Why are dudes like this.
Women are individuals who’s preferences differ from person to person. But forget all that for a second. Women are just not attracted to men who are DUMPY RUDE ASSHOLES. NOBODY IS. These dudes make so many excuses to not work on themselves.
why are dudes like this
Dudes are individuals whose personalities differ from person to person.
I always assumed “dude” is gender-neutral word. We even have a saying “dūdiņa” in my language which is like sweet-talking “dude” word meant towards women.
It depends on context. It gets used gender neutral sometimes, but it also gets used as a masculine descriptor too.
I’m guessing that was the joke
Kinda bordering a strawman here, but if I said
why are men attracted into the airhead type?
there would be bunch of dudes saying they are into intelligent women, and that it’s just hollywood.
(Sidenote props to the artist for drawing all those people one by one)
Zach is like Randall Munroe for people who prefer eyes to not be attached to heads 🤩
Is this an egg meme?
Men are attracted to the “airhead type” because those women are good at making men feel good about themselves and keeping up lively conversation; and though people usually prioritise companions who have the same interests as them, they enjoy talking also to a lively conversation partner, perhaps someone as-different-from-themselves as possible: someone who surprises them.
Many men feel that all women have the “airhead” quality - no, not as in they’re all stupid, but as in they’re lively and conversational in that stereotypical way that disrupts the man-to-man conversation; and though they do not speak to men as equals (preferring to talk over them or jerk the conversation off on some other tangent, perhaps, or dwell on uniquely feminine topics which baffle/disinterest the male listener), this is seen as no big loss, really. For women are different to men, and their presence in our lives is welcome precisely because of that rather than in spite of it.
The important thing to remember is that people change overtime and every person is more multifaceted than massive media would have us believe - so yes, that is “just Hollywood.” Who’s to say why a man likes an “airhead,” she probably has more depth to her than you know about.
Edited to change one comma into a colon, and formalise grammar in final sentence
Dude lamenting women not being attracted to intelligence checks out as he use a picture that clearly focuses on a woman’s intelligence.
The intelligence is stored in the boobs.
Incelligence is a heck of a term.
Should be word of the decade.
!brandnewsentence or however to link a community
Also, this is just plain wrong.
Some women are attracted to intellectual minds.
Some women are attracted to physical strength, some women are attracted to maternal instincts, so on and so forth.
The problem is this question is usually being asked by someone who thinks that responding to every factual statement with an inflammatory counterpoint qualifies as intelligence.
Also, this is just plain wrong.
A greentext that’s wrong? Highly unlikely.
Allow me to make an inflammatory counterpoint to demonstrate my intelligence: this text isn’t green YOU BUFFOON!
Got em
😰
Not on this Internet!
We need a new internet
Is it still under warranty?
Ah, damn, we might have to ask the US military…
It would be like claiming it contained misleading statements and was not heteronormative.
Chance in a million!
Now I don’t know if that means it has to happen (if it’s exactly 1000000:1, according to Pratchett) or if the front fell off.
Well, I was thinking more about the other ones.
The weird definition of intelligence they are using (how to succeed in life) does kind of cover that. The definition of what success is, and the millions of ways of achieving it covers just about all variations.
From what I’ve observed, intelligence doesn’t count for much when it comes to “success in life”, whatever that might be.
True, in today’s times much higher chance of success is having wealthy parents and not having problem exploiting other people, but it wasn’t always like that.
Though given that it is 4chan, I agree with responder that OP mixes incelligence with intelligence. I’m not convinced that sitting on a forum full of memes and Nazi ideology is something that an intelligent person would be interested in.
“That’s a suspiciously long reply about how Hitler could have succeeded with dates and sub plans. This is all hypothetical right. Just a thought experiment?”
At least OP said women and not “females”.
Rrrreallly setting the bar high, are we?
At least OP said women and not “females”
Weaponised schizophrenia
Ah yes, how to succeed in life in a fundamentally broken society that values exploitation over everything else. Couldn’t think of a better metric for choosing a partner.
Ffs, you were so quick with the snarky remark that you dont even understand that suceeding in life means a lot of different things to a lot of diferent People.
The definition you gave is your own and for me it reveals a skweded perspective of what means sucess, adaptation or intelligence.
Fair point :D but succeeding in life without succeeding in society is pretty difficult since as you said it means a lot of different things for different people but is still one of the biggest influence on their situation
Yes, it is. Someone who can do well in society and their lives while being generally good to those around them is often considered a good catch.
Thinking that anyone who succeeds in life in our society must be one of the like, less than 10% who are ghouls is odd.
