Monday, May 25, 2015

It must be the smart women's fault, then

We are reliably informed that men prefer intelligence to large breasts or long legs in long-term relationships:
Men value intelligence in women far above large breasts and long legs, a Cambridge evolutionary biologist has claimed. Although having a large bust and never-ending pins are deemed by western culture as the epitome of femininity, when choosing a mother for their children, men look for brains first,

Professor David Bainbridge, of the University of Cambridge said that intelligence is by far the most attractive quality for men looking for a long term partner because it demonstrates that his chosen partner is likely to be a responsible parent.

It also suggests she was brought by intelligent parents and so was likely to be well fed and looked after in childhood, and so healthier. It may reveal why men like George Clooney ended up marrying human rights barrister Amal Alamuddin.
If men prefer to marry intelligence, and nearly 50 percent of women with advanced degrees remain unmarried and childless, then we can only conclude that the declining rates of marriage, particularly among the intelligent, must be entirely the fault of women.

Obviously, since we so prefer intelligence, it can't possibly be our fault that no one is marrying all those smart women.

84 comments:

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Men value large breasts and long legs on women far above intelligence, a Laguna Beach man has claimed.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Although having an advanced degree and n-count > 15 are deemed by western culture as the epitome of femininity, when choosing a mother for their children, men look for big tits first.

Cail Corishev said...

Obviously it's the fault of Society, and the images of advertising and entertainment, which brainwash and peer-pressure us into wanting fair, leggy, busty women rather than the pant-suited degree-chasers we secretly want in our hearts.

"It may reveal why men like George Clooney ended up marrying human rights barrister Amal Alamuddin."

Failure to count. "Men like" him didn't marry her; one man married her, and it's not an accident that she's an unusually good-looking human rights barrister for her age. But hey, let's stake our theory on the late-in-life decision of a single man in rarefied circumstances.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

This is nothing more than beta-boy hamstering.

What he's doing is justifying his own failure--and that of so many modern men--to attract a hot, bangable woman.

Yes, by all means chaps, go for the smart chicks with degrees.

One Fat Oz Guy said...

Isn't that the reason every playboy magazine features only highly intelligent women regardless of looks and weight?

SirThermite said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
SirThermite said...

Men instinctively value intelligence in women if it means such women are self-aware of and are cultivating their own value at being feminine, empathetic, nurturing, and shrewd at efficiently running a household on a limited income (no late-night credit card impulse buys of jewelry, furniture, or collectibles on Home Shopping Network). Also women who are intelligent enough to realize they need a man (or need to keep their current man), before time runs out and they run into the Wall. But,as Vox and others have pointed out, too many women have been taught to mistakenly value socially-constructed credentials over traditional, productive feminine virtue and intelligence. There are record numbers of women alive today who will die with Masters and Doctorate degrees And there are record numbers of such educated women who will due unhappy, unmarried, and childless.

hank.jim said...

I'm waiting for George Clooney to announce the pregnancy of his wife. It seems like George and Amal means feminists win contrary to all evidence that they didn't. Large breasted and long legged women have two things big brains don't have. It did have George in his prime.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

It's not that men don't value any intelligence in their choice of mate, it's that other factors--such as long legs, large bust, beautiful face, etc.--are more important.

HickoryHammer #0211 said...

I can't believe that all the cognitive dissonance these people must experience in their daily lives doesn't cause them to stumble around like drunks.

Trust said...

@: " If men prefer to marry intelligence, and nearly 50 percent of women with advanced degrees remain unmarried and childless, then we can only conclude that the declining rates of marriage, particularly among the intelligent, must be entirely the fault of women."
________

Or perhaps modern college makes women less intelligent. Or perhaps more intelligent women marry instead of going to college.

Mackus said...

Even if "men marry for brains" theory was true, having advanced degree in liberal arts and huge college debt, is no indicator of intelligence.

daleaf47 said...

I read a blog recently (I think it was Roissy's) reporting a survey where 61% of women rejected any man less intelligent than themselves, and another 25% considered that a major negative. While men prefer intelligent women, the preference is no where near as strong. Most woman in the top 1 % would not consider any man not in the top 1%; as a top 1% man myself, I included the rest of the top 50% in my list.

Dexter said...

Best comment at the site:

Dr_Zeek

awesome research - it validates the view that porn has no future on the internet.

Dexter said...

I can't believe that all the cognitive dissonance these people must experience in their daily lives doesn't cause them to stumble around like drunks.

Often enough it causes them to be beaten, robbed, rapid or killed by the blacks whom they insist have they exact same intelligence and propensity to violence as whites.

maniacprovost said...

