Too smart for guys?

MissThompson
Posted: 7:01AM January 19, 2011 UTC
I have been talking to this one guy for months and he has told me he was interested in me so I told him I was too because well, I am. We went on a date and talked for a little while before another date. On the second date he told me that I was very smart, to which I said thank you. Then on Saturday I was talking to him when he said "You are very smart." I said thank you. Then today I got an email from him saying he could no longer continue talking to me because I am too smart. For the last 3 years this has happened to me. I get close to a guy and then he says I am too smart for him and he refuses to date me. Some guys say they can't even be my friend because I am smarter than them. I am not actually super smart, just like 87.6 average smart, not like 98 average smart.

Does this seem weird to anyone else? 
Was this helpful?
yes 0
84 Responses
g93
Posted: 7:01AM January 20, 2011 UTC
@jsaroya wrote
find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen


I know of a lot of guys like this. In this case it's probably that the girl feels too smart for him.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
Anonymous
Posted: 7:01AM January 21, 2011 UTC
@MissThompson wrote
We were discussing History class at our school (which we are both in) and he asked something and I gave him a full answer with the date and important people in it. Then he said "You are very smart." Then he asked for help with English, which I helped him with and he said "You are very smart." once more.


Right, so he acknowledges you're smart.  But has he said "I am breaking up with you because you're too smart for me"?
Was this helpful?
yes 0
DKDG
Posted: 7:01AM January 21, 2011 UTC
Take your guy friend to a party and get drunk or something instead of educating him at dinner
Was this helpful?
yes 0
Anonymous
Posted: 7:01AM January 22, 2011 UTC
@jsaroya wrote
find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen



I wouldn't want the girl I'm dating to be smarter than me.  Even equal is a little tricky since I'm supposed to maintain the dominant position in the relationship.

There's a fine balance between dating someone who you have superiority over, but not so that they're so stupid they drool when they speak.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
lemony
Posted: 7:01AM January 22, 2011 UTC
@ARMY101 wrote

@jsaroya wrote
find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen



I wouldn't want the girl I'm dating to be smarter than me.  Even equal is a little tricky since I'm supposed to maintain the dominant position in the relationship.

There's a fine balance between dating someone who you have superiority over, but not so that they're so stupid they drool when they speak.


If you are going to be medieval enough as to say that you think the man needs to have the dominant position in the relationship and be smarter than the girl (and I don't even understand how that is possible, because people are more educated in certain subjects than others, and there are many different types of 'smarts'), then I hope your attitude extends to being chivalrous and a perfect gentleman as well.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
mynameismattgotmlgo
Posted: 7:01AM January 22, 2011 UTC
I agree with Army, and I think you're taking what he said to the extreme. It's natural for men to want to have quite a bit of dominance over their wives. In return, men are to provide protection and food/supplies. Though this seems rather archaic (it is), you can't expect men's brains, which are the products of thousands and thousands of years of evolution, to have changed at the same pace as our rapidly evolving society. It also seems irrational - that's because IT IS. It feels right to want a girl who isn't as able to dominate you as you are able to dominate her. It's reasonable to expect a person's thinking to be rational, but you shouldn't expect the same of one's feelings. You know skydiving is safe, but you don't jump out of the plane because doing so doesn't feel safe.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
Stranger
Posted: 7:01AM January 22, 2011 UTC
I wouldn't want to be with a guy whose intelligence level is significantly lower than mine... Either about as intelligent as I am or more intelligent. 
Was this helpful?
yes 0
littleroom
Posted: 7:01AM January 22, 2011 UTC
@mynameismattgotmlgo wrote
It's natural for men to want to have quite a bit of dominance over their wives. In return, men are to provide protection and food/supplies. Though this seems rather archaic (it is), you can't expect men's brains, which are the products of thousands and thousands of years of evolution, to have changed at the same pace as our rapidly evolving society.



Men do a reasonable job of suppressing their natural urges. For example, everytime I'm attracted to a woman, I don't impulsively mount her. In addition, men use condoms, which is against our very evolutionarily sensible intuition to spread our genes when we're in the position to do so. Of course, in being rigorous, one would actually have to go about proving that males like to dominate females. In our closest relatives, bonobos, the social construct is predominately matriarchal. But nevermind such pedantry, men should do a better job of suppressing such urges if indeed they exist.  


@Stranger wrote
I wouldn't want to be with a guy whose intelligence level is significantly lower than mine... Either about as intelligent as I am or more intelligent. 