Beeing generally happy and doing well while simultaneously profiting from a society that is build on genocide, exploitation of natural resources and imperialism is such a twisted concept. Even if not part of the 10%.
Gotcha. So would you rank yourself as mostly unhappy, destitute and unwell?
Can you think of anyone in our society who’s doing alright within the confines of a broken system, or do you think that everyone’s existence is inseperable from the context of that existence, even if the means of changing it or it’s impact are outside of their reach? Somewhere in the middle?
I met a guy who helps manage a homeless shelter and food bank. Stand-up guy. Makes ends meet, is doing what he can where he can. Generally happy guy with a family. Pretty twisted right? Or my former coworker who let his gardening hobby get out of hand and ended up running a community garden that retrofitted two houses to donate to families in need.
People exist in their circumstances, but they’re not defined by them. How you react to those circumstances speaks to your character, not that you exist in them.
Or my former coworker who let his gardening hobby get out of hand… to donate to families in need.
The implicit level of privilege here should not go unacknowledged. It’s a hint at the full story. That’s a fundamental part of the problem regardless of how the individual feels about it or reacts.
Perhaps more importantly these are extremely niche/cherry-picked versions of succeeding. In USA it almost always means the same evil bullshit.
You’re not wrong, the guy did have a lot of privilege in his life. He’s well educated, has a demeanor people trust and enough money to have a backyard garden in a house in a not ideal part of town. He opted to use that privilege to get his neighbors to join their backyards together to have a community garden, and then used a city/state program to use their pooled money to buy an empty lot and an unoccupied house to finish the block. Instead of selling the house for profit, they opted to give it to someone in need.
I’m not sure what full story you’re looking for. Dudes a community college astronomy professor who spent some time maintaining billing software.
My point isn’t "oh my God, everyone in the US is a saint!” it’s that the notion that “because the US has fundamental structural problems, anyone who isn’t a miserable failure is inherently evil” is just profoundly misguided.
Either your definition of success is setup such that it says more about you than other people, or you just fundamentally haven’t encountered many people.
What’s your definition of “success”? How many Americans do you think are engaged in “evil bullshit”?
How you react to those circumstances speaks for your character
Being able to ignore the bigger picture because you can change your own privileged surroundings IS the problematic reaction that speaks for your character
Gotcha, so doing good where you can makes you evil unless you’re mired in torment over things beyond your control? By that metric everyone in the world is evil.
I can’t fathom an ethical system that requires you to be unhappy about things beyond your control once you’ve done the good that you can.
What constitutes “good character” to you? What constitutes “success”?
Yes it is called empathy, it’s nothing you can buy yourself out of by doing good things. If you are somehow interested in the well being of the people it just doesn’t magically disappear after helping some of them. It doesn’t make you evil but it’s certainly not a good sign to weigh these things against each other. The ability to feel good while seeing the world suffer seems to me problematic.
Gotcha. So when was the last time you were happy? I take it you simply do not do things you enjoy?
And when did I say anything even remotely like not feeling empathy for suffering, or that caring for people disappears after doing a good deed? Empathy isn’t an ethical system.
I’m actually curious what behavior you think would be non-problematic, and if any human actually does that.
deleted by creator
And for the protocol, i don’t give a shit about that incel bullshit, I just hate people that try to make complex problems look simple because of their particular privileged situation
If you love your wife and you are broke, you won’t make her your wife.
They are just avoiding selfish people who will drag them down.
Ah yes avoid being dragged down by choosing somebody who just drags other people down but not you. So they have a shitty character in general but behave differently toward you. Never heard that this went wrong.
I was reffering to myself, I am a man. I will not be cursing anyone else with myself.
I’m really sorry for this view on yourself. I don’t know how to change this since the default variants that I have been told didn’t work out for me either but I am really sure that prioritizing somebody else over yourself or as you said protecting somebody from getting cursed with one self is one of the most harmful ways to see things. It makes it a lot harder to come close to somebody since you are framing the avoidance as something helpful for them
User name checks out
Speaking of juicy mammoths, who’s the lady in the picture?
Asking the important questions.
Some thirst trap which is ironic since she’s holding a drink
iidazsofia
Probably what he considers his bottom in terms of women he’d date.
So success in life means actual intelligence? I disagree with that.
Success ≠ actual intelligence.
Plenty of very successful people who are complete morons.
Women are attracted to success, regardless of actual intelligence.
And of course this is a generalization. Women are not a monolith.
It’s more that intelligence implies success rather than success implies intelligence.
