[Constitution45]

These women get very easily offended and their politics is just whatever the guardian or huffington post is spewing out. It all caters for their emotions anyway, there is very little intellectual debate going on with these people. Further to that politics and education is a woman's game now in the United Kingdom, men are moving away from it.

There is a movement if you can call it that in the U.K. This sense that women are now running a new society and will bring it into a new era of enlightenment. I don't really digest the mainstream media but from conversations that I have had with girls recently, they really believe it.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

< In addition - even if those women met an intellectual man who is knowledgeable about those topics - and has Game so that they feel attracted to him, then those women would be offended by his raicist, misogynist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic viewpoints. Even if they would give him a chance to listen to his arguments, then they would discard them as racism or conspiracy theory because the BBC, academia and The Times would not lie to them on such a colossal scale!

You might still get the bang and then be mentioned in those articles: https://www.glamour.com/story/hooking-up...ters-essay

Quote:

Help, I Can't Stop Hooking Up With Trump Supporters

He challenged you alright cupcake and the worst part is that the more intelligent women might actually start to believe that the man has a point if he can put those arguments across well enough.

The bigger difficulty however is that most of those men would not want to invest more in you than a quick bang, so there you are back to "dating" nihilistic musicians (being one of his side-pieces is dating nowadays) and rejecting feminist soyboys.

[redbeard]

(08-17-2018 12:31 PM)kaotic Wrote:  

When will women understand that we really don't want to talk about the pressure that black women are under to adhere to white beauty stereotypes.

Men don't want to talk politics with women for the most part, you aren't impressing us with your degrees or PHDs.

Sure if it furthers your career and you make money off it great.

But if you're looking for mr right and we're looking for mrs right, we aren't going to be interested in a career whore.

Because you'll give a shit more about your career then your children and your families.


It's a good thing these women aren't finding men, and men are "clever" enough to avoid these females like the plague.

They'd make terrible mothers and wives anyways.

I've noticed over the past few years, I'm running into more "smart" girls as described in OP.

On paper, I'm a pretty desirable candidate for these chicks, so I understand why they want to meet. Well traveled, strong degree, great conversationalist, white, yada yada.

I entertain these girls standard texts until we meet up, and then the same thing always happens.

1. They're 1.7 points less attractive than their pictures
2. All they want to do is talk about "smart" topics like careers & politics
3. They have no soul, no positive energy, and weak smiles

Between those three there's absolutely no attraction. My dick goes limp and my eyes glaze over as they talk about the stupid shit they do for "career advancement."

I'll try to bang then delete their number.

It's sad, but as female participation in college & preferential corporate treatment continue, this trend won't stop.

Screw it

[captain_shane]

(08-17-2018 08:22 PM)budoslavic Wrote:  

Definite WB.

I can understand the frustration these girls have if they're actually willing to entertain other viewpoints than they've been told in college. If they just expect people to regurgitate leftist talking points though, no thanks.

Most people are a complete bore to talk with overall, men and women.

[CRR]

Because guys who were majoring in computer science or getting their PhDs in history were drowning in vagina

As I've said to people IRL, including my current girlfriend, women need to STFU when it comes to telling men what type of women they should be interested in. Women have no moral high ground, and its the exact type of behavior they accuse the supposed 'patriarchy' of conducting.

My girlfriend has a friend who 'can't seem to meet a good guy' who is actually very bangable. Cute little blonde, big tits, nice body. She's overtly a nice person with a pleasant demeanor. However, when you talk to her one on one, you realize quickly how insecure she is. When in a group she's far worse. She doesn't shut the fuck up, especially about herself. My girlfriend says "she's just insecure". My response "then don't be. It's not up to everyone to accommodate her behavior. People, women especially, can't expect everyone to tolerate their feelings no matter what. Handle that shit on your own". Of course I'm not saying one shouldn't support their friends and loved ones through difficult times, rather that just because someone feels a certain way doesn't mean everyone has to adapt to them. It's the epitome of selfishness. And that's what I see in women like this, that they are so 'smart' and men need to adapt to them. It doesn't work that way, nor should it.