Isn't that the reason every playboy magazine features only highly intelligent women regardless of looks and weight?
That's why they interview the centerfold about which college she's attending.

Hammerli280 said...

SirThermite is on the right path.

I think there are two dynamics in play here. One group of women wants to browbeat men with their educational credentials, not persuade men they will be good wives and mothers. The second group of women are mirror-imaging - they don't understand that a man cannot upgrade his status through marriage. Which means that advertising yourself as a high-status woman doesn't work.

Matt said...

Are these the men who prefer some icing instead of the whole cake?

Thelien said...

Marie Curie was happily married and had time to raise two children along with her science work, with no modern social services available. She was an intelligent women, those with advanced degrees and "not ready" to take care of a family - probably not so.

Bastiat's Ghost said...

I look for a flat stomach and a big ass personally. I'd take that over D cups anyday. I've known some women, a lot in fact, that had considerable intellect but had the tendency to say some of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Hells Hound said...

Off-topic: more feminist nonsense on Cracked from that misandrist asshat David Wong:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-helpful-answers-to-societys-most-uncomfortable-questions/

Cracked has long become a full-blown SJW rag.

traderdoc said...

What is with all the either/or choices? I married a woman with great thin figure, still has firm d-cup after three children, beautiful face still in her mid-50's, and enough intelligence to be the best currency futures trader I've ever known. . They are out there

For all the posturing and justification, I think most men are too scared of women to go after the really good ones. So make excuses, die lonely and frustrated, or go find the good-looking, intelligent ones. HINT - many of the best are Christian woman, and are not found in bars or single sites.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

"Hey check out the Stanford B.A. on that chick!"...said no man ever.

SirHamster (#201) said...

If men prefer to marry intelligence, and nearly 50 percent of women with advanced degrees remain unmarried and childless, then we can only conclude that the declining rates of marriage, particularly among the intelligent, must be entirely the fault of women.

There's also a possibility that advanced degrees are not an indication of intelligence; a negative indicator for intelligence, even.

Corvinus said...

"It may reveal why men like George Clooney ended up marrying human rights barrister Amal Alamuddin."

Or maybe it's because Amal looks far more like Monica Bellucci than Hillary Clinton.

Why this isn't obvious to Sarah Knapton (the author of that article) is beyond me. Maybe she's blind or autistic.

Corvinus said...

What is with all the either/or choices? I married a woman with great thin figure, still has firm d-cup after three children, beautiful face still in her mid-50's, and enough intelligence to be the best currency futures trader I've ever known. . They are out there

@traderdoc
I don't think Vox is referring to an "either-or". His point is that a smart woman might have a chance with an Alpha, but only if she's also hot.

Question: Would you have married your wife if she had the same IQ she does, but was homely? Yes or no? Now, would you have married your wife if she looked exactly the same as she does, but had an average IQ? Yes or no?

Aeoli Pera said...

I think what we're seeing here is at least partially due to the shape of the distribution. 110 IQ in a mother is better than 90 IQ. It's only at around 115-120 that girls start to pick up the teacher's pet attitude and thereafter identifying as "the smart girl". But the pre-115 crowd is 85 percent of the spectrum, and nobody wants to be at the office worrying whether their legally retarded wife forgot one of the kids has a nut allergy.

Aeoli Pera said...

Should mention the teacher's pet thing seems to fade at 140 and up, but girls at that level have a higher rate of dysfunction than their male counterparts, aside from also being more rare.

Retrenched said...

If this were true then adult novelty stores would be full of books and DVDs of plain looking girls doing advanced calculus for horny guys to fap to.

Retrenched said...

That said, I believe that both men and women tend to value intelligence in prospective mates, provided that they already happen to find said mates attractive already, for reasons unrelated to intelligence. It's not that intelligence doesn't matter at all, just that it's not an attraction trigger in isolation.

ray said...

Clooney makes a film like Michael Clayton, telling a bit of truth about New Transformed Amerika... then marries a corporate feminist skank.

'Preciate that knife in the back George! Will return it to you a.s.a.p.


You just keep pretending you're actually a man. Maybe one day you'll make it.

kbswift said...

Sounds like all those smart women need to women up to get married.
Men saying they like smart women is the PC equivalent of women saying they like nice guys.

Stickwick Stapers said...