That was my earlier point. I think having a mutual intelligence level would be beneficial to both partners for making some interesting conversations - a pillar of successful relationships. 
Was this helpful?
yes 0
mynameismattgotmlgo
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
@littleroom wrote
Men do a reasonable job of suppressing their natural urges. For example, everytime I'm attracted to a woman, I don't impulsively mount her. In addition, men use condoms, which is against our very evolutionarily sensible intuition to spread our genes when we're in the position to do so. Of course, in being rigorous, one would actually have to go about proving that males like to dominate females. In our closest relatives, bonobos, the social construct is predominately matriarchal. But nevermind such pedantry, men should do a better job of suppressing such urges if indeed they exist.



You sound like my girlfriend. And it's true: people don't always act on their feelings/urges, but they STILL have those feelings/urges. When you see an attractive woman, you likely do want to mount her (and if you don't, then the guy next to you does), but you don't. You still have that feeling/urge though. (Never did I ever claim, and hopefully didn't imply either, that acting on feeling/urges is right or just - just that people do, especially when doing so is also deemed fairly appropriate [as is the case with a man wanting a woman less intelligent than himself; as is NOT the case in raping a woman you find attractive]. Don't shoot the messenger.)

We can't go back into the past, obviously, but an accepted concept in evolutionary theory as it relates to sexual differences is that the larger, more physically powerful sex is the dominant one, and fossil records do show that men have always been larger than women. Bonobos are sort of an anomaly in that they show little sexual dimorphism, and it isn't totally accepted that their social construct is matriarchal, just that it isn't (blatantly) patriarchal. Regardless of how closely related bonobos are to humans, we are still very different species, and there's no reason to claim that, in regards to male-female relations, bonobos are more like humans than common chimpanzees (which are blatantly patriarchal, much moreso than humans) are like humans.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
deathangel
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
<br>find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen<br><br>
From my experience, older guys (5-10 years older) love girls who are smart(er) and are able to have a good discussion with about life, love and even politics ;)

Guys my age? Not so much. They tend to get intimated by girls who know more(about anything) than they do.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
littleroom
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
@mynameismattgotmlgo wrote
You sound like my girlfriend. And it's true: people don't always act on their feelings/urges, but they STILL have those feelings/urges. When you see an attractive woman, you likely do want to mount her (and if you don't, then the guy next to you does), but you don't. You still have that feeling/urge though. (Never did I ever claim, and hopefully didn't imply either, that acting on feeling/urges is right or just - just that people do, especially when doing so is also deemed fairly appropriate [as is the case with a man wanting a woman less intelligent than himself; as is NOT the case in raping a woman you find attractive]. Don't shoot the messenger.)

We can't go back into the past, obviously, but an accepted concept in evolutionary theory as it relates to sexual differences is that the larger, more physically powerful sex is the dominant one, and fossil records do show that men have always been larger than women. Bonobos are sort of an anomaly in that they show little sexual dimorphism, and it isn't totally accepted that their social construct is matriarchal, just that it isn't (blatantly) patriarchal. Regardless of how closely related bonobos are to humans, we are still very different species, and there's no reason to claim that, in regards to male-female relations, bonobos are more like humans than common chimpanzees (which are blatantly patriarchal, much moreso than humans) are like humans.



I actually agree with everything you said. I just wanted to add some food for thought. 

But really, do men find stupid women attractive? I certainly don't. They're revolting. 
Was this helpful?
yes 0
mynameismattgotmlgo
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
If that's what you're thinking, then you're thinking wrong. We aren't saying that guys find stupid women attractive; we're saying that guys would prefer to have girlfriends/wives who are not smarter than themselves. That is, guys like girls who are about as smart or slightly dumber than they are. This works out nicely because lots of girls want a guy who is as smart as they are or smarter. Guys don't want girls considerably smarter than themselves; girls don't want guys considerably dumber than themselves.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
This post was deleted
Stranger
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
>.>
It's not like she said "I'm just 99.99% smart."
Was this helpful?
yes 0
Anonymous
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
@lemony wrote

@ARMY101 wrote

@jsaroya wrote
find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen



I wouldn't want the girl I'm dating to be smarter than me.  Even equal is a little tricky since I'm supposed to maintain the dominant position in the relationship.

There's a fine balance between dating someone who you have superiority over, but not so that they're so stupid they drool when they speak.


If you are going to be medieval enough as to say that you think the man needs to have the dominant position in the relationship and be smarter than the girl (and I don't even understand how that is possible, because people are more educated in certain subjects than others, and there are many different types of 'smarts'), then I hope your attitude extends to being chivalrous and a perfect gentleman as well.