[Hypno]

They are not actually that smart. They have just been given set-asides and I are education, and have used advanced degrees and diversity to steal jobs from better qualified man. Let’s are qualified and then I have figured out that the game is rigged and start small businesses or learn a trade, or become location independent and move overseas

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(08-18-2018 09:28 AM)captain_shane Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 08:22 PM)budoslavic Wrote:  

Definite WB.

I can understand the frustration these girls have if they're actually willing to entertain other viewpoints than they've been told in college. If they just expect people to regurgitate leftist talking points though, no thanks.

Odd and crazy combination:

22yo attractive girl currently not even looking for Mr. Right - just Mr. Fuckboi now. She wants best a successful movie director! There should be 1-2 dozen of them in Britain, what's the problem eh ? (depending on what level is successful to her)

And the other woman is fucking 41 and finally ready to settle down?!!!! Good for you cupcake. Also she betrays what is amiss - it's either the super-interesting men who are out there, but don't want her or the geeky, Game-less, boring feminist guys. The middle ground seems to be going to zero at least in certain circles - or they already got married much sooner to women who were not stupid cunts.

It's amazing how they could also invite those two speaking about the same "issue". That is like:

Here we have a fresh lottery winner who just got 10 mio. $ in cash and on the other side we have a former lottery winner who is now broke after having spent her 10 mio. $ on shoes, cocaine and travel.

And the article itself clearly omits the legion of Game-less nice guys out there who are into STEM fields, computer gaming, who are even smart and have a decent beginning job. But strangely those women are not interested in them.

[Captainstabbin]

(08-17-2018 11:46 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:

Waiting in a bar for a young man a few weeks ago, she ran through possible options, before settling on the subject of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. A surefire way, the 22-year-old undergraduate reasoned, to guarantee an interesting debate.

Here's something you overlooked in your "education". Men don't want a chick who's always looking for an argument. It doesn't matter if you call it a "debate". A debate is no man's idea of a fun date. And he knows that all of your brilliant, enlightened arguments will be based purely on emotional chick-logic.

(08-17-2018 11:46 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:

‘But I’m running out of time to start a family and that gives me a sense of emptiness.’

No shit, princess. Guess what, it gets worse. The one thing men are most interested in - your youth and fertility - is gone. Have fun convincing a quality man to wife you up and give you a child...a child with a high probably of having problems.

[WalterBlack]

This thread reminds me of an old joke:

"What's the smartest thing to have ever come out of woman's mouth?"

"Einstein's penis"

[MongolianAbroad]

(08-17-2018 02:52 PM)questor70 Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 01:28 PM)Adonis Wrote:  

The racial chart is also saying what we already know. Check out the difference in desirability of asian female vs. male, for instance.

Careful, Asian women are more desirable than white women on that chart.

You might trigger some forum members if you keep reposting this.

[MrLemon]

(08-18-2018 06:37 AM)Montrose Wrote:  

Granted those women are delusionary and have unrealistic expectations, but there’s no denying that men are opting out of education, the job market and marriage in ever increasing numbers, and that is worrying.

https://youtu.be/BoXQf2f2Yxo

Men are "opting out" of education or the job market. They are being blocked by society -- by women actually.

It's ok though. The whole problem will solve itself when the intellectual chicks are wearing veils and sucking muslim terrorist cock. Or maybe they'll be sucking white supreamacist cock.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

A short time ago I brutally Red Pilled a 30yo sister of a friend who hung out with us.

She was still girly and happy in attitude, but unfortunately overweight. I told her that men don't give a shit about her STEM degree and her job, but more that her fat is lowering her attractiveness. Then I showed her the SMV chart by Rollo and she even agreed with it.

Finally we sat there one afternoon at a restaurant and she showed us the Tinder profile of a friend of hers. She described her as a "top-level" - all we saw was a 5.8-6 at best. Then we continued by pointing to girls in the restaurant and telling her what 6-9 were. Luckily enough there was a young 9 in the place together with a male model. Then 2 tables to the left there was a hot 8 sitting and oh wonder a British 7 tourist. She did not ask how we rated her - some things are better not mentioned.

