Ladies, The Smarter You Are, The More Likely You Are To Be Single

[lino]

This is often a cop out I hear from women who are simply just too picky.

 

Often, they aren't genuinely that intelligent either, they just think that themselves (or it is reinforced by their airhead friends) and believe no man can ever match their intelligence and because they settle for no less than their perceived equal, they're often permanently single*

 

Women I've met who are genuinely intelligent people, and I've met many, have no dramas finding a partner. The only ones who do, are those who are very lacking in looks or are very unfriendly.

 

* Single but still seeing/f#cking guys without problems. Quite often guys they're happy to do this with but wouldn't dare have a relationship with.

[Els]

A social study with 121 participants...? Eh.

 

My observation (which really is only slightly smaller in terms of sample size than that 'study') has been that intelligence doesn't prevent a woman from finding a compatible partner at all. I don't think it 'benefits' women to the extent that it does men in terms of increasing your odds (as men who are strongly attracted to intelligence are rarer than their female counterparts, but they do exist), but it certainly doesn't decrease them.

[ascendotum]

I believe you know your company... just check the base salary as well, while you're at it. I'm not saying you're not earning just as much... I am saying companies indiscriminately discriminate against all women. Most of the times . And the only way of knowing for sure - and not speculating or generalizing, is to check with Payroll.

 

Check with payroll? Payroll dept is not going to give out much info. Many companies are very guarded with their payroll information, especially those where there is big differences in bonuses, or pay rates/bonuses/deals are struck on a individual basis by different dept heads and there is not a clear and open policy on pay for the various positions as there is say in the public service sector. I worked with payroll data for a couple of public companies and I did not see clear discrimination against women (private sector companies may be different). In fact when it came to some attractive women that you could tell the bosses liked (possibly had the hots for) there was a positive bias to their pay. Sometimes its hard to compare as there some variation in duties and they change the job title as well, so one person my not have much more responsibly or work any more hours but will earn maybe earn 30-50% more.

[Gloria25]

Or don’t care that much. Some of the smarter women really don’t care that much. Condi Rice, Harriet Myers, Sonya Sotomayor, just to name a few high-profile examples in only one field.

If a fabulous guy comes along, great! Really great! Otherwise, they may just choose to stay single and do other things that fascinate and challenge.

There are men like that too.

 

Lol....that sounds like me and where I am in my life right now. Sometimes, even after I meet someone and/or get an opportunity to get laid I'm like "meh, I don't wanna be bothered"...Some think that's why I've played into my latest role of being an "imaginary girlfriend"...

 

See, thing is, the older you get, you get set in your ways...and, after you've learned to do without for so long, it doesn't phase you.

 

Also, I've been there and done that with sex - even though there are things I'd still like to do, but not the biggest priority for me. Geesh, sometimes I wonder if like wives, we women all just get to a point where sex isn't a priority anymore.

 

But if I had a guy, I'd make sure he's taken care of

 

 

With all due respect, those three women aren't remotely attractive...And are we even sure they are heterosexual??...I dunno..

 

Ill concede that its still possible that the outcome would be the same if they were good looking, but it does make you wonder.........

 

TFY

 

Yeah, I've heard the jokes about feminism being the last resort for ugly women who couldn't get a guy to notice them...Eh, well, I'm not the prettiest girl in the room, but I belief in being on my own and putting my priorities in my career and education came from a combo of an abusive dad and poverty. I just have not been able to let go trusting a man with my heart and finances....

 

I tried to get married a couple of times for religious reasons and out of loneliness when I first joined the military, but didn't. I can get laid right now if I wanted to, but don't want that.

 

Also, when you look at Condi, she came from an uppity family, so she was raised to be a "success" if you will.

 

So, not all of us spinsters with education are fugly broads

[Weezy1973]

As a smart dude I'd say intelligence is a factor in attraction but career/ambition. The career success of a woman literally has absolutely no effect on my attraction towards her. It's a neutral characteristic.

[clia]

I've seen this a lot, and quite frankly, I can't understand it...especially when you consider all the talk of gender equality...Can you imagine if a typical guy said this?

 

I am a high earner...It wouldn't bother me if a woman made less, because quite frankly, they probably will..Guys have been carrying women, and still do, in many cases, since the dawn of creation....Heck, I know guys who are multi millionaires and have wives that are morons...And they are OK with it...But for some unknown reason, women feel like a guy isn't worthy if he doesn't make more than she does....Doesn't that fly in the face of all that is supposed to be about feminism and equality of the genders?

