Dating Smart Girls

[IpAncA]

lol nope, you just can't expect every guy you date to be that way.

Yep.

 

I wanted to make sure that my guy wasn't screwed up more then me lol!!

[Trialbyfire]

lol nope, you just can't expect every guy you date to be that way.

Yes I do.

[dropdeadlegs]

Yep.

 

I wanted to make sure that my guy wasn't screwed up more then me lol!!

 

Thats about what I look for. And holding down a job (not necessarily a great paying one) and paying his bills on time. If he has a child, he absolutely MUST pay his support payments and pay them on time. Sense of humor is pretty important to me. I think I prefer "handy" men to those with a high IQ. If I want to dabble in rocket science I'll do that on my own, but if I need my brake shoes changed, he better be able to help me out. And I will stand by and "assist" in the operation (hand him tools.) I don't like to get dirty!

[CarolAnne]

I got my BS at Duke and my cousin is at MIT, I went to visit for a week and it was actually beyond nerd paradise - in one word, Halo probably sums it up Can't forget Sex Tetris either

 

This thread is somewhat saddening because I know exactly the frustration and jealousy that is being described. The feeling that the thing you are most proud of, the thing you have sacrificed so much time and effort to improve - your brain, seems like a not-very attractive trait to guys compared to say, big silicone boobs or a new BMW. Anyone can buy fake boobs, those are done in an hour, but how often does one come across a truly insightful mind?

 

Unfortunately, what I pick up on most in this thread is anger, bitterness, and childishness. Anger that one's prized trait isn't being appreciated, extreme jealousy to the point of name-calling at women who were born with different attributes, and frustration that the enjoyment you feel when you totally win a debate isn't returned or even appreciated by the opposite party. A really bitter frustration because you totally feel like they should be impressed by your time-honed mastery of the facts and excellent debating skills, but people are instead turned away.

 

It makes me chuckle because it's a thread by someone who claims to be intelligent enough to be objective whining "me me me" just like a baby - I want to exercise my brain, I want to win the debate against you, I want you to appreciate my knowlege, I want you to recognize how special I am, I want you to appreciate my forethought and planning for the future, I want you to want to spend time with me instead of crap-for-brains her -- I'm not laughing at you BTW, I'm laughing with you because this is me several years ago.

 

The one question you are NOT asking: what does he want? There is no other way I can sum it up. You know what you want obviously. Hell even babies know to cry when they want something, but I'm reading nothing but ridicule, stereotyping and anger at the things he wants.

 

I don't doubt that you are frustrated and sincerely wondering whether he really does prefer dumb girls to smart girls. But that is missing the entire point, this guy - like you and every single person out there, wants someone who pays attention to his needs first. Sort of like a mommy. Just like you want him to appreciate your special abilities. And if a girl in community college who plays video games listens to his needs, and you want him to recognize *your* brilliant mind and let *you* feel important by winning debates, it's pretty clear that the reason why he is choosing her has nothing at all to do with intelligence.

[Guest]

I'm a guy and I have played a few mental chess games in my day. Here's my take.

 

I don't care how smart you think you are, or want you got on you SAT's. I'm not dating your report card. I want to date the person. How you act and conduct yourself is more important than anything. Do you argue all the time and try to force your ideas on people? Be humble.

 

I never put that much emphasis on grades and book smarts. Take my brother for example, he has a master's degree, but cannot figure which way to tighten the garden hose. Lefty loosy, righty tighty, DUMB A**!LOL I laughed hard at him and that one knocked him down a peg in my book. University of what??????????

 

But people like that are so smart; they can PAY someone to do it for them. JEEZ!

 

Book smarts sand street smarts are VERY VERY DIFFERENT.

 

A street smart person would KNOW that no one gives a S*** about her sat score. A Book smart person would think that’s important.

 

 

To the 4.0 GPAs, here is a little food for thought. You will come across lot of people who will think you’re an idiot in your lifetime. You’re plumber, your mechanic, maybe your doctor, other drivers on the road, accountants, contractors, pilots. The list goes on.

 

Your academic achievements mean nothing outside of university walls. Hope your not in your 30’s, still talking about your grades. Because that would be pathetic.

