Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

alternet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 160 posts

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#151

Post by adrianwaj »

c00p3r wrote: post #149
Rod wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a loser's game. Sure, a ton of money will get you laid... with precisely the kind of women one should avoid in the first place. Money does not increase one's attractiveness per se , it only attracts scavengers commonly known as gold-diggers. Better use the money to improve oneself...

Money without intelligence is a much worse problem than poverty! You should use your money smart way. First of all, distrust all claims like 'money is not everything'. Without money you simply cannot stay physically attractive. You need fresh, organic, mostly veg. food, because a healthy diet is the most important part of your nonverbal value. The skin, the hair, even the teeth - they all depends of food. Then banal…

You can be a slob dress and grooming-wise 80% of the time but know how to look good 20% of the time when it matters. That's the key, to be able to shift up a gear.

It can also be cheap to be fit, exercise gives you new thoughts, and doesn't take long. The downside of exercise is injury, over-exertion and poor form. Again, like clothes, you don't have to be fit all the time, you can ramp it up when you want to start giving off some pheromones with your new clothes.

Diet is crucial all the time. Here's the key: avoid all processed foods and stay away from trans-fats. Choose water.

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#152

Post by banned_man »

joetrumpet wrote: post #140
HSO wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"they still go for the strong guy over the "nice" guy" The antonym to strong is weak, not nice. I think people often forget that girls, particularly sane and intelligent ones, do not reject the prototypical "nice guy" because he is nice but because he is a pushover. That is, weak. You can be strong and nice. In fact, I think the strongest ones usually are "nice" or considerate because they can afford to, whereas at l…

He didn't mean antonym, which is why he mentioned at the end girls could then find both a nice and strong guy. In other words, it's less likely for nice guys to have the trait, but not impossible: they don't have it because they didn't attempt it since they simply listened to girls who didn't know (or weren't willing to admit) what they wanted. In my experience, girls do want first and foremost an alpha male, and bei…

So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then?

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#153

Post by rdouble »

banned_man wrote: post #152
joetrumpet wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't mean antonym, which is why he mentioned at the end girls could then find both a nice and strong guy. In other words, it's less likely for nice guys to have the trait, but not impossible: they don't have it because they didn't attempt it since they simply listened to girls who didn't know (or weren't willing to admit) what they wanted. In my experience, girls do want first and foremost an alpha male, and bei…

So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then?

So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then?

I guess now we know what time_management's new nickname is...

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#154

Post by joetrumpet »

banned_man wrote: post #152
joetrumpet wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't mean antonym, which is why he mentioned at the end girls could then find both a nice and strong guy. In other words, it's less likely for nice guys to have the trait, but not impossible: they don't have it because they didn't attempt it since they simply listened to girls who didn't know (or weren't willing to admit) what they wanted. In my experience, girls do want first and foremost an alpha male, and bei…

So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then?

It came about for evolutionary purposes, I'm sure, and the magnitude of their influence is quite debatable, and varies greatly from person to person. But do you believe status is not a factor in the eyes of most girls (this is, of course, simply a generalization)?

I'm sure you have friends who you would consider incredibly nice, but very shy, guys who never could get a girlfriend, and plenty of jerky, but confident, guys who you wonder why girls would date. Confident guys, even when not nice, just seem to win out over really nice, but not at all confident, guys. Guys with both win out over both. Whether or not it's a bad thing is your call.

(I'm not arguing guys are above their primitive desires: not by any means, it's just not the focus of this discussion.)

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#155

Post by asciilifeform »

sachinag wrote: post #8

Frankly, there's an opportunity here: make a dating site just for smart people. Don't just ask about people's alma mater, ask for their GPA and major. Don't just let people say what they do, ask what their employer and title is. Ask for SAT, GRE, GMAT, LSAT, whatever other scores. Then let your users screen on the stuff that they use as a proxy for smart. We all have different definitions for smart; just try to accom…

>make a dating site just for smart people

This has been done. (http://www.intelligentpeople.com) They seem to use the same test for every applicant (a dusty scan of the famous Raven's Progressive Matrices.) So the system is easy to game, if you so wished.

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#156

Post by jganetsk »

davidw wrote: post #131
tel wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just about the exact same experience with swing dancing as well. It's a slightly different crowd: higher energy, more into the flourish than the candles, but still it's easy to learn, fun to do, and a wonderful way to meet women.