 

Isn't it equality to want a guy who makes what you make? Isn't that equal?

 

Obviously men aren't that bothered about what women make, and many men will take a hot woman with no earning power over a less attractive woman who makes the same salary as they do. But that's not my problem, as a woman. Men will do what they want to do. And most men want hot women and don't give a crap about how much money they earn -- oh, until the divorce happens and they have to pay alimony to the non high earning woman who they chose because she was hot.

 

But I think it's total equality to want a man who makes what I make in terms of salary, or close enough to it.

[Radu]

Isn't it equality to want a guy who makes what you make? Isn't that equal?

 

Obviously men aren't that bothered about what women make, and many men will take a hot woman with no earning power over a less attractive woman who makes the same salary as they do. But that's not my problem, as a woman. Men will do what they want to do. And most men want hot women and don't give a crap about how much money they earn -- oh, until the divorce happens and they have to pay alimony to the non high earning woman who they chose because she was hot.

 

But I think it's total equality to want a man who makes what I make in terms of salary, or close enough to it.

 

Are we talking philosophy or instinct bred over tens of thousands of yrs ?

 

Men tend -notice the word 'tend'- to have this huge sword over their heads and it writes 'provider' on the blade.

Hence why they are more willing to accept a woman who makes less, compared to women who are less willing to accept a man who makes less.

 

Provider is a big part of masculinity and it's not just about the money, you could actually consider it to mean 'taking care of her' ... which can mean other things that women find hot in men [fixing something around the house, organizing stuff, even being a good logical decider, etc ...].

 

In principle, men and women should couple with similar earning potentials.

But many times the world does not work on principle.

 

PS: Let's throw another wrench into the whole sensitive deal.

If they make less, the woman is more likely to still make less.

When kids come around, someone usually goes part time or gives up work for a while.

That someone is generally the woman; when kids get older or other things change, she can go back to work but it will be a career hit overall.

 

So for them to command a true equal salary longterm there are 2 options :

- no kids [how many women are ok with this ?]

- she should be earning more from the start so after the kid.hit [which tends to happen early in the marriage], they can end up with equal earning potential

[Eggplant]

The education is still worth it to me, even if it means a "lesser" partner or no partner.

 

 

That said, all of my highly-educated (with graduate degrees) girlfriends married before 26, some before finishing school. It's not as though you have to wait to be in relationships until you're out.

[Eggplant]

“successful men date less successful women not because they want ‘women to be dumb’ but rather because they want ‘someone who prioritizes their life in a way that’s compatible with how you prioritize yours.

Basically, they want someone who isn’t ever going to let her career come before making dinner and pleasing them first.’” Read more

 

 

This makes sense. I'm female, but I've thought to myself many times that I'd prefer a man who wasn't as career-oriented so that he would have more time to spend with children. I do not want a father for my kids who works 90 hours a week and never sees them. I want the one who will be at their sports matches and recitals and who will be home for dinner. And if this means living a much more modest lifestyle, so be it.

[TaraMaiden2]

The words 'smart' and 'married' can often be an oxymoron....

[SycamoreCircle]

We can all agree that the woman chooses.

 

So, why is the onus being put on men here? Women aren't fruit dangling on a tree. They have legs. They have checking accounts.

 

Statistical Fact: Vitamin rich apples with precious Johnny Appleseeds inside are more likely to ripen, fall to the ground and become bird-chew.

Yeah, right.

 

The title of this post mounds this fermenting ground waste into a passive pile and says..."Oh...woe...I'm just too good to be plucked."

[PrettyEmily77]

A social study of 27 international female volunteers (read friends & family) indicates that smart, educated, solvent, average to attractive single women who have a career and / or a stable job are single because they either haven't find a compatible partner or because they don't want one.

 

 

Like most other single people, really.

[TaraMaiden2]

A social study of 27 international female volunteers (read friends & family) indicates that smart, educated, solvent, average to attractive single women who have a career and / or a stable job are single because they either haven't find a compatible partner or because they don't want one.

 

 

Like most other single people, really.

Possibly. But not for the same reasons....

[elaine567]

I think there is a lot of "traditional" thinking going on, defending the patriarchy and "the ways things are" and "biology" and a dismissal of the fact that educated women are an increasing species. Never before have women had the potential to change "the way things are and have always been".

There is much talk here about powerful ugly old men wanting hot young women and dismissing other women as being unwanted and ugly.

However education for women is still relatively new, and I see a time in the future where powerful, old ugly women will be choosing hot guys to marry and dismissing other men as being unwanted and ugly. Then that will become "just the way things are".

