[Ehnulo]

Obviously for a short term fling it's irrelevant. But even for a longer term relationship, do you guys think it's important that your chick is intelligent?

I've never had a relationship last longer than 6 months, but my experience has been that intelligent girls are more argumentative, and not in a good way.

Not saying I like 'dumb' girls but I do seem to get along better with girls who just have less collective wisdom but an inquiring mind and a fun spirit.

Maybe I just met the wrong smart chicks though. What do you guys think?

[hydrogonian]

I'm not trying to sound snotty with his post, but I guess I need to a little bit to answer your question. I acknowledge the snottiness:

My POV is that you want enough intelligence that enables her to control her base impulses, or at least understand them, to the degree that she can suppress them for the greater good (family, your relationship, etc) if necessary. Any more isn't necessary.

I enjoy people of average intelligence, more than I do people who are slightly above average. This is because that there is no one so stubborn and arrogant as a person, who is a little bit intelligent, presupposing that they know it all or that they are correct in their logic. Frequently they aren't. Its annoying and those people tend to be annoying. I''ve got a big head, and so I'm not that dumb, but if there is one thing that I have learned in my life, its that "all I know is that I don't know". I'm always willing to consider a perspective and to learn something new.

A good and relevant example would be a slightly above average woman who thinks that her feminist worldview is the most enlightened and correct. She has enough intelligence to understand and even research feminist theory, but not enough to realize that this is a narrow worldview that doesn't take into account many factors, most importantly those that effect society as a whole. She doesn't see the theory as excessively self serving, even though that is precisely why she subscribes to it.

That is just one example. Other examples can be made for women who have IQ's of around 103-109. (That's a lot of people).

Now, truly smart women (IQ of 110+) are a mixed bag. If you get an enlightened and mature smart woman, then that can be the best thing that ever happened to you. She will have a meta-view on her base impulses, will understand them, and will be able to make conscious decisions about them. This would indicate a well adjusted, smart woman. They are usually open minded and principled at the same time. I meet a woman like this about once every ten years, currently. These are the only women that I feel (used to be) truly out of my league. I can work them now. But they used to break my heart.

More likely, a truly smart woman will be a sociopath after learning what power she has over others and learning to wield it.

Why I don't like smart women is because even not so smart women tend to have a degree of social intelligence that men don't have, and so she already has an advantage over me that can often be used manipulatively. Therefore, I like a woman of average intelligence to limit the manipulation, limit the exposure to sociopaths, and to limit exposure to irrational worldviews and stubbornness (although, average intelligence doesn't guarantee the absence of these things. The effects of modern brainwashing is tough to avoid in women)

If I want smart I go and find a friend. As I believe G-manifesto so eloquently put it one time, "women are for raising your kids and looking good on your arm, not for having deep philosophical discussion with" (paraphrasing).

[Deluge]

I find it harder to build connections with the average ones, they're monotonously boring. All they care about are their iPhone's, Next Top Model and Justin Bieber/Selena Gomez. Give me a pseudo-intellectual conversation with some hipster bitch any day.

[hydrogonian]

I have one I can introduce you to. She's a true fucking man-eater though It takes a special skill to match her level. She's a good example of "too smart" for a guys own good (she's somewhere above 110, but I'm not sure where). Although, after not getting what she wanted for 16 years, she gained a meta-view and is now shacked up with a beta chump. I know she's bored silly, but she is one of the few women who actually realized that she will never match with an alpha male, even though that's who turns her on. She's the hipster girl that guys fantasize about, but then they get what they asked for. She's a piece of work. You'd love talking with, hanging with, and fucking her though. She just might make-out with another guy while you're out with her as her boyfriend, or cheat on you and immediately tell you, exclusively to shit test you. She's done both, with some regularity. And you might even care because she's so legitimately smart, cool, pretty, and fun. Everyone loves her. That's the poison.

[Deluge]

I feel for this bitches husband.