Read what Matt said.  Grow up and come into the real world.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
This post was deleted
lemony
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
@ARMY101 wrote

@lemony wrote

@ARMY101 wrote

@jsaroya wrote
find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen



I wouldn't want the girl I'm dating to be smarter than me.  Even equal is a little tricky since I'm supposed to maintain the dominant position in the relationship.

There's a fine balance between dating someone who you have superiority over, but not so that they're so stupid they drool when they speak.


If you are going to be medieval enough as to say that you think the man needs to have the dominant position in the relationship and be smarter than the girl (and I don't even understand how that is possible, because people are more educated in certain subjects than others, and there are many different types of 'smarts'), then I hope your attitude extends to being chivalrous and a perfect gentleman as well.


Read what Matt said.  Grow up and come into the real world.


How can you promote the idea of guys being smarter than girls but dislike the idea of chivalry? Both are related to the idea of the man protecting the woman; saving the "damsel in distress"; and ultimately the man being dominant. If chivalry is dead, so is the concept that the man must be smarter. Or is it just another double standard?
Was this helpful?
yes 0
Anonymous
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
@lemony wrote

@ARMY101 wrote

@lemony wrote

@ARMY101 wrote

@jsaroya wrote
find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen



I wouldn't want the girl I'm dating to be smarter than me.  Even equal is a little tricky since I'm supposed to maintain the dominant position in the relationship.

There's a fine balance between dating someone who you have superiority over, but not so that they're so stupid they drool when they speak.


If you are going to be medieval enough as to say that you think the man needs to have the dominant position in the relationship and be smarter than the girl (and I don't even understand how that is possible, because people are more educated in certain subjects than others, and there are many different types of 'smarts'), then I hope your attitude extends to being chivalrous and a perfect gentleman as well.


Read what Matt said.  Grow up and come into the real world.


How can you promote the idea of guys being smarter than girls but dislike the idea of chivalry? Both are related to the idea of the man protecting the woman; saving the "damsel in distress"; and ultimately the man being dominant. If chivalry is dead, so is the concept that the man must be smarter. Or is it just another double standard?


Your whole attitude about how "horrible" this would be or how it's a bad idea is disgusting, not my notion of ensuring dominance over my girlfriend.  It keeps her happy and protected.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
mynameismattgotmlgo
Posted: 7:01AM January 23, 2011 UTC
@lemony wrote
How can you promote the idea of guys being smarter than girls but dislike the idea of chivalry?



I see only a minor link between these two ideas.

Chivalry is taking a man's devotion to his girlfriend or wife to the extreme. It is going beyond providing supplies and protection for his wife and going to an obsession with her and a compulsion to take care of her every needs. In the timeline of human evolution, chivalry is a new idea, just like other non-survival-related endeavours (such as philosophizing, conducting science experiments, writing poems, painting wonderful portraits, etc...). Chivalric acts aren't the types of things you'd expect a caveman to do for his cavewife. For much of human evolution, men were more concerned about killing mammoths and scaring away saber-tooth tigers than pulling out a chair for a lady to have a seat at a candle-lit dinner before watching a live performance at the Globe.

Wanting your girlfriend to be as smart or not as smart as you, though not significantly less smart, is tied to a much more appropriate level of dominance that a man naturally seeks over his significant other.

Also, you're asking a reason of feelings. Even if chivalry and a man wanting to be smarter than his gf/wife were logically the same, like you proposed, it wouldn't matter because we're talking about feelings. A man might have said, if your analogy were valid, "oh, good point. My feelings are irrational," but that wouldn't change his desire to have a gf/wife who is not as smart as he is. It's quite like me telling you that skydiving is safe and having you brush away my reasoning because your fear of jumping out the plane is mostly subconscious. A conscious reminder that skydiving is safe won't appeal to that level.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
lemony
Posted: 7:01AM January 24, 2011 UTC
@Army101
Sorry, but I don't really understand what you said in your first sentence. I never said that I personally have a problem with chivalry or having a smarter boyfriend; this is merely a discussion. I am arguing that chivalry and dominance over the female can be related or should be. Gender roles have changed significantly (or been suppressed) since prehistory or even medieval times. It may also be against male instincts to let women have enough power as to vote, work, and be independent, and up until a few decades ago, it was like that. But times change quickly and while those deep instincts may never change, they can be ignored.