 

The "norms" will be challenged as women capable of running their own lives and their own fertility - with or without men - will realise their own worth and not rely on a man to take the "dominant" role in the partnership.

Those hot young bimbos will start to say "Thanks but no thanks", as women start to see other avenues out of the poverty trap, other avenues that don't involve f*cking old men for their money.

 

Few young men are looking for wealthy women to date purely "for their money", as most men want to get there under their own steam.

I guess there will come a time when few young women will be looking for wealthy men to date either, purely "for their money", as they will also be capable of getting there under their own steam.

[SycamoreCircle]

Wow, Elaine. This is one of the most radical things I've read from you. That's not a judgment, just an observation. Couple this thread with the recent one on Caitlyn Jenners and there's more speculation on the fluidity of sexuality than I can muster at the moment.

 

Maybe we can also tie in the recent thread on Hilary Clinton as President.

 

Anyhow, my mother who was born in 1938 has witnessed a wealth of change in her lifetime. Maybe, with this new woman you're proposing, I will, too.

[Taramere]

There is much talk here about powerful ugly old men wanting hot young women and dismissing other women as being unwanted and ugly. However education for women is still relatively new, and I see a time in the future where powerful, old ugly women will be choosing hot guys to marry and dismissing other men as being unwanted and ugly. Then that will become "just the way things are".

 

 

Whatever gender a person is, they face the reality that they can try to be all the things people are said to want in a partner...and still find themselves screwed over at the end of it. When guys trumpet about "well, what we really want is hot young women and we don't care much about their brains" that's sending out a message to women of all ages that they'd better learn to feather their own nests for that time when their looks start to go.

 

That could mean marrying a wealthy older person for theirs cash, or it could mean learning to be independent so that their ability to live comfortably is not dependent on how hot others think they are. Between the two, I think the second is more honourable...and it also gives people the opportunity (and impetus) to pursue what talents they might have.

 

I think there will always be people who marry for love...and there will always be a fair chunk of them who manage to stay married. But inevitably not the same number of people get/stay married as was the case in the past. Not necessarily because people have lost their ability to love, or because they're unlovable, or because their expectations are too high....but because there was far more pressure on people to get married in the past. Even if they didn't particularly want to.

 

The number of single people floating around today might be hard for a lot of people to accept, but I bet if we all got in a time machine and questioned people from 100 years ago a lot of them would envy people today for not being under the same compulsion to plug through life in loveless marriages.

[elaine567]

The "sheng nu" in China should not curl up and die, unwanted and undesired, under some sort of "old maid" traditional shame .

This is the patriarchy talking.

They need to use their wealth and education to start "using" the third of Chinese single men who are unmarried and desperate for a wife.

 

They need to start an new order, as they have been dealt the upper hand, despite the Chinese media and "traditional" Chinese views putting them down.

They need to start selecting and using the "weaker" men for their own ends, in the same way men have generally "used" poorer women for centuries. They need to be proactive, not fade into the shadows as "failures".

 

Else nothing changes, education for women will be seen as a bad thing - unless single-hood is the goal - and women go back into the kitchen.

[Radu]

I think there is a lot of "traditional" thinking going on, defending the patriarchy and "the ways things are" and "biology" and a dismissal of the fact that educated women are an increasing species. Never before have women had the potential to change "the way things are and have always been".

There is much talk here about powerful ugly old men wanting hot young women and dismissing other women as being unwanted and ugly.

However education for women is still relatively new, and I see a time in the future where powerful, old ugly women will be choosing hot guys to marry and dismissing other men as being unwanted and ugly. Then that will become "just the way things are".

 

The "norms" will be challenged as women capable of running their own lives and their own fertility - with or without men - will realise their own worth and not rely on a man to take the "dominant" role in the partnership.

Those hot young bimbos will start to say "Thanks but no thanks", as women start to see other avenues out of the poverty trap, other avenues that don't involve f*cking old men for their money.

 

Few young men are looking for wealthy women to date purely "for their money", as most men want to get there under their own steam.

I guess there will come a time when few young women will be looking for wealthy men to date either, purely "for their money", as they will also be capable of getting there under their own steam.

 

Theory is good, practice is different.

 

In practice, you will need a new much more powerful generation of anti-depressants for this to work.

[elaine567]

When guys trumpet about "well, what we really want is hot young women and we don't care much about their brains" that's sending out a message to women of all ages that they'd better learn to feather their own nests for that time when their looks start to go.