[ElJefe]

110 is less than one std deviation above average - about a third of the population is that smart. I imagine the average in here is somewhat higher.

Intelligent girls want intelligent guys who can outwit them. They are often eternal ingenues, so you really have to know your game. The way to do this is, counter-intuitively, to come across as not that intelligent or interested in details to the point where your style could be described as "cave-man".

Smart girls spend a lot of time up in their heads, so they need someone who will make them laugh and take their minds off their boring, uninspiring lives. They often lack the initiative, imagination or will-power to go out and achieve the way you'd expect a man with high intelligence to do.

So if you are intelligent, make a habit of being silly or ridiculous with the more intelligent girls you meet - then every once in a while, let it slip you know a lot more than what you're letting on. This will pique her curiosity for sure.

[Tim9000]

(11-27-2011 09:58 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  

110 is less than one std deviation above average - about a third of the population is that smart. I imagine the average in here is somewhat higher.

110 is probably a lower IQ than the average college student even at non-selective schools.

I have a lot of experience with high IQ women. If my sample is any indication then they're no different than low-IQ women in terms of their game-ability and ease of getting along with, which one HUGE difference: high IQ women who have gone to selective colleges and universities that you meet at a bar (I emphasize 'bar' because I don't have any experience meeting these kinds of woman in clubs, but I'm not a club guy either) are much less likely to give you any sexual 'signal' to work with in response to your game, even if they seem to enjoy talking to you. In this bar/low-sexual signal context, they're lousy candidates for a same-night-lay even if they really like you. When you step back for a moment and think about why that is, the reason becomes clear: these women are *fantastic* at impulse control or may not have strong base impulses that need to be controlled to begin with. Only people who are both smart (at least book-wise) *and* have great impulse control can get into the most selective schools, because it requires lots of studying and the grades in high school to prove it. So if I'm right, forget about the Harvard girl who will talk to you at the bar forever but remain nonreactive to your escalations--she's likely just not that sexual and/or supremely self-inhibiting.

I want to be clear that I'm not talking about high-IQ women in general, just the ones that get into the most selective schools.

I've found that once you get a high-IQ woman in the sack everything is the same as other women from that point onward.

[CJ]

Like a buddy of mine once said to me in high school, "She doesn't have to be smart to lay on her back."

For long term? I'm not hooking up with a retard. I'd do it for 2-3 months though.

[Samseau]

I don't know if there's a correlation, but I'm IQ 120+ and I get some very intelligent women (like IQ 120+).

High IQ Girls from Princeton, Harvard, NYU, MIT, and Columbia have made up 25% of my bangs, and even my girls who aren't part of the elite schooling crowd still tend to be pretty damn smart (I've dated Physcists, Doctors, Engineers...).


That said, I don't give a shit if a girl is intelligent or not. In fact, it's been my experience that the more intelligent a woman is, the more manipulative and fucked up she is. I'll take a bimbo over a smart bitch every time.

I also think intelligence is pretty damn useless for the most part, anyways.

[Nonpareil]

Well behind;

- Looks
- Femininity
- Sexuality
- Kindness/Sweetness
- Ease of being around
- Sexual Skill
- Intangibles (money, cooking skill, connections)

The smart, hot lizards have good long-term upside...or at least they would if they didn't tend to be so neurotic, manipulative and competitive; chances are if a hot 26 year old girl is single and bemoans the fact, she is going to be a very smart girl, there is such a thing as too smart. Bang for 3 months or until you get tired of her elitism, of course if you're one of these 'I want a strong, confident womyn!' chumps (which I'm sure no one here is), feel free to latch onto her coattails until she cheats on you.

The dumb, hot lizards are fun but offer little much else in terms of long-term upside; keep them for fuckbuddies and short flings.

