does. I know others I've had were definitely wealthier, from consulting for the private sector on the side or being a talking head in the media.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(12-23-2014 07:16 AM)Deluge Wrote:  

I only know where one of my professors lived, beachside private school belt suburb, median house price currently $1.3 million. And he's in his mid 40's, no idea what his wife does. I know others I've had were definitely wealthier, from consulting for the private sector on the side or being a talking head in the media.

There are a multitude of ways how college professor can up their pay working for foundations, corporations, various speaking engagements - at least if they are employed at a better college in their state.

The same goes for cops and other civil servants, though cops have other "means" of supplementing their pay, which personally I have nothing against. It would be great if good jobs started at 200k anyway without all the bullshit you have to go through to reach that level.

[TravelerKai]

Don't forget about their self written books they force you to buy at a 200% upsale margin at the college bookstore, that read like a thick pamphlet and not a book.

[Mr. Wolf]

(12-20-2014 10:55 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

You will not have sex with this woman. Instead you will share custody with both the government and woman to raise the child, ....

I thought this was supposed to be hypothetical? That describes the fate awaiting at least 50% of fathers nowadays.