 

 

Yes, just like a footballer needs to get the best deals - when he is fit and healthy and at the top of his game - in order to finance the rest of his life

He may land the national coach position in later life, but the greater likelihood is, he will have to go back to low wages, IF he doesn't make sure his ducks are in a row and his nest feathered well, when times are good.

 

Berating women for entering into survival mode, over the "newer, better, younger, model" attitude of men, is perhaps a bit rich...

[elaine567]

Theory is good, practice is different.

 

In practice, you will need a new much more powerful generation of anti-depressants for this to work.

 

Well, perhaps the break up of "the patriarchy", may mean women will no longer need as many anti-depressants.

[PrettyEmily77]

The "sheng nu" in China should not curl up and die, unwanted and undesired, under some sort of "old maid" traditional shame .

This is the patriarchy talking.

They need to use their wealth and education to start "using" the third of Chinese single men who are unmarried and desperate for a wife.

 

They need to start an new order, as they have been dealt the upper hand, despite the Chinese media and "traditional" Chinese views putting them down.

They need to start selecting and using the "weaker" men for their own ends, in the same way men have generally "used" poorer women for centuries. They need to be proactive, not fade into the shadows as "failures".

 

Else nothing changes, education for women will be seen as a bad thing - unless single-hood is the goal - and women go back into the kitchen.

 

That's a very pessimistic view of things. Where I live, intelligence / smarts / whatever has not stopped women from finding compatible partners, and I don't even live in a big city. I have a good career and whenever I've been single was totally by choice. The men I dated never saw it as an issue, and my guy finds the facts that I have a stable career, a solid formal education and, most importantly, that I can think for myself, a very big plus.

 

 

The men in my family, social circle and work are or were all married to or dating educated, smart women; I think more men than you think are attracted to educated women. I for one give them that credit.

 

 

Social studies are all well and good but overthinking the reasons why people are single aren't really helpful IMO, because they're mostly personal and down to individual circumstances.

[SycamoreCircle]

Well, perhaps the break up of "the patriarchy", may mean women will no longer need as many anti-depressants.

Deposing Sadaam Hussein brought a wealth of new, unforeseen problems.

[elaine567]

That's a very pessimistic view of things. Where I live, intelligence / smarts / whatever has not stopped women from finding compatible partners, and I don't even live in a big city. I have a good career and whenever I've been single was totally by choice. The men I dated never saw it as an issue, and my guy finds the facts that I have a stable career, a solid formal education and, most importantly, that I can think for myself, a very big plus.

 

 

The men in my family, social circle and work are or were all married to or dating educated, smart women; I think more men than you think are attracted to educated women. I for one give them that credit.

 

 

Social studies are all well and good but overthinking the reasons why people are single aren't really helpful IMO, because they're mostly personal and down to individual circumstances.

 

I was referring to the Chinese model, where it seems the "sheng nu" or "unwanted women" are being berated by society for in essence bettering themselves with an education.

Those women are now Class A, in a society where Class A men want to marry down and desire Class B females.

[elaine567]

Deposing Sadaam Hussein brought a wealth of new, unforeseen problems.

 

OK, so let's all we women, troop back into the kitchen, for fear of the release of a thousand demons on all our heads...

 

An apocalypse beckons.

 

"Let the men have their bimbos!!", we all shout in unison.

[Taramere]

Berating women for entering into survival mode, over the "newer, better, younger, model" attitude of men, is perhaps a bit rich...

 

I've long felt that way. It's not a case of wanting to get into a battle with men over it...but it's a big risk to let one's basic survival depend upon anything as fleeting as lust (or even romantic love). Especially when that lust/love is based primarily on time limited factors like youth.

 

We can't control other people. Their desires or their whims. We'll see threads on here giving messages like "so long as you do X, Y and Z your partner is unlikely to cheat on you" and a lot of us know from experience that that is just not the case. That you can try really hard to do all the "right" things in a relationship, but things like cheating - or people just losing interest - can still happen.

 

As somebody who practices divorce law, I can tell you that the women who are hardest hit by divorce (where the man went off with a younger women) are those women who have devoted their lives) are the women who devoted themselves to the business of trying to be a perfect wife and mother. Meantime, they're battered that bit further by media messages about "how to beat time/how to hang onto your man/this celeb/model looks 35 at the age of 50...so what's your excuse??"

 

It's hard to hear their stories. To see how depressed and embittered they are as a result of having put all their eggs in a basket that, as it turned out, was not built for the long term - however hard they tried to take care of it. So it makes sense, in the context of eternally uncertain relationships, for women to be confident in their ability to be self supporting.