[insomnie]

I've been avoiding LS for a while because I feel like this thread got out of control and a lot of (wrong) assumptions were made about the kind of person I am and what values I hold. This probably is because of the way I phrased things in my first couple of posts and what I chose to make known about myself as opposed to what I chose NOT to reveal.

 

I created this thread because I was curious. I wasn't really looking for feedback as to why my ex-boyfriend doesn't love me, what went wrong with my relationship, what is wrong with me/my attitude, or why I have "trouble" attracting guys (I don't). I suppose I should have omitted all the background info because it was pretty irrelevent to my question.

 

Question being:

 

Does a person's "attractiveness" begin to decrease after a certain level of intelligence is surpassed??

 

 

As an equation (I think in numbers, English being my second language): if f(y) is a person's "total" score for how attractive you find them, where y is their intelligence, is f(y) a decreasing function on any interval?

 

 

I'm starting to see that it doesn't matter, though. Love is more than the sum of its parts, but it's simpler than that, too. We love people who make us happy. We grew apart. I stopped making him happy. Vice versa, too, but I held on harder.

 

One positive thing about this thread for me was that it made me realize this. It also made me realize that I DON'T actually value intelligence as much as I claimed to. Intlligence certainly wasn't what attracted me to exbf, and it isn't what I miss about him the most. It was just an easy thing to be pissed about with the whole exbf's new gf situation.

 

 

A couple of things I want to clear up about myself, though, since I'll probably keep posting on LS and I don't want to be remembered as that snobby girl that thinks she's the smartest person in the world:

 

1. I DON'T think I'm the smartest person in the world. In fact I posted this question on LS because I think most of the people on here are WAY smarter than me (as is obvious by the caliber of their advice and logic) and I figured they would sympathize with at least SOME of my observations.

 

2. I am NOT "argumentative". It seems most of you think, after reading my first post, that I am someone who loves picking fights with others to establish my own "superiority". Someone to stay clear of because my snobbishness disables me from being able to relax or have fun. Not the case. I actually LOVE acting childish and spend most of my free time on semi-braindead hobbies, which include video games. I said that I love to argue. Well, I take that back. I don't love to argue. But, sometimes someone will say something that I think makes no sense and that I disagree with. Then I'll voice my opinion and sometimes it'll turn into an arguement. And sometimes I'll want to "win". Key word, though, is SOMETIMES. I reality I rarely argue (I've maybe gotten into three of these kinds of arguments my entire time at college), and actually I stay clear or people who like picking political fights, for example. I am not one of them.

[insomnie]

Your ex boyfriend is probably interested in this "dumb girl" because of her looks, integrity, fun loving spirit and support she gives to him. Don't get me wrong, I think intelligence is important but being smart is better. I've known ivy league guys who won't date ivy league girls because they don't want to talk "shop" when the day is over. I've been told by them that they want someone soft and sweet who make them feel like a man.

 

Aren't there clubs and other social groups where highly intelligent people socialize? If I were you I would find one of these groups and you will probably find the man of your dreams and you guys can argue and analyze everything until you are blue in the face.

 

And this kind of barely veiled hostility is why I've been avoiding LS.

 

You don't really know that much about me. You know even less about him and her.

 

I just think it's a little presumptuous of you to tell my why my boyfriend probably cheated on and subsequently left me for someone else, and what qualities she probably has that I don't.

 

And thanks for the tip about where I can find someone to get blue in the face with, but I'm not really looking for that kind of relationship.

[cbl]

Very interesting post and a very interesting way you presented yourself here. Basically I don't think people are trying to judge you here (maybe some) but most people are just trying to offer their opinions based on the information you provided

 

I suppose I should have omitted all the background info because it was pretty irrelevent to my question.

What seems irrelevant to you might be considered relevant information to other people. I learned that by reading very carefully each post and I am surprised sometimes I am not open minded enough as I think I am

 

Does a person's "attractiveness" begin to decrease after a certain level of intelligence is surpassed??