Guys, it's about MMV, not SMV. Irrespective of whether she's right, the author is: a) not claiming that men find intelligence more sexually arousing than big boobs or long legs; and b) not claiming that men are wholly disinterested in boobs or legs when choosing a mate for a LTR. What she is claiming, right or wrong, is that when a man is choosing a mate for a LTR, he is likely to value intelligence more highly than boobs or legs for the sake of his future children. Maybe the study is flawed, or her analysis is faulty, but I personally do not find it hard to believe that the average man would prioritize the well-being of his future children when choosing a long-term mate, since men tend to be sacrificing and long-term in their thinking.

maniacprovost said...

the teacher's pet thing seems to fade at 140 and up, but girls at that level have a higher rate of dysfunction than their male counterparts
Yeahhhh, I knew a 144 who was about a 24-24-36. The only problem was her complete suppression of all her negative emotions. That sounds good, but it's not. She claimed she wanted to live alone in silence with no children, and to the best of my knowledge she still does.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

I see a lot of mature women getting plastic surgery done, not too many are opting to get degrees at age 60.

David-093 said...

"Maybe the study is flawed, or her analysis is faulty, but I personally do not find it hard to believe that the average man would prioritize the well-being of his future children when choosing a long-term mate, since men tend to be sacrificing and long-term in their thinking."

You're completely wrong. Intelligence in a wife is nice to have, but it's not absolutely necessary beyond knowing how to cook and to raise moral, happy children. Women with above-average intelligence tend to be a pain in the ass to deal with. I'd take pretty with average smarts over okay looks and high smarts every time.

Cail Corishev said...

Most men probably have an "IQ floor" below which they wouldn't find a woman marriageable, but it'd be a lot lower than smart women would like to think. I was going to say a man wants a woman who's too smart to accidentally set herself on fire, but then I remembered the James Garner movie "Support Your Local Sheriff." The lead actress is a ditz, and every time Garner meets her she's doing something ridiculous, including the time she's making dinner and covers herself in flour and sets her dress on fire. She's still adorable, and it doesn't seem odd at all that he marries her in the end.

Conscientia Republicae said...

Was that Sally Field?

tweell said...

Joan Hackett - Sally Field was Murphy's Romance.

Stickwick Stapers said...

Fogey: I see a lot of mature women getting plastic surgery done, not too many are opting to get degrees at age 60.

Do you also see a lot of men looking to marry 60 year-old women to have kids with them, Einstein? "...when choosing a mother for their children, men look for brains first."

David-093: You're completely wrong. Intelligence in a wife is nice to have, but it's not absolutely necessary beyond knowing how to cook and to raise moral, happy children. Women with above-average intelligence tend to be a pain in the ass to deal with. I'd take pretty with average smarts over okay looks and high smarts every time.

Intelligence in a wife is nice to have, even though it makes her a pain in the ass to deal with? Anyway, how can I be completely wrong on the basis of intelligence not being absolutely necessary, when prettiness is not absolutely necessary either? Besides, big boobs and long legs are not synonymous with pretty. Furthermore, nobody said anything about high smarts. All we know is that there is some minimum level of intelligence that appeals to the men in this study more than large boobs or long legs.

Cail: Most men probably have an "IQ floor" below which they wouldn't find a woman marriageable, but it'd be a lot lower than smart women would like to think.

Probably. I tried to find the paper to get the details, but no dice. The problem is, the media almost always misrepresent research of any kind just to make a story. The more I think about it, the more this seems like a non-story. Most men don't seem to care about breast size as long as the breasts are nice. And long legs? Probably most men prefer legs that are proportional in length to a woman's overall height. In that sense, it's almost obvious that when it comes to choosing a potential mother, neither big boobs nor long legs are as important as some minimum intelligence level. It would've been far more telling if the researcher had chosen to compare a preference for general prettiness and intelligence to see which came out on top. And also to study this for two different groups -- men who are currently looking for a LTR for having children and men who have already been in a LTR with children.

David-093 said...

"Intelligence in a wife is nice to have, even though it makes her a pain in the ass to deal with?"

You must've over looked the part where I said they tend to be a pain in the ass. As in, generally but not always. And I don't much like dealing with idiots so I appreciate intelligence, but the fact remains they're typically annoying.

"Anyway, how can I be completely wrong on the basis of intelligence not being absolutely necessary, when prettiness is not absolutely necessary either?"

Prettiness is the attraction factor that draws men to women. Intelligence isn't. Ergo, prettiness is more necessary. Men don't care about intelligence as long as she's not a total fucking moron.

"Besides, big boobs and long legs are not synonymous with pretty."

If I had to bet...

"Furthermore, nobody said anything about high smarts. All we know is that there is some minimum level of intelligence that appeals to the men in this study more than large boobs or long legs."