Actual intelligence boosts chances for success, but it is not required for success.
The way the world is going, intelligence is playing less and less of a factor. You’re either born into it, or you’re a wage slave struggling for life.
Guess that depends on where you are. Many places in the world have very high social mobility along with solid welfare and pension systems.
Maybe somewhat less that 40 years ago, but certainly much better than the last thousand years overall.
Intelligence is working out that you don’t have to struggle. UK example, don’t move to London “for the jobs” if you are only finding minimum wage work.
Success looks different for different groups of people, unfortunately. A slave could be considered more successful than another, while remaining a slave.
Intelligence is actually slightly negatively correlated with success by a lot of metrics (earnings, years of life, health) and the best predictors are general big 5 attributes like openness to experience, low neuroticism, high conscientiousness (hard working), and extraversion. Those characteristics are way better predictors of life success.
Do you have any references for this? As far as I know the literature, the debate about “what matters more” is still ongoing with some research arguing in favor of personality and other research in favor of cognitive ability. Regardless of this, the relationship between cognitive ability and various life outcomes seems to be consistently positive, and I am not aware of any convincing evidence to the contrary.
I guess I was referencing the original 2016 study by Borghans, Golsteyn, Heckman & Humphries that’s since been replicated and refuted. You’re right that it’s not settled academically right now so we don’t know for sure.
“…conscientiousness (hard working)…”
Yeah, surely, if you define working hard as just receiving your father’s or grandfather’s wealth (or at least, part of it) as your inheritance.
When you actually look down at this rabbit hole, you find that the entire premise where these supposedly “predictors” rely, the meritocracy, is actually just a scam, maybe the biggest one. Because social movility is totally broken because prices, rents and taxes are going crazily up while salaries are dropping dramatically, and meanwhile some fucking bank takes your money as a monetary rescue for a fucking son of a bitch billionaire which movement caused an economic catastrophe.
Yeah, I took it more as analysing and adjusting to one’s current situation, as opposed to going conspiracy nut.
Neither magic crystals nor PUA courses are what someone struggling to budget 2000$ for candles needs
What is success? Being surrounded by people you love and trust? Living life without regret? Sitting on hoards and hoards of money? Planting an endangered tree?
It’s just correct enough for the tiny quipy descriptor to get to the real takedown after.
Also this is 4chan, grade on a curve.
Yeah, I’d say humor is the better indicator. It boils down to the ability to connect ideas in creative ways, as well as keeping a longer context window in conversations
It’s not a direct 1:1, but what is intelligence really? There’s many types, and they’re all a combination of domains
That’s not what I was referring to. Intelligence is basically a combination of working memory, recall, cognition, and metacognition
The combination of these domains together produce the foundation for the “types” of intelligence, which might be more accurately described as abilities
Humor demonstrates these qualities socially. It’s not a direct relationship, more like a demonstration. Like how dancing demonstrates physical ability, humor demonstrates the factors underlying intelligence
(But you could also just be a good or bad dancer)
women are people with choices
they make different choices
Impossible. If women had choices, then they’d have a diversity of off-spring with a wide spectrum of forms, traits, and behaviors.
We know that can’t be the case, because all men are identical and perfectly interchangeable, except for a tiny variance in peak performance which they use to sort themselves from Sigma to Omega for the purpose of obtaining Da Big Sequesy to produce more Sigma clones.
😭😭😭
I mean, that’s a fun take but realistically there are plenty of women who put a lot more stock in looks (just as men do) an immediate financial ability.
That jock who got a job that’s physically demanding might be making more out of high school, but the IT nerd who went for they education and got a good tech job was likely on a slower burn path to self-improvement with better pay, possibly improving looks over time (or at least less of a beer belly). At least before AI started killing the tech sector again, so maybe the jocks will be coming out ahead for awhile.
Also, there’s also nothing wrong with being a good dude with average intelligence who works hard. Just don’t pick an red-hatred idiot. And intelligent nerds who don’t learn social skills can absolutely still become nasty incels.
I wouldn’t put too much stock into the jock versus nerd stereotypes.
Life isn’t an RPG with stats that come at the cost of other stats. Being bad at sports doesn’t make someone more likely to be good at school (if anything, the correlation might run the other way). And charisma, ambition, intelligence, physical appearance, athleticism, work ethic, are all distinct factors that sometimes feedback on each other, and feed into things like wealth, happiness, attractiveness, etc.