The sweet spot is an attractive girl of average to slightly-above average intelligence. All else considered, she's easy enough to talk to and be around (though she will still brainfart at times and call herself an expert on something she clearly isn't one on), but generally, if were talking IQ, you'll find the most quality girls in the 97-105 area.

[MikeCF]

A lot depends on your Agreeableness rating on the Big 5 personality scale.

http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/

I am low agreeableness. When people say stupid things, it annoys me more than average.

Women who are merely "bright" don't stay home reading. Even smart women rarely have intellectual hobbies. They listen to NPR and *maybe* occasionally read the New Yorker.

Those types of girls try holding court on the issue of the day, and it pisses me off. They are, best case, dilettantes.

I prefer silly girls. They view "serious subjects" as being over their head, and instead want to goof off, party, and fuck.

I have guy friends (guys are more likely to be brilliant rather than bright) to have intellectual conversations with. Girls exist to provide fun and light-heartedness to my life.

Many guys would be happier if they learned to keep women and companionship separate, like the men of old. Socrates didn't talk philosophy with his wife. Why should you?

[Timoteo]

This reminds me of a situation Aristotle Onassis once found himself in. Onassis was not formally educated, and was not a sophisticated man. His family business brought him into certain circles, so he found himself surrounded by the upper-crust of world society, people who ARE well schooled and sophisticated. He didn't give a fuck. Once he was married to Jackie Kennedy, he had to rub elbows with her crowd. One day he was at one of her functions, and someone asked him how he felt about being among her crowd. He replied, "There are only 3 things you need to know about Aristotle Onassis. I'm fucking Maria Callas (the famous opera singer and the true love of his life), I'm fucking Jackie Kennedy, and I'm fucking RICH."

[hydrogonian]

110 is less than one standard deviation, but it isn't as low as you think in terms of practical intelligence. I know that standard deviation refers to a possible range with any one person, but it also refers to an actual percentage of people that will consistently fall at any given point on that range. Assuming a true score of an individual on that range, there are lots of 110 Doctors - even surgeons. There are LOTS of 110 college professors, but that's not necessarily saying a whole lot.

I think its impractical to categorize 'smart' as above the first standard deviation, because first of all, most of life can be more than adequately dissected and mastered by someone with an IQ of 100-110. If that weren't so, society would be much more fucked up then it is. Also, IQ tests are highly controversial in what they measure. You can have someone who tests at 100 but has some sort of preternatural ability with business. That's an intelligence type that isn't accounted for in testing. However, I will also say that I think as a measure of a large group and predicting group behavior and achievement, that IQ testing is very useful.

100 is average - in the USA. I suspect that if you were to target and test specific geographic locations, probably according to socioeconomic status, you would see a lower average. The high achieving areas balance it out. But if you live in a low achieving area, then your experience with the average person will be below 100. Your best sample of the '100 average' population is probably in any middle class neighborhood. Of course, the standard deviations apply within any area. 50% of the population is at or below 100. another large percentage is between 100-110. Only the top 5% of that first standard deviation is at or above 110. Hence, that number being an arbitrary but practical categorization for 'smart'. Semantically speaking, anything above 'average' (100) is by definition 'smart' (if smart is defined as above average)

Actually, when I think about it, its hard for me to believe that 35% of the population is above 110. That's just not my everyday subjective experience interacting with people. Then again, I don't live in the 'smartest' of areas. If anyone has any data on intelligence within the general population, I'd be interested.

A 10 point difference in IQ is pretty huge. I f anyone is interested, take and IQ test and find out. The key is that you have to take a timed test that isn't culturally biased. It will likely be made up entirely of pattern puzzles. I have a link to one - if I find it I'll post it here.

[hydrogonian]

IQ tests are controversial in what they actually measure, but this one is about as good as it gets without paying a psychologist to administer it. It measures your practical ability to apply intelligence, not knowledge. Also, it's culturally neutral. Of course, scoring procedure is everything. I'd be interested to know what the possible top score is for this test. There may be a ceiling. For instance, if you have a 200 IQ, I don't know if this particular test can measure that. If you score at 135 or above, you may want to seek further testing if your interested in your true score.