@mynameismatt
You are right that chivalry is a relatively newer idea and is more created than instinctual. That is a good point. Chivalry is not hardwired in a male's system while dominance is, although its that rooted desire for dominance that leads to chivalry. Chivalry is based on protecting and saving the female because she is helpless and must be taken care of. It is a form of dominance, alongside being smarter.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
kaloolah
Posted: 7:01AM January 24, 2011 UTC
Back to the whole "too smart for guys" thing.

I don't mind if a guy is a little bit less intelligent than me. As long as we can keep up a conversation, get along and are attracted to each other, then s'all good.


Hot, smart and nerdy guys are awesome though...just saying :P 
Was this helpful?
yes 0
mynameismattgotmlgo
Posted: 7:01AM January 24, 2011 UTC
@lemony wrote
@mynameismatt
You are right that chivalry is a relatively newer idea and is more created than instinctual. That is a good point. Chivalry is not hardwired in a male's system while dominance is, although its that rooted desire for dominance that leads to chivalry. Chivalry is based on protecting and saving the female because she is helpless and must be taken care of. It is a form of dominance, alongside being smarter.



Agreed that it is a form of dominance, but it is a much stronger form of dominance than a man wanting to be slightly smarter than or equal in intelligence to his wife.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
snowman
Posted: 7:01AM January 24, 2011 UTC
@ARMY101 wrote

@jsaroya wrote
find me a guy who legitimately doesn't mind a girl being smarter than him and i will.... i don't know, i don't even have to think of something to hand over because it's unlikely this could happen



I wouldn't want the girl I'm dating to be smarter than me.  Even equal is a little tricky since I'm supposed to maintain the dominant position in the relationship.

There's a fine balance between dating someone who you have superiority over, but not so that they're so stupid they drool when they speak.


 well said. if only these boob-carrying, penis-inducing creatures called females, with all their smartness,could understand this concept.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
lemony
Posted: 7:01AM January 24, 2011 UTC
@mynameismattgotmlgo wrote

@lemony wrote
@mynameismatt
You are right that chivalry is a relatively newer idea and is more created than instinctual. That is a good point. Chivalry is not hardwired in a male's system while dominance is, although its that rooted desire for dominance that leads to chivalry. Chivalry is based on protecting and saving the female because she is helpless and must be taken care of. It is a form of dominance, alongside being smarter.



Agreed that it is a form of dominance, but it is a much stronger form of dominance than a man wanting to be slightly smarter than or equal in intelligence to his wife.


In what way is it stronger? Could you not say that "being smarter" is a stronger form of dominance because 1) it is based in instincts and has been such for thousands of years 2) it is present in all males, while chivalry is not? I have to admit though, I'm starting to confuse myself a little. It probably doesn't help that we might have slightly different opinions on what chivalry is.
Was this helpful?
yes 0
mynameismattgotmlgo
Posted: 7:01AM January 24, 2011 UTC
By chivalry, you're talking about the type in which a man must hold the door open for his girlfriend/wife, pull her chair out for her so that she can take a seat, pay for all or most of a restaurant bill all the time, etc...? That's the type of chivalry I'm talking about.

When a man does things like these for his wife, it suggests that he believes his wife is helpless and absolutely needs him to care for her. If she can't even open a door for herself, then how would she ever be able to survive without him? When a man prefers that his wife not be smarter than he is, really all he wants is to not be frequently upstaged by her. If she is constantly telling him he is wrong (and, therefore, suggests that he is stupid or incompetent), then is he going to feel capable of protecting her and able to provide her with supplies? Probably not. She'll seem to have the dominant role in the relationship. He is going to feel dependent on her, which is fine from a logical point of view (chances are she actually is just as capable as he is), but it just doesn't feel right. What else can I say? It's a feeling and, therefore, pretty difficult to describe.

The basic difference, though, is that in the case of chivalry, the man treats the woman like she is completely helpless (essentially like a baby); in the case of a man not wanting his wife to be smarter than he is, the man acknowledges that his wife is capable of doing her own thing and that she is likely more competent than him in some areas, but the man still wants to seem the more competent overall and, therefore, feel like his wife does depend on him to some slightly greater degree than he depends on her.

If you can't rest without knowing that the universe is just (which is what it seems you believe), know that the degree to which a man wants to have some dominance over his wife is approximately equal to the degree of unequal protection that a man provides for his wife. If a husband and wife are standing outside freezing, who do you think is most likely to give his or her jacket to the other?
Was this helpful?
yes 0

Looking for the old Community? Click here