 

No it doesn't. It depends on what kind of people you intend to attract and what kind of people you are attracted to. Extremely brilliant people are certainly very attractive to those who appreciate intelligence (NOT that they don't appreciate any other qualities) therefore in your equation try to add other variables such as a: the ability to be attentive to his needs, b: physical attractiveness, c: being caring, d: being romantic, e. level of happiness being together, to name a few. Then you see, it is not a linear function anymore, and it’s a “combination” of things (ie. a package deal) – f(a, b, c, d, e, ….y) And smart as you are, I am sure you know how to find the answers to this multi-variant function

 

2. I am NOT "argumentative"

No you are not. You are just being too hard on yourself... Relax. And have fun in life.

[SmoochieFace]

I was attending a banquet one night given in Sir Ross's honor; and during the dinner, the man sitting next to me told a humorous story which hinged on the quotation "There's a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will."

 

He mentioned that the quotation was from the Bible. He was wrong. I knew that, I knew it positively. There couldn't be the slightest doubt about it. And so, to get a feeling of importance and display my superiority, I appointed myself as an unsolicited and unwelcome committee of one to correct him. He stuck to his guns. What? From Shakespeare? Impossible! Absurd! That quotation was from the Bible. And he knew it.

 

The storyteller was sitting on my right; and Frank Gammond, an old friend of mine, was seated at my left. Mr. Gammond had devoted years to the study of Shakespeare. So the storyteller and I agreed to submit the question to Mr. Gammond. Mr. Gammond listened, kicked me under the table, and then said: "Dale, you are wrong. The gentleman is right. It is from the Bible."

 

On our way home that night, I said to Mr. Gammond: "Frank, you knew that quotation was from Shakespeare,""Yes, of course," he replied, "Hamlet, Act Five, Scene Two. But we were guests at a festive occasion, my dear Dale. Why prove to a man he is wrong? Is that going to make him like you? Why not let him save his face? He didn't ask for your opinion. He didn't want it."

 

"Why argue with him? Always avoid the acute angle." The man who said that taught me a lesson I'll never forget. I not only had made the storyteller uncomfortable, but had put my friend in an embarrassing situation. How much better it would have been had I not become argumentative.

 

It was a sorely needed lesson because I had been an inveterate arguer. During my youth, I had argued with my brother about everything under the Milky Way. When I went to college, I studied logic and argumentation and went in for debating contests. Talk about being from Missouri, I was born there. I had to be shown.

 

Later, I taught debating and argumentation in New York; and once, I am ashamed to admit, I planned to write a book on the subject. Since then, I have listened to, engaged in, and watched the effect of thousands of arguments. As a result of all this, I have come to the conclusion that there is only one way under high heaven to get the best of an argument - and that is to avoid it .

 

Avoid it as you would avoid rattlesnakes and earthquakes.

Nine times out of ten, an argument ends with each of the contestants more firmly convinced than ever that he is absolutely right.

 

You can't win an argument. You can't because if you lose it, you lose it; and if you win it, you lose it. Why? Well, suppose you triumph over the other man and shoot his argument full of holes and prove that he is non compos mentis. Then what? You will feel fine. But what about him? You have made him feel inferior. You have hurt his pride. He will resent your triumph.

 

That quote from the book has got to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

 

So allowing someone to be factually wrong about something is somehow 'right'? Uh, an argument can be won easily if the winner has the facts correct. If the loser is 'hurt' by being shown that he is wrong then that is his problem. He should just suck it up and learn not to say things that are factually incorrect.

 

And Mr. Gammond was a real dummy for KNOWINGLY being wrong... and for kicking someone too.

[SmoochieFace]

And this kind of barely veiled hostility is why I've been avoiding LS.

 

You don't really know that much about me. You know even less about him and her.

 

I just think it's a little presumptuous of you to tell my why my boyfriend probably cheated on and subsequently left me for someone else, and what qualities she probably has that I don't.

 

And thanks for the tip about where I can find someone to get blue in the face with, but I'm not really looking for that kind of relationship.

 

Just my opinion but I think people who are 'hostile' towards you are probably jealous in some way. So that makes it THEIR problem and not yours.