Yes, which is exactly my point: average smarts is better than no smarts, but no man has ever wanted to marry a complete dumbass nor does a man expect to, and it's completely disingenuous to frame the debate that way. So again, men will pick prettiness over above average smarts everytime because, chances are, she meets the minimum intelligence requirement.

Jack Amok said...

A nice personality is a lot more important than IQ. Women have a much smaller StdDev than men anyway, so the vast majority of women are going to be within 10 points of average. I doubt I could reliably tell the difference between a woman with a 105 IQ and one with a 95 IQ. But I can sure tell the difference between a personality I could tolerate for more than a one night stand and one I couldn't.

Besides, probably the highest IQ woman I've ever met was a girl I went to High School with. Daughter of two math professors at the local University (and one of the three prettiest girls in our graduating class). She was extremely smart, but also the stereotypical absent-minded professor. If anyone was going to accidentally set herself on fire, it would've been that girl.

bob k. mando said...

Stickwick Stapers said...
In that sense, it's almost obvious that when it comes to choosing a potential mother, neither big boobs nor long legs are as important as some minimum intelligence level.



come on, Stick. you're smarter than this.

is a man going to be interested in marrying a woman who drools on herself? hell no.

but then, that's a long way from "intelligent".

and, if you remember, the center of the female IQ curve tends to be a little bit right of the male curve.

the key is that men have a much broader curve than women do, which means that there are far more intelligent men than women in a given group even though the women usually have a higher average IQ rating. lots more dumber men too.

when men had to provide for themselves, the stupid ones would get culled or would not effectively reproduce.

Stickwick Stapers said...

David-093: Prettiness is the attraction factor that draws men to women. Intelligence isn't. Ergo, prettiness is more necessary. Men don't care about intelligence as long as she's not a total fucking moron.

I don't dispute that it's important in terms of stimulating an initial attraction, but the whole point of the article is men's preferences in terms of selecting a potential mother for their children. Prettiness is not necessary for a woman to be a good mother.

If I had to bet…

Totally irrelevant.

It's not a stretch to say that no boobs + stumpy legs is synonymous with unattractive for most men, but in the range of average boobs/legs and upward (irrespective of other physical features), there is such a diversity of preference that it doesn't make sense to say that big boobs and long legs are synonymous with attractive. They can be attractive or they can be neutral. Besides, if you read the article, the study also claims that boob size is irrelevant and that most men prefer women with average legs. This is not my opinion; I'm repeating what the article said. My only point for jumping into the discussion was to comment on the nonsensical responses.

Yes, which is exactly my point: average smarts is better than no smarts, but no man has ever wanted to marry a complete dumbass nor does a man expect to, and it's completely disingenuous to frame the debate that way.

I didn't frame it that way. It's so obvious as to not even merit comment that most men would not want to marry a complete dumbass. The point of the article is that, according to this study, men tend to place a higher priority on intelligence than they do on big boobs and long legs. Without access to the paper, I infer that to mean a preference for IQ that is higher than average. I'll retract if someone can find the paper and show me that it states otherwise.

So again, men will pick prettiness over above average smarts everytime because, chances are, she meets the minimum intelligence requirement.

Nobody is talking about prettiness here. The study never mentioned that. It only said boobs and legs.

bob k. mando: is a man going to be interested in marrying a woman who drools on herself? hell no.

bob, my friend, is it possible some guy at Cambridge planned, got the funding for, carried out, published, and hinged his professional reputation on a study in which he tested the hypothesis that men don't want to marry complete drooling morons? Yes, it's possible. In which case, this becomes more of an indictment of the academic research system. But given that everyone on the planet, including complete drooling morons, already knows that men don't want to marry complete drooling morons, it seems more plausible to me that Bainbridge was testing something a little less intuitive.

Eric said...

If men prefer to marry intelligence, and nearly 50 percent of women with advanced degrees remain unmarried and childless...

You don't have to be intelligent to get the sorts of advanced degrees women tend to get; you just have to be diligent. A PhD in Sociology or Women's Studies or Library Science tells you nothing about the intelligence of the bearer. In fact, one could argue a negative correlation.

Brad Andrews said...

Stickwick,

I have an advanced degree and would not have shied away from someone in a similar program when I was in college (not that I can recall seeing any eligible females in the computer science program in grad school), but I never even considered that when looking for a wife.

My qualifications were:

- Strong Christian
- Thin
- Likes cats
- Likes computers

I only got "tolerates computers" but hit the others. My wife did seem smart enough, but she has no higher education (past high school).