Life isn’t an RPG, but there has definitely been a push by certain groups to value looks and strength or martial prowess over intelligence and education, particularly in North American culture. Yeah, somebody can be an athlete without being dumb, and as another person pointed out there actually a lot of high-speed decision-making that requires intelligence to pro-sports.
At the same time, there are people who very much lean towards looking buff, tough, but not too bright as they categorize intellectuals as losers or socially unwanted. Similarly, there are girls or women who will emphasize their looks and actively hide their intelligence. Il This over time leads to a willful ignorance that IMO is worse than simply being of lower IQ or lacking education.
I’m not aware of any culture in which hiding one’s strengths is a common response to one’s own surroundings. Placing value on a particular characteristic does not imply that a completely unrelated characteristic is undesirable. Plenty of beautiful smart people out there, and even in a society where beauty is prized above all else, why would someone beautiful hide their intelligence?
For whatever it’s worth, in my circles (urban white collar millennial professionals in dense cities), most people are both athletic and intelligent. There are plenty of finance bros and tech bros who have Ivy League degrees (sometimes Ph.D.s, M.D.s, J.D.s) that represent real academic achievement and can also turn around and dominate on a basketball court or in a fighting gym. Lots of smart people like gyms, whether we’re talking resistance training, Olympic lifting, CrossFit/Hyrox, endurance cardio sports like marathon running or biking, winter sports like skiing, etc.
That’s also consistent with what I saw in my high school. Most of the top students headed towards Ivy League or similar caliber schools were also athletes who were very good at a competitive sport for the school. The “nerd”/“jock” dichotomy we expected from John Hughes movies never really materialized, and the popular kids tended to be people who were both good at school and good at sports.
And yet where do you think the demographic that voted for the guy that shits his pants and falls asleep comes from exactly, and moreover continues to double-down on supporting him even to their own detriment? How about the people who modify their trucks to spread black smoke just to “own those pissy hybrid drivers and cyclists”?
The continued attempts to enumerate activities that would have fit on Jackass (and likely watched the same on repeat).
Never knew a pretty girl in school who got good grades but hid then and played dumb?
There’s plenty of people who embrace an absurdist mentality and openly reject anything that requires actively using one’s brain.
There’s plenty of people who embrace an absurdist mentality and openly reject anything that requires actively using one’s brain.
I think they’re old, fat, unathletic, and unattractive.
I know Trump voters. For the minority who are actually young, they’re much more likely to be loser incels who are both bad at sports and didn’t get a college degree (much less post graduate educations). It’s aggrieved losers trying to make sense of the world, who are generally unattractive on most metrics: poor, unhealthy, unathletic, not very smart.
It’s like looking at people who work in the trades. Plumbers and welders and carpenters. They tend to be in worse physical shape than, like, lawyers and doctors, who obviously have better intellectual and academic credentials.
So if you’re surrounded by losers, I’m just gonna ask that you stop being impressed with them.
“Just don’t pick an red-hatred idiot” took me a sec to parse.
It’s a typo but the intended group still fits! Love it.
Yeah I meant to your red-hatted but hatred seems to come with that package too so…
The thing there is that when people say “people are attracted to intelligence” the intelligence people think of is different than the type people are generally attracted to.
Highly analytical intelligence is a type of intelligence. So is the ability to make correct choices in a variety of situations.
Almost every athletic endeavor entails being able to assess situations quickly and accurately, and know how to respond. Team sports require group coordination, training and predicting teammates behavior.
That’s intelligence, but it’s often considered a lesser sort than the analytical sort.It’s why people see the people doing work that requires the type of less prestigious intelligence as less intelligent, and see people being drawn to them as proof that people aren’t really drawn to intelligence.
To be blunt: it doesn’t matter how strong you are if can’t read or get confused by the garage door opener every day.
It’s the same as saying that people aren’t attracted to appearance because plenty of people are drawn to normal attractiveness people.
That’s actually a good point about sports intelligence. Pro athletes likely have a certain almost instinctual grasp of certain physics even if they aren’t running the actual numbers in their heads.
You can take away the qualifiers. :) and it’s not instinctual, just practiced.
The notion that athletics doesn’t require intelligence draws away from the understanding of exactly how much practice it takes to hone the skills to that level.And, for a fun reference, the typical NFL player has significantly more traditional education than the average person.
Women like beer bellies, and big forearms.
Everything men hate, women like.
most women i know are more attracted to a character or intelligence than anything else. i know a couple more “stereotypical” women as well. like one girl which disagreed a potential boyfriend just because he is driving a small car. and i can see a big correlation with their background/upbringing
If you can’t show off your rare pepe collection then what’s the point?