 

I would just ignore those who are 'put off' by your intelligence and just seek out those who value it. Intelligence IS something to be valued in my book so I have no issues with people who have it. They are more interesting overall because of it.

[princessa]

I'm starting to see that it doesn't matter, though. Love is more than the sum of its parts, but it's simpler than that, too. We love people who make us happy. We grew apart. I stopped making him happy. Vice versa, too, but I held on harder.

 

One positive thing about this thread for me was that it made me realize this. It also made me realize that I DON'T actually value intelligence as much as I claimed to. Intlligence certainly wasn't what attracted me to exbf, and it isn't what I miss about him the most. It was just an easy thing to be pissed about with the whole exbf's new gf situation.

 

I think that despite how you might feel about the hostile comments that you've received given what you said in the first post, you were still able to take something away from all of this, and that's what's most important. Any extraordinary quality, be it beauty, street smarts, or intelligence, can be easily made unappealing when the person holding those qualities fails to demonstrate humility. Only you know whether you're really snobbish or not, since none of us know you in real life, but seeing as how your original post, it was easy for a reader to assume that you were indeed stuck up and arrogant. If you know that this is not who you are, then disragard any comments related to that by all means, but it is still our job here oh LS to warn you against that.

 

As far as my personal opinion on your question, I think it was pretty shallow to begin with (yeah, I think seeing an ex with some dumb blonde would have done the same to anybody else)... and I think you just said that you've realized yourself that intelligence is not all that counts. It shouldn't define you as an individual, and it shouldn't be all that defines your ideal partner. I think that a quality by itself cannot do harm to anybody by definition. IMO any problems with this "quality" (such as possibly making you unattractive to a man) would come from the attitude that carries this quality.

 

That said, a certain level intelligence that's compatible to yours is a must have in a partner. You need somebody of your own level. If you are highly intelligent, and you're dating somebody with a low IQ, then yes, you will inevitably be unattractive to him because he will not be able to handle your convos and will get bored. Same with somebody who's much more intelligent than yourself.

 

Here's what marriagebuilders.com say about intelligence:

 

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]1. Intelligence. You and he should be roughly equivalent in intelligence, within about 15 IQ points. Without having to take an IQ test, you can usually figure that out by comparing grades in school, although men are notorious underachievers in high school. College grades are a better measure of intelligence for both men and women. The quality of your conversation is another good indicator of compatible intelligence. Men who are stimulating to talk to are usually in your league intellectually. But if there is a large gap between you in IQ, both of you will tend to be bored by your conversation. The one with the highest IQ will find the conversation to be superficial, and the one with the lowest IQ won't be able to keep up. There is also a tendency of someone with a higher IQ to disrespect the judgments of the one with the lower IQ, and that's an absolute relationship killer. Respect is essential in marriage regardless of the quality of an opinion. If you both enjoy talking to each other for hours at a time, and you respect each other's ideas, you pass the test.[/FONT]

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi5068b_qa.html

[CarolAnne]

That quote from the book has got to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

 

So allowing someone to be factually wrong about something is somehow 'right'? Uh, an argument can be won easily if the winner has the facts correct. If the loser is 'hurt' by being shown that he is wrong then that is his problem. He should just suck it up and learn not to say things that are factually incorrect.

 

And Mr. Gammond was a real dummy for KNOWINGLY being wrong... and for kicking someone too.

 

Aw dude you've got to be kidding - the point is you have to pick your battles, some really will cost you more in the long run even if you win. Also the title of the book is How to Win Friends And Influence People not How to Be an Asswipe at a Party

[SmoochieFace]

Aw dude you've got to be kidding - the point is you have to pick your battles, some really will cost you more in the long run even if you win. Also the title of the book is How to Win Friends And Influence People not How to Be an ********* at a Party

 

I'm being dead serious.

 

See... there's the problem right there. People are too scared to set others straight when they are wrong and one of the consequences of that are ignorant and ill-informed people assuming positions of power. I don't think I need to point out to you who I am referring to.

 

Sometimes having people who have their facts wrong in those positions can have disasterous results. Just check it out - it's all over the teevee every day.