I am only a sample of 1, but I go against your claim. I was limiting my search to the kind of church I was a part of, so that greatly limited the target audience, but I still had my aimpoint and God found the right target for me. My aimpoint had no "smart" component though.

I expect I would have left aside a complete idiot, but I was not thinking much about future offspring at that point.

Brad Andrews said...

That should say that I did not really get the "likes computers" part. She tolerates them, but is not very found of them overall.

JP said...

What if I told you you can have big tits AND a big brain?

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Fogey: I see a lot of mature women getting plastic surgery done, not too many are opting to get degrees at age 60.

Stickwick Stapers: Do you also see a lot of men looking to marry 60 year-old women to have kids with them, Einstein?


Of course not, dumbass. As I said, I see a lot of mature women trying to attract men by getting facelifts and bigger boobs--not by enrolling in PhD courses. Even some women know what men value most in women.


Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Women with above-average intelligence tend to be a pain in the ass to deal with. I'd take pretty with average smarts over okay looks and high smarts every time.

Yes, I've observed these amusing creatures in the wild.

Such women often have a radically inflated sense of their own intelligence, because it's been drilled into them by beta dad, school, beta orbiters, and society since they were little girls that they're special snowflakes who can be president one day. I'm not saying some men aren't like this, but with women it seems to be more common, especially American women.

You end up looking at these advance degreed women, who often have made themselves disagreeable and childless, and think: "What a waste."

Again, it begs the question, do we really want women attending university in the first place?

genericviews said...



Or perhaps the really smart women are not going to college. They are smart enough to see that it is a bad investment in most cases and a total waste if the woman intends to be a mommy for the rest of her life. Instead she uses her skills and intelligence to profit her family instead of drain it of resources.

Dexter said...

In my field of expertise, there are plenty of academics who have published useless restatements of the obvious.

Stickwick Stapers said...

Brad Andrews: I am only a sample of 1, but I go against your claim.

I haven't made any claim other than to point out what the article says. Look, it's not difficult. This Bainbridge guy designed an experiment involving several men, and looked at the trends. We don't have the paper, so we don't know exactly what his conclusion was, all we have is what the article says it was. If you disagree with what was stated in the article, make a rational case for it. So far, we have two guys disputing Bainbridge's result because they, personally, don't care that much about intelligence, and some other people confusing SMV and MMV.

Fogey: Of course not, dumbass. As I said, I see a lot of mature women trying to attract men by getting facelifts and bigger boobs--not by enrolling in PhD courses. Even some women know what men value most in women.

There have already been enough convincing discussions about how men are not sexually attracted to IQ at any age to effectively put it beyond question. This article was about men prioritizing certain qualities in potential mothers. Your anecdote about senior citizen women has nothing to do with it, and repeating it doesn't make it any less stupid.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

You're not getting it. The article was about what qualities men find most attractive in women for a long-term partnership. Men by and large prefer big boobs and long legs, at any age, and for any purpose. Even women past their prime know this.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

This Bainbridge guy designed an experiment involving several men, and looked at the trends.

That's the problem right there. You don't make silly claims about 'trends' from the responses of--wait for it--several men.

Also, when it comes to young men (as it is with women), it often pays to go by what they do, not by what they say (on a survey).

Long years of experience and observation tell me men mostly prefer women with big tits and feminine curves, with sweet, agreeable natures. Intelligence is a factor, but it is secondary or tertiary.

If some men claim they prefer intelligence in a woman most of all--and I've met some over the years--it's because they can not attract a beautiful woman. Their claims are an exercise in self-deception and face-saving.

Bainbridge's project is ridiculous on its face, and we can only speculate as to his motives for pursuing it. Justifying his own romantic choices? Currying favour with the feminists in his department? Appeasing a feminist wife? Who knows.

Unknown said...

JP said...
"What if I told you you can have big tits AND a big brain?"

Then, those big tits and brain better come attached to a pleasant, feminine personality, not some shrill, "see-how-smart- I- am" shrew!

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Actually, it just looks like publicity to help sell his new book.

tweell said...

Intelligence, meh. Wisdom, now - better known as (un)common sense, now That's a big plus.

bob k. mando said...

Stickwick Stapers said...
In which case, this becomes more of an indictment of the academic research system. But given that everyone on the planet, including complete drooling morons, already knows that men don't want to marry complete drooling morons, it seems more plausible to me that Bainbridge was testing something a little less intuitive.