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

[Sushifan]

Hi IQ women will be far more argumentative and will butt heads with you frequently.

One of my ex-girls is a Stanford graduate MD and it was nothing but grief with her. My current girl is a community college graduate and knows her place.

How smart do I like girls? just smart enough... Nothing more.

[hydrogonian]

(11-27-2011 02:53 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

A lot depends on your Agreeableness rating on the Big 5 personality scale.

http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/

I am low agreeableness. When people say stupid things, it annoys me more than average.

Women who are merely "bright" don't stay home reading. Even smart women rarely have intellectual hobbies. They listen to NPR and *maybe* occasionally read the New Yorker.

Those types of girls try holding court on the issue of the day, and it pisses me off. They are, best case, dilettantes.

I prefer silly girls. They view "serious subjects" as being over their head, and instead want to goof off, party, and fuck.

I have guy friends (guys are more likely to be brilliant rather than bright) to have intellectual conversations with. Girls exist to provide fun and light-heartedness to my life.

Many guys would be happier if they learned to keep women and companionship separate, like the men of old. Socrates didn't talk philosophy with his wife. Why should you?

Agreed. Good post.

[All or Nothing]

(11-27-2011 04:22 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

IQ tests are controversial in what they actually measure, but this one is about as good as it gets without paying a psychologist to administer it. It measures your practical ability to apply intelligence, not knowledge. Also, it's culturally neutral. Of course, scoring procedure is everything. I'd be interested to know what the possible top score is for this test. There may be a ceiling. For instance, if you have a 200 IQ, I don't know if this particular test can measure that. If you score at 135 or above, you may want to seek further testing if your interested in your true score.

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

Scored 126, oohhhhh yeaahhh and they say conservatives are dumber than liberals.

Personally, from what I have seen, intelligence doesn't have very much of an affect on what girls do. I'm an engineering major, and some of the girls that I see that are really smart, still follow their vagina when it comes to guys.

Although, I usually keep my conversation topics with women pretty light.

[Samseau]

(11-27-2011 04:22 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

IQ tests are controversial in what they actually measure, but this one is about as good as it gets without paying a psychologist to administer it. It measures your practical ability to apply intelligence, not knowledge. Also, it's culturally neutral. Of course, scoring procedure is everything. I'd be interested to know what the possible top score is for this test. There may be a ceiling. For instance, if you have a 200 IQ, I don't know if this particular test can measure that. If you score at 135 or above, you may want to seek further testing if your interested in your true score.

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

Sweet test. Reminds me of the test some guy in a black suit administered to me when I was in 1st grade.

Just because I hate guys who brag on the internet without backing it up:

   

I had fun taking it. Too bad having a high IQ isn't valued by society (not that I disagree with society's stance).

[hydrogonian]

Nice scores. I'll take it in a couple of days. Studying for a test now.

[joehoya]

My style of game works better with high IQ and/or highly educated women. They pick up and respond more to my conversational skill AND they are more quick to recognize my DHV. Furthermore, there is less competition at the top of the IQ scale than the bottom.

Also, while I have fucked less intelligent/educated chicks, I don't think that I could ever seriously date one. Even in Latin America, the chicks that I DATE tend to be college educated and/or working professionals, definitely several steps above the average chica in terms of intelligence. However, I have banged numerous average/below average girls. I just have ZERO interest in spending any more time with them after I bust my nut.

[hydrogonian]

Quote:

Scored 126, oohhhhh yeaahhh and they say conservatives are dumber than liberals.