But the reality of the matter is that she even agreed with a shock that women waste their most attractive years - the years where they could get the most attractive most high-value man - that they waste it on college, "party years" and first work years. Even beautiful women aged 30 were more attractive aged 22. And men simply don't care about her education since her raw intelligence was the same without a degree.

Though that is a positive woman with a STEM degree - most get their Bolshevik indoctrination. Still - I gotta say that unfortunately women's solipsism is that blind that they simply don't know that they are so much less attractive to men as a marriage prospect aged 31. The reason is likely because a 31 year old successful man is as attractive to a 20yo woman as the 23yo counterpart - or more, so they actually assume blinded by feminist constant indoctrination that it actually must be the same.

But ask yourself honestly:
How many more men would get married if suddenly legions of hot 18-21 year old girls would do their best to get married and have children? And they would tell their men that they prefer to stay at home, so he has to make enough money. The world would come to a screeching halt and countless men would take them up on their offers - even guys here would suddenly marry in this Brave Old World. Think about it.

They don't want to marry at their hottest years and we don't care later after they prefer to do porn than go to the altar:



Men just make rational choices - no more no less.

[Donfitz007]

A girl literally told my friend the other day that she could picture herself marrying him 10 or so years from now after she had 1-2 kids. He correctly got angry and said "after you're out your window....no thanks"

I don't know what makes women feel that we would want them after their past.

[LexisNexis]

I don't understand the fuss. Women having actual intelligence and career-based standards in men is virtuous and preferable to the Chad-based model of current.

[slowpoke]

(08-18-2018 07:42 AM)Simeon_Strangelight Wrote:  

You might still get the bang and then be mentioned in those articles: https://www.glamour.com/story/hooking-up...ters-essay

From the glamour article:

glamour Wrote:

I can’t be with someone who won’t understand why the news sometimes causes me to burst into tears, or why I want to throw my phone across the room after reading the President’s latest tweet

OK, you got me. I'm too intimidated by women's superior intelligence

[MrLemon]

Some smart woman in NY several years ago pointed out, correctly, that "College is the last good place you'll ever find, to mingle with hundreds of eligible men who are career-focused who are in your socioeconomic class. If you aren't looking for a husband in college, you're a fool"

Forgot her name. Great comments.

Any woman with brains gets a good degree, but more important, finds the son of rich banker to marry. By 28, she'd MUST start having kids. Kids keep her busy for 20 years minimum, if her hubby is well off, she'll be staying home with them or running the local community groups or charities. AT BEST she will restart her career after the kids leave. So she uses her education for maybe 20 years tops, whereas men use their education 45+ years.

In summary, our current educational system, in which 60% of advanced degrees are earned by women, is perfectly upside down. We are pouring resources into people who, almost immediately after being trained, quit to have kids. Their husbands, who do NOT quit and should be the mainstay of society, are being shunted off to the side.

If Dr. Evil wanted to destroy the economic heart of a society, he could not plan a more devious and relentless destructive plan.

[Montrose]

^^^^
Her name is Susan Patton aka the Princeton Mom. She recommends girls in college spend 75% of their time looking for a husband.

Huffington post obviously disagrees

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/0...07116.html

[CynicalContrarian]

(08-18-2018 06:01 PM)LexisNexis Wrote:  

I don't understand the fuss. Women having actual intelligence and career-based standards in men is virtuous and preferable to the Chad-based model of current.

Without using Google or any other internet search engine. By memory alone, name five notable female philosophers...
Even restricting male philosophers to those of non-Greek or non Deutsch origin; one can rattle of a whole litany of names. Camus, Hume, Kierkegaard, Descartes.

While I get the overall premise of your comment. The chicks featured in this thread are not viable examples for that. Dr Rhonda Patrick would be a better bet.
It's one matter to claim high intelligence without any viable achievements to point to.
To be so short-sighted as to claim high intelligence, yet not even being able to see how much of a joke you are (as per this thread), that's a whole other level of stupid...

[Simeon_Strangelight]

High intelligence - pffft - IQ distribution between men and women is different. Men far outnumber women at the top - at 140+ it's closer to 2:1 and then it gets far worse. The upper genius levels which make up many scientists, inventors, philosophers, businessmen - they are 90%+ men. Women will never be able to compete with men intellectually.