*looks at AGW 'research'*

*looks at Stickwick's claim*

*notes that this is a Sociological ( the softest of the sciences ) study*

yeah, i'ma go with with "Not bloody likely".

now if you'll excuse me, i've got a bunch of fives and ones burning a hole in my pocket. i need to stop by the strip club and stuff them in Big Brain Brenda's headband.

Aeoli Pera said...

This is really not a difficult idea.

John wants to reproduce.
Greg wants to marry. This implies that Greg wants to reproduce.

They are both looking for T&A because T&A ~ SMV. But Greg is looking for more than this, and particularly nurturing traits (for the kids) and an agreeable personality (for himself, assuming he thinks marriage is for keeps). IQ is good for nurturing, but sometimes bad for agreeability (mostly in the 115-130 range, as noted). So Greg has an economic problem in front of him, and nobody can predict the tradeoffs he'll make.

Maybe Greg will even choose wrong because he's confused about what he wants, and then he marries a hot, bitchy, 115 IQ coed from college and gets divorced four years later. Turns out you just wanted sex, Greg, not marriage!

Aeoli Pera said...

tl;dr-

SMV <- T&A, BMI, etc.
MMV <- SMV, IQ, EQ, etc.
EQ <- IQ, etc.

bbq
GTFO

CarpeOro said...

A movie that would be of considerable value for women (if for a change they put themselves in the role of the male main character): "Harvey". When it comes to choosing between being very, very smart and being very pleasant, Jimmy Stewart chose pleasant. Believe it or not, with all the solipsistic though patterns women have a pleasant loon of a woman is about all we hope for and would be more bearable than most "smart" women.

As has been mentioned before women with intelligence have been so fawned over in this society and encouraged to challenge men that they usually miss the obvious: a little challenge is fine, constant challenge isn't even the same as another male friend - at some point male friends at least have your back and support you. Women miss this and go from "interesting" to "opponent" because they are the least likely to have your back or support you.

David-093 said...

"I don't dispute that it's important in terms of stimulating an initial attraction, but the whole point of the article is men's preferences in terms of selecting a potential mother for their children. Prettiness is not necessary for a woman to be a good mother."

Neither is intelligence. She doesn't need to know advanced calculus or how to build a shed in order to be a good mother. What she needs is wisdom and common sense; that will set her far above all the other women out there, where she'll be worth more than rubies.

"It's not a stretch to say that no boobs + stumpy legs is synonymous with unattractive for most men, but in the range of average boobs/legs and upward (irrespective of other physical features), there is such a diversity of preference that it doesn't make sense to say that big boobs and long legs are synonymous with attractive."

You're thinking about this from the perspective of a woman, Stick. Men's preferences are more similar than dissimilar. A preference for a certain color is just that, a preference, but it's not a requirement for most and men will generally overlook it. Men prefer women with a nice rack, toned legs, slender, with clear skin and long hair. 100 out of every 100 men will say that. Dividing it along what men almost universally describe as inessential (eye color, hair color) is ridiculous. Men are not women, and we have a much broader range of women we find attractive than what women find attractive in men.

"They can be attractive or they can be neutral. Besides, if you read the article, the study also claims that boob size is irrelevant and that most men prefer women with average legs. This is not my opinion; I'm repeating what the article said. My only point for jumping into the discussion was to comment on the nonsensical responses. "

Define average legs. What do average legs look like? I don't prefer the super-model look of very skinny, very long legs either, and I expect most men feel the same way (but I might be wrong), but saying "average" needs to be defined.

"I didn't frame it that way. It's so obvious as to not even merit comment that most men would not want to marry a complete dumbass. The point of the article is that, according to this study, men tend to place a higher priority on intelligence than they do on big boobs and long legs. Without access to the paper, I infer that to mean a preference for IQ that is higher than average. I'll retract if someone can find the paper and show me that it states otherwise. "

And again, for men, IQ factors in only if she's either too smart or too dumb. Most women have average IQ (~100), so it doesn't matter that much to us. Seriously, take a step back and think: if the majority of men had a certain quality, would you, in your single days, have thought much about it? Would it factor in or would you think it was so abundant that you'd focus on other qualities because, chances are, they had it anyway? It's the same thing here. Most women meet the minimum IQ threshhold so men naturally prefer women with a nice rack and good legs.

Of course, it may be that they asked these men, publicly, which they prefered. And since these men are undoubtedly betas, they would say they prefered intelligence over tits because liking the latter over the former is just mean.