 

My philosophy: the truth is all that matters. If that means I 'lose' out on friends/career prospects/whatever then so be it. I am completely comfortable with it. Being correct takes precedence over all those other 'little things'.

[CarolAnne]

Well, if always making sure everyone knows you are right is your priority then so be it, I'm having visions of petty arguments going late into the night over whether Bush is a good president etc... Are you a lawyer BTW?

[SmoochieFace]

Well, if always making sure everyone knows you are right is your priority then so be it, I'm having visions of petty arguments going late into the night over whether Bush is a good president etc... Are you a lawyer BTW?

 

No, it's not about making others know that I am 'right'. It's about pointing out to others when they are factually wrong about something AND them learning from the experience. See, if someone points out to me that I am factually wrong about something I take it as a positive thing... a learning experience... and I use it as an opportunity to learn what is correct... and NOT getting all pissy about it like most people would because their fragile egos have been 'hurt'.

 

Nope, I am not a lawyer and I am not connected with the legal profession in any way. In fact, I really don't care for most lawyers as many of them will distort the truth for their (and their clients') gain.

[CarolAnne]

Stop proving my point!! I thought we were arguing

 

"My philosophy: the truth is all that matters. If that means I 'lose' out on friends/career prospects/whatever then so be it."

 

That's my point too, that's the point of the book section - proving that you are right / they are "factually" wrong can cost you even though you "win" the argument. The only reason I posted it is because the original thread post described the poster being frustrated that her "winning" made people mad. I guess it just comes down to personality, if setting people factually straight is more important to you than "friends/career prospects/whatever" that is totally your choice. Incidentally I think you would have a fabulous career as a trial lawyer or professor.

 

You are definitely right about easily bruised egos - from my experience people don't take being corrected as a "learning experience" or "chance to play devil's advocate" but as some kind of personal attack.

[SmoochieFace]

The only reason I posted it is because the original thread post described the poster being frustrated that her "winning" made people mad.

 

Yes, that is right. But why are people getting 'mad'? Is it insecurity? Jealousy? Weakness? What?

 

 

I guess it just comes down to personality, if setting people factually straight is more important to you than "friends/career prospects/whatever" that is totally your choice. Incidentally I think you would have a fabulous career as a trial lawyer or professor.

 

 

I appreciate your compliment however I also am honest to a T. I just don't view lawyers in general as possessing the same high standards I possess so the legal profession really is a turnoff. Call me cynical, but I think most lawyers are in it for the $.

 

Now... being a prof... yeah, that's a possibility. I think police work has more appeal though. Get to yank all the baddies off the streets and Tase those stubborn ones.

 

 

You are definitely right about easily bruised egos - from my experience people don't take being corrected as a "learning experience" or "chance to play devil's advocate" but as some kind of personal attack.

 

Yeah, well, people really need to toughen up, quit blaming others for their BS, and take responsibility for their lives. Admit it when you're wrong and accept the responsibility it entails.

 

If people would just quit being pu$$ie$ when confronted with the truth and instead embrace it and learn from it - not run away like cowards - then perhaps we would have a better world filled with more enlightened people. I know it's idealistic but I've done it and others can do it too if they choose.

[Grrlish]

Insomnie, I just saw this thread. I haven't read the entire thread - which seems okay since you've provided a 'starting over' point here.

 

I'm twice your age (as shown in your profile). I can relate to how you feel now; I felt the same way in my 20s. That most men my age did not want to date an intelligent woman. And maybe back then, they didn't. Most of the guys in my small-ish hometown were not educated beyond high school, and most did not have a lot of ambition.

 

An intelligent young woman likely has expectations for her life, which means that she likely has expectations for the man in her life. Frightening for a young man of 24 (or so) - to know that he is content with his life, as-is, but that the young gal across the table from him is dreaming of bigger things.

 

Question being:

Does a person's "attractiveness" begin to decrease after a certain level of intelligence is surpassed??

 

Perhaps. But this level, or point, likely differs from person to person.

 

There's a theory, of sorts, that most people wind up with someone with a level of physical attractiveness within a certain 'range' of their own. (Of course, there are always exceptions to this rule, and, of course, it's a rather subjective characteristic.)

