So, I wanted to write about the mismatch, but I didn’t really know where to go with it. It seems like a fairly common-held and accepted belief--at least among women--that men care more about pretty than about smart. That’s not to say that men want to be with a dolt. The feminist line of thinking is that men want to have the upper hand in relationships and would feel emasculated or upstaged by an intelligent woman. I think that’s a bit mean.
I decided to put the theory to the test last night. When it comes to relationships, are men shallow hormone-driven players with an inferiority complex? Or is the mismatch a construct smart women have developed to explain why they’re still single? I asked several guys of my acquaintance how important intelligence is in a relationship for them and also how important they think it is for men in general. Basically they all said that intelligence was important to them, but that in general the mismatch does exist.
However, one respondent suggested that the mismatch was the fault of women, and not men! Curious. His theory was that when men want to appeal to women they try to set themselves apart by studying harder, picking up interesting skills, or becoming more athletic. Women, on the other had, focus on pretty. So, starting in adolescence, men start working to improve their minds and skills, while women let that take a back seat to improving their appearance. With women underachieving, what choice do men have but to focus on the pretty? Women then mistake effect for cause and the cycle perpetuates itself.
I do think there’s some merit in this argument. When relationships don’t work out for me, I never think its about my personality. I usually start thinking “I’m too fat” or “I’m not pretty enough.” But I don’t think the idea is coming out of nowhere. Men are visual creatures. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been around guys and watched them checking women out. Sometimes they even comment on it to me! That behaviour, so noticeable to women, helps support their notion that men want a pretty girlfriend/lover/wife over everything else. So in the quest for a mate, the theory suggests that development of substance goes out the window.
But ultimately I can’t agree. And I have demographics on my side. Article after article tells me that more women are going to college than men, there are now more women in the US workforce than men, and that many women will have to face the reality that they will be the primary breadwinner in their families. So, there are a lot of smart women out there. Arguably more smart women than smart men.
And apparently they’re all living and working in the same places. Last month I read an article in Slate (here: http://www.slate.com/id/2286240/) which basically said that there is a supply-demand issue that favors men. So, smart women are clustering in big cities and spending time in the same neighbourhoods. Men are spoiled for choice. That means they hold the power. And they’ll pick women who will be more likely to go along with the types of relationships younger men favour. Promiscuity is rampant. And that’s why we see so many men with more attractive women.
As we grow older, hopefully men will migrate from the play mindset and their criteria for an appropriate partner will mature. Many will just go with the flow and find themselves comfortable in long term relationships they started in their younger years. (Side note: could this be a one of the many reasons behind rising divorce rates?) But for those who are still single: Why not choose pretty AND smart?
Mood: Procrastinating!
Jeans: Fat jeans
Belt notch: 4th/5th notch in
| Food | Carbs (g) | Fat (g) | Calories | Protein |
| Scrambled eggs | trace | 15.2 | 206 | |
| Smoked salmon | 1.3 | 13.8 | 238 | 29 |
| Cream cheese | 2.9 | 11 | 155 | 11 |
| Tomatoes | 6.2 | 0.6 | 40 | 1.4 |
| Billtong | 0 | ? | 155 | ? |
| Spinach | 3.4 | 1.8 | 60 | 6.2 |
| Grilled chicken | 3 | 24.2 | 433 | 45.9 |
| Red wine | 3 | 0 | 125 | 0 |
No comments:
Post a Comment