Nah, they aren't. There are dumb as dirt people on both sides, though. That's just the nature of large groups of people, and it doesn't say anything about either party. I think liberals get that rep because I think that there is a tendency of a lot of 100-110 people to seek out and latch onto fancy theories (feminism, etc.), and defend them to the death, without further objective analysis. So, you get this 'above average' liberal group, who tends to be college educated, giving the liberals that reputation. Furthermore, liberalism is reinforced on college campuses. Conservative college campuses in this country, which tend to be religious, are all but a running joke except for maybe BYU. If someone came to me for a job with a degree from Liberty University, I wouldn't give them the time of day.

On the conservative side, I get frustrated because there are people who fall into the same trap. However, it tends to be reinforced through the media and dogma rather than education. There is a lot of liberalism insidiously woven into modern day conservatism, and most average to low average conservatives can't parse it out, and so in my opinion modern conservatism does need a jolt of intelligence injected into its popular philosophy. Many of the 'smarter' conservatives become employed by the media and think-tanks to reinforce this bastardized form of conservatism to the dumber masses. However, there are still smart conservatives and smart liberals who stay true to their values. Its just that the liberal values are insanely destructive and the conservative values, when applied correctly, work to preserve society (imo). There needs to be more vocal smart, true conservatives. The problem is that the media ignores them, inclusive of "conservative" channels such as Fox.

[All or Nothing]

(11-27-2011 06:00 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Just because I hate guys who brag on the internet without backing it up:

I felt that offhand stab.

(11-27-2011 06:20 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

The problem is that the media ignores them, inclusive of "conservative" channels such as Fox.

I was just saying that because I still remember this one kid telling me: "I'm a liberal and statistically liberals are smarter than conservatives." I have always held a deep hatred of that down your nose snootiness that liberals have. This has probably helped me gravitate even further to the conservative side of the line.

Also, about Fox, Fox is HUGE. My problem with Fox is that they put up these conservative heads like Bill O' Reilly and Pretty Woman No.2 to speak for the conservative masses. Probably because Bill O' Reilly and Pretty Woman No.2 breeds higher rating, but at the end of the day it fucks up the conservative stance. Especially since, reasonable intelligent conservatives are almost silent compared to these media figureheads. This ends up making the conservatives look like a mass of bumbling rednecks with their head in the sand.

[hydrogonian]

Quote:

This ends up making the conservatives look like a mass of bumbling rednecks with their head in the sand.

Right. Consider the fact that this might be intentional. Although, as a conservative myself, there are a lot of conservatives that are bumbling rednecks with their head in the sand. The redneck part is irrelevant. The head in the sand part is what makes the conservative party an accomplice to the bad road that this country has been going down. There are too many cheerleaders and people that just want to be a part of the "conservative club" without ever analyzing the policies that their party leaders embrace. This makes them about as worthwhile as your average sheep, or ostrich, to stay congruent with the metaphor. Its the rare conservative that I meet that I identify with. Some I like. They tend to be older. Like, real old. Most I dislike because I find their logic weak and their support for their ideals blind (without analysis). The ones that I like can parse the liberalism from their so called conservative ideals.

Anyway, not to hijack the thread with politics..

Back to smart vs dumb...

[UrbanNerd]

If the woman is:

a) not of Western culture
b) woman I just want to bang

...I don't care about her intellect. Now for the North American woman I would marry??....yes I want her at least intelligent enough to make a living that is close to my level so it minimizes my loss in case of divorce.

[DLuzhin]

Smart girls aren't more argumentative than normal ones. All women shit-test, but intelligent women don't shit-test men they feel are more intelligent than them. Instead they vent on orbiter males that they know to be their intellectual inferiors, leaving the good times for the smart dude they actually respect.

Also, I've had my intelligence actually limit my appeal. I've measured out at 150 & 155 on two Wechslers, and have found that to women of above average intelligence, I'm strange and dazzling, but to women of average intelligence, I'm just strange. Consequently I've had to find ways to immediately weed out girls who I know would be alienated by what I am and what I do with myself.

IQ doesn't matter a lick in the real world btw, it's just a something nerds invented for use in internet pissing contests.