 

I wonder...if this is the same for intelligence? Again, though, intelligence can be defined in different ways.

 

I have a B.S. My boyfriend has an A.S. There are many people with B.S.s that would assume that my bf is less intelligent. (There are many with their M.S.s that would assume that I am less intelligent than they are.)

 

I believe that my bf and I are of a similar level of intelligence, simply by the way that we interact. Do we know the same things? No. Today, he's providing senior 'back-up' for a young instructor who is teaching a group of state employees how to climb huge trees (for limbing). Me, I'm peer reviewing scientific analyses by junior staff. He can survive in the backcountry for months at a time with minimal gear and food carried in. Me, I can survive in the midst of a room filled with stressed out clients for hours! He's a better cook than I am. I'm better with the computer than he is.

 

Intelligence is subjective. You can't measure it with an algebraic equation - not in reality.

 

2. I am NOT "argumentative". ... Someone to stay clear of because my snobbishness disables me from being able to relax or have fun. Not the case. ... I don't love to argue. But, sometimes someone will say something that I think makes no sense and that I disagree with. Then I'll voice my opinion and sometimes it'll turn into an arguement. And sometimes I'll want to "win". ...

 

Well, what you're describing could be interpreted as being argumentative by some. It could also be interpreted as being a know-it-all by some. And wanting to 'win' in anything except a formal debate or at least where the other participant has acknowledged in some way that they are interested in having a debate, is, well, aggressive and probably unwelcome. Either way, let me offer this:

 

I was probably much the same way when I was younger. I'm intelligent and articulate and thought that it was a positive thing to always offer input or opinion or more facts or...

 

I was well into my 30s before I realized that people don't always want to hear what you have to say. Especially if you're always offering your opinion - no matter how benign the topic. I've learned that just because someone is speaking on a topic with which I'm familiar, or about which I know a few interesting tidbits...doesn't mean that I need to open my mouth and chirp up.

 

Sometimes people just want to talk. Sometimes the best thing to do is to just shut up and listen. Or pretend to listen. You'd be surprised how positively people react to you when you just listen some times. This doesn't make you any less intelligent.

 

They don't always want to discuss. Or hear what you have to say.

 

I've learned to relax in conversation and not always feel like everything has to 'make sense' to me. (Of course, if I feel that someone is a babbling idiot, I shouldn't be around them anyway, right?) Not every conversation has to be factually correct - to me.

 

 

I was one of those children/teenagers who earned straight As in grade school and middle school. My brain was so unchallenged in HS that I dropped out. I graduated with double honors from college (at 33 - I was a returning student).

 

One of the most important lessons that I've learned is that no one really cares how smart you are, when you're smart. Well, I work in a scientific field so the people I work for and with do but...other than that, people don't really care.

 

More importantly: Are you enjoyable to be around?

[westernxer]

Are you a lawyer BTW?

 

Lawyers don't have time for this type of stuff. Neither does anyone else working 50+ hours a week.

[westernxer]

Personally, I like smart girls, but I can't stand the ones who don't know when to apply the brakes.

 

It goes both ways... ever see a guy who knows it all and speaks loudly so everyone can hear him? Hard to befriend someone like that.

[johan]

I prefer smart girls. But they have to have a good sense of humor. A smart serious girl can be a drag.

[Okeydokey]

This is such a good thread you started. I didn't read everything bc it seems to go on forever and it sounds like some folks got rude about the subject and you. I'm in law school and for the last few years I've only dated guys from the school and needless to say the relationships have sucked. lol. Here is my reflection on the issue. I don't think the problem is so much our smarts - the problem really stems from couples who compete with against each other and measure their professional worth on that basis.

 

The TRICK is too date someone who does something COMPLETELY different from what you do to the point where your body of knowledge and their body of knowledge are entirely different and are not comparable. I haven't gotten there yet, but all of the happily married female attorneys I know are married to people with entirely different skills from their own which include an elementary school teacher, an artist, a mathemetician, and a high-class carpenter.

[burning 4 revenge]

I like smart girls too, but they're especially sexy when they're evil.