Best choice for a smart woman is to give birth to 3 smart boys - that will push science forward better. Biology is a bitch.

[Paracelsus]

It was likely coincidence, but in Murdork another female idiot did an Op-Ed along similar lines:

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/relati...e90a600386

Quote:

I RECENTLY discovered I’m a Sapiosexual.

I was pretty shocked to make this curious discovery at the age of 48. I thought I had come to know myself quite intimately over the last five decades. But I’d just embarked on my virgin voyage to planet ‘Bumble’, the dating app that promised to deliver a string of eligible, professional bachelors directly to my iPhone, when a kind nerdy-looking guy — Steve (49) — appeared on my screen with the words ‘Sapiosexual’ beside his name.

“Ewwwwww”, I screamed as I swiftly swiped left on Sapiosexual Steve. It all sounded like far too many shades of kink for me.

I’d done my due diligence before venturing into the world of modern dating apps. I’d familiarised myself with all the lingo. I knew all about Ghosting and Catfishing and Benching and Breadcrumbing and Half-night standing. Yep. That’s actually a thing now (Done it. Didn’t even realise). But nowhere had I seen or been warned about these so-called ‘Sapiosexuals’.

At first I assumed that S.S. Steve must consider himself to be the ultimate open-minded sexual being. A horny free spirit who feels an attraction to all ‘homosapians’, regardless of their sexual preference. So, basically, any human with a pulse will do.

But a quick trip to Google told me a Sapiosexual isn’t anywhere near as creepy as it might sound. Simple definition: Someone who is attracted to intelligence over looks. The other person’s brain is the biggest turn on (the Sapio part comes from the Latin word ‘sapient’, meaning ‘wise.’)

Did our contestant ping Steve back after realising the Gameless dill was representing himself as something she supposedly might like to fuck?

Nope.

Quote:

And at that moment — as I registered that I, too, have been identifying as Sapiosexual for most of my adult life without even realising it — I had a revelation: I will never find love on a dating app.

For those of you oblivious to the whole crazy ‘swiping’ culture of modern dating (you lucky bitchezzzzzz!), swiping right on someone’s profile photo on a dating app is the modern day equivalent of locking eyes with a cute stranger across a crowded bar and holding his gaze for just that second or two longer than feels comfortable.

In the land of dating apps, the right-swipe sends a convenient little message to your target, letting them know that you think they’re a bit of all right, thereby giving you both the green light to connect, which will hopefully lead to hooking up in person and possibly touching bits at some stage. If the photo doesn’t tickle your fancy, you swipe left instead, literally swiping him off your phone and out of your pants. Oops! Life.

Sounds pretty straight forward, right?

But for Sapiosexuals like me, there’s a major design flaw with the swiping culture of online dating. It’s managed to remove one all-important factor that forms the foundation of any successful relationship.

Cue the "Boohoo, I can't keep up on Tinder against the slutstream.":

Quote:

I’ve always believed that true love comes from an undeniable chemistry that connects you to your other half on a level that you don’t feel with everyone you meet.

It’s impossible to define exactly what ‘chemistry’ is, but we all certainly know it when we feel it. It’s an invisible, inexplicable, unique X-factor that draws the two of you together. For some people, chemistry is aroused by a physical attraction, being turned on by his big shoulders or his soulful brown eyes.

But for me, chemistry is ignited by intelligent conversation. I’m turned on by someone who is naturally quick witted. Someone who talks about his life and his job with passion. And who asks me relevant questions about mine. OK I’ll go ahead and admit it … a good debate over topics that matter is my ultimate panty dropper.

So really her pussy get wet for the following conversational tricks, pay attention boys:
(1) Someone with Game.
(2) Someone who talks about the rich-boy shit he does -- and in particular talks about his job, i.e. signals his wallet size.
(3) Someone who doesn't just asks me questions so I can talk about myself.

Quote:

It can only be discovered when you connect with someone, face-to-face, and engage in a good old fashioned chin wag. There is no way I can know, simply by looking a guy’s profile photo, if he has the skills to motivate my mojo.