Is that still a going concern? I was aware of it being quite a fad during the late 90ies, when one of my favorite bands, the Cherry Poppin' Daddies (from my hometown of Eugene) got caught up in it, despite being an extremely eclectic band. I guess it stuck with some people? Good thing; it's fun music and I could see it having a similar vibe. Salsa can be pretty high energy too, I think, although if you're treating it…

The swing dancing fad that you experienced has evolved into a vibrant community of Lindy Hop and related dances. It's relatively small, and few people are aware of its existence... but it's very robust and spread across the world. I would say the community's size is on the same order of magnitude as that of ballroom dancing.

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

I started doing it 6 years ago. I've been stuck doing it ever since, because of my hacker mindset, but also because of the social scene. Imho, Swing is actually much better for hackers... plenty of women, it's full of other hackers, everyone's a bit geeky, and many folks are hyper-creative and artsy. It's also easy to learn but hard to master... lots of challenge when you get really into it.

I must note that the vast majority of people have many misconceptions about swing dancing. What you saw in the fad bears little resemblance to what's done today. No one really plays Cherry Poppin Daddies or other similar pseudo-swing punk music. Lots of swing DJs are true music geeks, and play swing, soul, blues, and R&B at dances. Real swing dancing is much more about having feeling and jazz musicality than it is about acrobatics. Think of it as tap dancing with a partner. The acrobatics are definitely still around, but are basically restricted to performance. Yes, Swing is not as seductive as Salsa, but the emotion is definitely there.

Great example of what good swing looks like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3rlvBQ7nUE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u0YWCY0sZI

In the Bay Area, check out: http://920special.com/ http://www.redwoodcityswing.com/

In Boston, check out: http://www.havetodance.com/calendar.html

In NYC, check out: http://www.yehoodi.com/frimfram/

There's also a very different family of dance in the swing umbrella, West Coast Swing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_coast_swing

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#157

Post by chris11 »

tel wrote: post #118
davidw wrote: post #80

One thing that helped me a lot: investing some money in some salsa dancing lessons. First of all, I actually enjoy it, it's fun (if you don't like it you wont' get far). Second, it's sort of cool, compared to, say, talking about startups and computers with someone who is potentially not interested in either one. Also, it's something where practice does pay off, and where you can't fake it, so investing some time will…

Just about the exact same experience with swing dancing as well. It's a slightly different crowd: higher energy, more into the flourish than the candles, but still it's easy to learn, fun to do, and a wonderful way to meet women.

Swing dancing is a lot of fun. It seems to be somewhat popular around the few colleges in the area. Swing is somewhat simple, and like you said, it can be really high energy.

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#158

Post by cousin_it »

banned_man wrote: post #117
gaius wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you even know what "alpha male" means. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_male "In social animals, the alpha is the individual in the community whom the others follow. Where one male and one female fulfill this role, they are referred to as the alpha pair" Girls want to be part of an alpha pair, it's as simple as that. I think you are projecting your own warped ideas about sex ("humiliation") onto this.…

The concept of "alpha" is highly variable among species and therefore doesn't generalize easily. In humans, it describes the type of man who would have a large number of wives in a pre-monogamous society-- narcissistic, brutal, detached, and without conscience. Healthy women don't want to be anywhere around those sorts of men, who tend to be abusive husbands and terrible fathers. However, a certain class of psycholog…

Healthy women don't want to be anywhere around those sorts of men

Will have sex with them gladly, though, and tell the nice guy the kid's his.

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#159

Post by dkarl »

banned_man wrote: post #106
gaius wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Woman are programmed to find the leader of the pack attractive, even if said leader is an ahole. That's the key point - alpha characteristics/interactions trump everything else. Girls like alpha assholes despite them being assholes, not the other way 'round.

This is completely wrong, because women who like alpha males have those preferences because they've been taught that sex is degrading, humiliating, and painful, and are therefore attracted to men who are likely to humiliate and damage them. Therefore, the attraction is because of these men being assholes.

The women who believe that are the women who grew up in households where it was true, or who believe that they are worthless for some reason and don't deserve any better. A small minority of women, in fact.

If you see that mentality in most of the women you meet, then you're missing something about them or about the men they like. Or you're hanging out in strip clubs.

Re: Why Being Smart Won't Get You Laid

#160

Post by dkarl »

I thought I was smart. I thought I was right. I thought it better not to fight. I thought there was a virtue, in always being cool. So it came time to fight, I thought "I'll just step aside," and that the time will prove you wrong. And that you would be a fool.

To fight is to defend. If it's not now then tell me when would be the time that you would stand up and be a man. For to lose I could accept, but to surrender I just wept, and regretted this moment that I was the fool.

'Cause I'm a man, not a boy, and there are things you can't avoid. You have to face them when you're not prepared to face them. If I could, I would, but you're with him, now it'd do no good. I should've fought him. But instead I let him... I let him take it.

Post reply on HN