"Nobody is talking about prettiness here. The study never mentioned that. It only said boobs and legs. "

Stick, what exactly did you think they meant? Do you seriously believe they might mean "a woman with big boobs and long legs who's a plain jane or dog-ugly and fat?" Come on, you're smarter than that.

Stickwick Stapers said...

Fogey: You're not getting it. The article was about what qualities men find most attractive in women for a long-term partnership.

What part of when choosing a mother for their children do you not understand?

Bainbridge's project is ridiculous on its face, and we can only speculate as to his motives for pursuing it. Justifying his own romantic choices? Currying favour with the feminists in his department? Appeasing a feminist wife? Who knows.

This does not hold up to scrutiny. It appears that this information is presented in a book called Curvology written by Bainbridge, which is being trashed by at least a few feminists. Why? Because he reports that there are solid evolutionary reasons for men preferring attractive, youthful women and it's not just cultural conditioning. What is not widely reported, but is findable with a little googling, is that Bainbridge also reported the #1 quality men most looked for in a LTR prospect was youth. It's not difficult to suss out the chain of preference: youth > intelligence > big boobs. Is that really so controversial? It is the mainstream media, which is dominated by progressives, that are ignoring the most important finding (youth) and focusing on the intelligence > boobs factor. One thing is certain -- you can count on the media to distort and spin to suit a certain narrative.

Stickwick Stapers said...

David-093: Neither is intelligence. She doesn't need to know advanced calculus or how to build a shed in order to be a good mother. What she needs is wisdom and common sense; that will set her far above all the other women out there, where she'll be worth more than rubies.

Why are you and others insisting on academic showcasing as markers of intelligence? Educated != intelligent. It's entirely possible -- very likely, even -- that when men responded to the poll questions, they had "wisdom and common sense" in mind when they chose "intelligence" as an important factor. Not a degree in math.

Men prefer women with a nice rack, toned legs, slender, with clear skin and long hair. 100 out of every 100 men will say that. Dividing it along what men almost universally describe as inessential (eye color, hair color) is ridiculous.

I'm aware that what's attractive to men is far more universal than what's attractive to women. I'm not talking about unessentials. As I said before, I'm talking specifically about boob size and leg length, within a certain range. Nice rack != big rack, and toned legs != long legs. My general sense is that the vast majority of men's preferences fall in the range of B to D cup; for leg length compared with overall height, there's probably an analogous range. That's not to say that a man who prefers B cups would reject a woman with D cups, but because of this range of preference, specifically equating big boobs or long legs with prettiness doesn't make sense.

Define average legs. What do average legs look like? I don't prefer the super-model look of very skinny, very long legs either, and I expect most men feel the same way (but I might be wrong), but saying "average" needs to be defined.

That sounds exactly like what the article stated -- that most men don't like very long legs -- so I'm not sure what the problem is. The article says "regular length." Presumably this is specified more precisely in Bainbridge's book, but it's not unreasonable to assume that it refers to a leg length that's proportional to a woman's overall height, being neither overly short nor overly long. In any case, he says the more important factor with legs is straightness, since that's an indicator of health.

Stick, what exactly did you think they meant? Do you seriously believe they might mean "a woman with big boobs and long legs who's a plain jane or dog-ugly and fat?" Come on, you're smarter than that.

It's very unlikely that's what they meant. Look, I'm very careful about definitions and assumptions when looking at correlations. What the article said was big boobs and long legs; to extrapolate from there that those qualities are equivalent to prettiness is unwarranted. What we can reasonably assume is that for a given woman who has all of the other attributes a man finds within acceptable limits -- body fat, facial features, hair, skin, etc. -- that he's less concerned about boob size and leg length than he is about her being intelligent. That's all the article is saying.

Brad Andrews said...

“The main thing that men are looking for is intelligence. Surveys have shown time and time again that this is the first thing that men look for. It shows that she will be able to look after his children and that her parents were probably intelligent as well, suggesting that she was raised well.

Which surveys? Is that why all the magazines have intelligent women on them, whether for men or women?

It looks like they focus on other things to me. I know I have never thought, "what a great brain in that woman," the first time I saw someone. Though I have not been looking lately so perhaps things have changed. Or we are just being fed a bunch of claptrap.

A linked article said:

It is already known that curvaceous women live longer and that men find them more attractive but the new research suggests that they are also cleverer.

Ah, a cute body makes you more attractive (or is it the other way around?).

That must be why men are attracted to intelligence, it is more curvy, right?

I have yet to see any clear evidence that men filter for intelligence in these articles or real life. I also doubt most men think as much about the ability to be a parent as is claimed. Sounds like more of that evolutionary claptrap to me, rather than reality.