[Guest]

i think many men are intimidated by smart guys and they isolate them from certain parts of their lives. i have seen guys place women in position where they 'look up to them' and thats gross to me.

 

a smart woman to me is someone that puts her self-respect and self-worth first and demands respects from others, that places her children above her relationship and makes sure that her dreams and goals don't get lost in the shuffle. a smart woman to me is someone that supports and teaches life lessons but only in a way that the other has to do the work and figure out the clues she is sending from a distance.

 

a smart woman to me is someone that knows when to stop sitting on the fence when she knows what she wants and sees that it is out there. this is a woman that will do great things in life and will be respect by all that come into contact with her. this is a woman that every man should dream of, and it such a woman ever enters his life - he should stop at nothing to win her heart [within reason of course].

 

i have only know one such woman, and she is someone i would love to have in my life forever, but a smart man and a smart woman can love each other in many ways. i know a smart woman and she is beauty and grace and sensual and naughty and tough and tender, she is both stubborn yet flexible and confusing yet clear, she is like clouds in the sky where imagination is born and plays freely, and she is footprints in the snow and snow angels in the field. she is detailed and forgetfull and passionate and stern, she is music and silence and the love of my life. she is present but absent, a ghost, a vision, and real within touch, she is substance and enriched with wisdom and wit, she is creul and unbending but also timely and rational and she is a woman that is unique and there is no one like her.

 

this woman was once in my life in a way where we both made connections between each other that will last a lifetime. this woman is now dancing on the corners and edges of the table i have set up for a feast and if she gets hungry i will pull back her chair and offer her wine, and light several candles and look into her eyes and tell her 'thank you for coming back for another adventure, this time i believe the ride will be better.

[Guest]

1. Intelligence. You and he should be roughly equivalent in intelligence, within about 15 IQ points. Without having to take an IQ test, you can usually figure that out by comparing grades in school, although men are notorious underachievers in high school. College grades are a better measure of intelligence for both men and women.

 

I like Marriagebuilders but this is dorky advice. Women can also be underachievers in high school and high marks, even in university, don't guarantee that someone is a great conversationalist.

 

Point is this: not all of your couple time is spent in bed. A good conversation is a great pleasure. So you want (or at least I do) someone who is great to talk to. Which does not include, as someone else pointed out, the sort of person who 'thinks stars are aliens with flashlights' LOL.

 

And I want to deal with a logical person - or at least someone who will acknowledge if his ideas are illogical because we all have the odd quirk of illogic (I hear Irish accent and am turned off but I acknowledge this is illogical and won't refuse to speak to someone just because of an accent, for instance).

 

To me, prejudice is illogical. Being against social justice is illogical. Believing in generalizations like 'all women are bytches' is illogical - and once I hear a statement like that come out of someone's mouth, I'll challenge it. If the person acknowledges he's using a generalization just as a figure of speech and then goes on to make a more reasoned argument, I'll listen - but someone who can make (and believe) in that kind of bogus statement loses all my respect. And clearly you wouldn't want a relationship with someone you don't respect.

 

Like Smoochieface, to me facts and truth are equivalent. Someone who is dealing with an issue based on faulty information is in need of the facts so not to be considered a fool by everyone else who knows the facts or so not to cause grief to someone who will be harmed by acting on wrong information.

 

So, for instance, if someone in a conversation says you're supposed to not eat when you have a fever because of 'feed a cold, starve a fever', I'll say that's an old wives' tale and that it's necessary to eat when sick to help fight the illnesss. If I just stay silent to save someone's feelings, the people listening might follow the advice and cause themselves harm.

 

In the context of LS, when some bozo says you win people by 'treating them bad', I'll chime in to say that's really bad advice because nobody deserves to be mistreated and you won't earn yourself a good relationship if you behave that way in hope that nobody will follow bad advice.

 

And, like Smoochie, I have no idea why people get in a snit about being corrected. It's just information. Why would someone glom onto information to the extent that they get personally insulted when corrected?

 

So I think Insomnie needs to find someone she can have a good conversation with - and that means someone who won't be in a complete snit about being mistaken once in a while (and of course that goes for her, too ) and, as she has pointed out, and in my experience, they're not that easy to find.