I spoke to a fella named Pete on my podcast (“Romantically Challenged” on PodcastOne) who says he can swipe 180 profiles per minute. That’s three photos per second! And this is not an exaggeration. He’s actually timed himself.

The very fact he revealed this shit online proves Pete has no game, or is trying too hard to play FOMO too early. As expected, the pussy goes Saharan:

Quote:

Yep, Pete dedicates an entire millisecond to determining whether the photo that just popped up on his phone is the face of someone he wants to get to know better. And that’s how he expects to find love? It’s no wonder people often struggle to formulate lasting, meaningful relationships when they meet online.

Sure, those online dating apps have the potential to deliver hundreds of potential suitors to my phone every night of the week. But I’d rather meet my guy the old fashioned way. In person. In the end, I’ve just gotta believe that I might literally bump into my Mr. Right. Anywhere. Anytime.

siiiiiiggggh I'm just so inundated with guys who want to fuck me, can't I just get that magic of an ape shouldering his way across a crowded nightclub to me for a chaaaange?

Quote:

Which is exactly what happened to me recently.

I was seated beside a nerdy looking barrister from Brisbane who engaged me in a delightfully interesting, witty and charming conversation for five-and-a-half hours, as we flew from one coast of the USA to the other.

As my Sapiosexual inclinations kicked into gear, I started to feel those fluttery butterflies in my belly as my attraction to him grew stronger, hour-by-hour, state-by-state.

By the time we were somewhere over Kentucky, I accepted his very kind invitation to join him for dinner when we landed in Manhattan. I knew he was someone I wanted to spend more time with.

I’ll be honest (and I really hope he’s not reading this) but I probably would have swiped left on his photo if I’d found him on a dating app. Yes. I definitely would have swiped left. Without a second thought.

And I would have missed out on that whole sexy sapien experience.

So that’s taught me a valuable lesson about looking for love in a virtual world: That ain’t where I’ll find it.

Not only have I discovered that I’m a Sapiosexual. I’ve also decided that I am a Sapiosexual who refuses to swipe.

PS: So what happened to the QC? Our first date in New York was ah-may-zing (or maybe it was our second date. Does randomly being seated together on a flight count as a first date? I’m not sure). We enjoyed dinner at a gorgeous little restaurant on Madison Avenue followed by a stroll along Fifth Avenue and our first kiss on the steps of The Met. It was all pretty awesome, I’m not gonna lie. It’s still early days and we have some logistic issues to work out, so who knows where it will lead? But for now, I can tell you, that my sapio sexual tendencies are most certainly being satisfied.

Highlighted two words in here because for those of you in the US who haven't heard the term "barrister" before, it basically means: lawyer who has a shitload of money. Especially one who's flying around the US and doing dinner in NYC. As in, someone who's paid to do trials and charges in roughly the top 2% of lawyers in the UK or other Commonwealth countries to do so. This one's panties got wet for fucking money, pure and simple. And a barrister who can talk a chick into a first date after 5 hours spending time with the bitch is a guy who knows how to charm juries, he's learned the art of persuasion a long time ago. But she got a free meal and got away without having to bang to pay for it, so, winners all round, amiright?

Incidentally, our single, husbandless contestant?



Tidy for 47, but if that's not fucking grey hair she's covering up I'll eat my hat, and she's starting take on the usual strained look that thin blondes get around the 50-yo mark. Left your run too late, cupcake, the QC won't be calling back.

[Bluto]

One of the reasons why men avoid the intellectual conversations in general is that it is a high risk move as noted in this thread here. I am not sure if women are generally intimidated by men smarter than themselves, or if it is something else, but looking at popular culture smart men are an anathema to the propaganda. These days, I honestly try to avoid talking about anything that I know extensively unless it comes up in conversation.

I find it interesting that one of the girls in the article decided that the topic of conversation on a first date is not each other,(interests, experiences, etc.) but on politics. She broke the old rule of polite conversation of "never talk about politics or religion." These days it is unfortunately expected for most people to not have a sense of etiquette, but that even now seems to me to be an overly crude topic for a first date.