Visually and audibly pleasing is a much bigger factor.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

@ Stickwick ~ What part of "Professor David Bainbridge, of the University of Cambridge said that intelligence is by far the most attractive quality for men looking for a long term partner" don't you understand? Dumbass.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

The professor's study is so flawed, it really doesn't warrant serious inquiry.

Trust said...

That's why Penny is so jealous of Bernadette and Amy Farrah Fowler. They have better options.

In their dreams

johnnesteutes said...

Here's a wild idea:

Perhaps intelligent women avoid getting into $120k of student loan debt. Only an unintelligent person goes to college these days.

They also avoid living in unhealthy lifestyle and eating an unhealthy diet. Only an unintelligent person lets themselves get fat and chooses to become unattractive.

Men have a preference for women who don't have dowry-sized student loans, a preference for women who haven't chosen to become unhealthy and unattractive, and who choose to secure a husband when they still have their 20s in front of them, not behind them.

So in that sense, I'd say men do prefer intelligent women.

johnnesteutes said...

Yeahhhh, I knew a 144 who was about a 24-24-36. The only problem was her complete suppression of all her negative emotions. That sounds good, but it's not. She claimed she wanted to live alone in silence with no children, and to the best of my knowledge she still does.

We must have both known the same girl. She was smart enough to understand just how many problems there are in the world.

Think of the smartest guy you know, and then thing of how much of an obnoxious jackdonkey he can be sometimes. Now transpose that onto a woman. Does that still seem appealing? Do you want to come home to that everynight?

zishan malik said...

all games free download single link and complete download.

Cail Corishev said...

The main thing that men are looking for is intelligence.

Not a chance. I don't care how marriage-oriented and child-focused a man is, he isn't looking for intelligence first. I don't know if that's what the study actually claims, but if it does, it's crap. Maybe they got guys to say that's how they think, but if so they were lying because they thought that would sound better than, "I just want big boobs; I don't care if she drools on them."

Jason said...

This guy seems to be missing a fair bit.

It is probably a bit true that men will make some trade offs in favor of intelligence and other factors against looks in a long term partner relative to a short term one.

But that would be like choosing got but crazy for a weekend but putting for a bit less got but sane for a wife.

Of course looks are less important in a wife than in a one night stand. But only in a holistic sense. You don't really care if a one night stand can read our count past 10 without taking her shoes off. You probably would care the mother of your children can.

1sexistpig2another said...

We are reliably informed that men prefer intelligence to large breasts or long legs in long-term relationships.

I don't even prefer intelligence to small breasts and short legs, let alone large breasts and long legs.

...then we can only conclude that the declining rates of marriage, particularly among the intelligent, must be entirely the fault of women.

One of the main points of feminism is that nothing is EVER the fault of women.

1sexistpig2another said...

Guys, it's about MMV, not SMV.

For me it was always MMV.

1sexistpig2another said...

I prefer loyalty and respect from a woman over intelligence in a woman, especially when you consider what passes for intelligence these days.

Jason said...

@1sexistpig2another

"I prefer loyalty and respect from a woman over intelligence in a woman, especially when you consider what passes for intelligence these days."

That is a good point. What are they calling "intelligence"?

1sexistpig2another said...

That is a good point. What are they calling "intelligence"

Feminist/PC thought/speak and other manifestations of misandry.

Bogey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fred kings said...

I want to thank God for using Dr Okougbo Alaba as my source of savior after 2 year of joblessness and my lover left me alone for 2 years,Have just been heart broken until i go in contact with Dr Okougbo Alaba after i saw a lady testimony on how she was helped by this same dr Okougbo Alaba, So i decided to get in contact with him and when i told him all my problem he laughed and said this is not a problem that everything will be ok in 3days time. Exactly the 3rd day my ex lover called me i was shocked and what surprise me the most was that a company i applied for over 4month called me and said i should resume work as soon as possible.Am so grateful to Dr Okougbo Alaba if you wish in contacting him realhomeofspell@outlook.com He do cast the spell as following
(1) If you want your ex back.
(2) you need a divorce in your relationship
(3) You want to be promoted in your office.
(4) You want women & men to run after you.
(5) If you want a child.
(6) You want to be rich.
(7) You want to tie your husband & wife to be yours forever.
(8) If you need financial assistance.
(9) Herbal care
Contact him today on: realhomeofspell@outlook.com

Heer said...


Welcome to my website www.harleen.in for chandigarh escorts and i am totally independent chandigarh escorts.

James M said...

Bainbride is fucking gay

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.