As far as the general sentiment, I am in total agreement, these women are screwing themselves. The one who is 22 has some time to change her tune if she is serious, but I don't think that the smart money is on that bet. The other two are most likely not going to find a Mr. let alone a Mr. Right. As stated before they missed their opportunity to find a man of quality when they were going to college with their peer group. Now the men in their peer group have better options, and the men with a lower status are not marriage material.

[dicknixon72]

(08-19-2018 08:00 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

Incidentally, our single, husbandless contestant?



Tidy for 47, but if that's not fucking grey hair she's covering up I'll eat my hat, and she's starting take on the usual strained look that thin blondes get around the 50-yo mark. Left your run too late, cupcake, the QC won't be calling back.

I'd lift that dress up to show her my standard deviation.

[eradicator]

The article isn’t that bad if you just look st their photos and ignore all the words. First 2 girls are wb for sure

[eljeffster]

(08-18-2018 06:01 PM)LexisNexis Wrote:  

I don't understand the fuss. Women having actual intelligence and career-based standards in men is virtuous and preferable to the Chad-based model of current.

The cute Natasha chick said she wants an intellectually stimulating man, but she was dating, i.e. fucking, a DJ and a mechanic. It isn't what she says, its what she does (who she bangs).

Heartiste:

Maxim #19: Never take a woman’s word; a woman’s actions are the best interpreters of her thought.

Maxim #3: Whenever an attractive girl tells you she hates assholes, or describes her experience in the past dating assholes and claims to avoid them now, or recites a laundry list of asshole-y things guys do that she disapproves of, you can bet your weight in gold bricks that she needs you to be an asshole to her.

Maxim #54: A woman’s happiness is inversely proportional to efforts to accommodate her demands. Corollary to Maxim #54: The more a woman’s demands are catered, the more irrational will her future demands become.

Maxim #55: Less talking is always sexier than more talking. If you struggle to find something witty to say to a girl, stop trying. Flailing for the “right” words is approval-seeking beta behaviour that women can sniff from across a room. Corollary to Maxim #55: A grunt or aloof gesture trumps a try-hard, strained, verbose comeback.

Maxim #57: Never trust a woman’s advice on how to please women. Her advice is designed for alpha men she already finds attractive and from whom she seeks signals of attainability and commitment. Corollary to Maxim #57: A woman’s sex and relationship advice isn’t meant to help men; it’s meant to distract men from what really works to turn women on.

[Vladimir Poontang]

(08-19-2018 05:01 PM)eljeffster Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 06:01 PM)LexisNexis Wrote:  

I don't understand the fuss. Women having actual intelligence and career-based standards in men is virtuous and preferable to the Chad-based model of current.

The cute Natasha chick said she wants an intellectually stimulating man, but she was dating, i.e. fucking, a DJ and a mechanic. It isn't what she says, its what she does (who she bangs).

Heartiste:

Maxim #19: Never take a woman’s word; a woman’s actions are the best interpreters of her thought.

Maxim #3: Whenever an attractive girl tells you she hates assholes, or describes her experience in the past dating assholes and claims to avoid them now, or recites a laundry list of asshole-y things guys do that she disapproves of, you can bet your weight in gold bricks that she needs you to be an asshole to her.

Maxim #54: A woman’s happiness is inversely proportional to efforts to accommodate her demands. Corollary to Maxim #54: The more a woman’s demands are catered, the more irrational will her future demands become.

Maxim #55: Less talking is always sexier than more talking. If you struggle to find something witty to say to a girl, stop trying. Flailing for the “right” words is approval-seeking beta behaviour that women can sniff from across a room. Corollary to Maxim #55: A grunt or aloof gesture trumps a try-hard, strained, verbose comeback.

Maxim #57: Never trust a woman’s advice on how to please women. Her advice is designed for alpha men she already finds attractive and from whom she seeks signals of attainability and commitment. Corollary to Maxim #57: A woman’s sex and relationship advice isn’t meant to help men; it’s meant to distract men from what really works to turn women on.

Sorry to go off topic but where can I find all the maxims? I've tried in the past, with no luck.