Smart or Attractive? Biology's Debate on Selection

[Moonbear]

Kinky

Why, Shawn, I have no idea what you could be reading into my totally innocent statements.

 

[Huckleberry]

I agree with chroot on all counts here.

By mate do you mean having sex with that person or a life-long relationship? That dramatically changes what I'm looking for most in a partner. To answer honestly I would say that physical attractiveness is the primary factor in considering sex with a woman I have just met. For me the lure of physical attraction fades quickly and other qualities become much more important for a long term relationship. Overall, intelligence is much more valuable to me than beauty, but there are other qualities such as compassion, sincerity and humility that are far more valuable than either. Ultimately, I would consider a life-long mate that I initially found neither attractive or intelligent.

Oh, did I mention that she would have to be very, very, VERY patient?

 

[Moonbear]

She probably grew up in a middle class area where everybody goes to university. I grew up in the suburbs and almost everybody I went to school with, and can find on facebook, went to university.

I grew up in suburbs and most of the kids I knew went on to university too, but I still wasn't oblivious to the fact that not everyone grows up like that or learns calculus...especially by the time you get to grad school!

 

[Chronos]

Beauty gets old a lot faster than brains. I'll take the smart chick any day. Ugly can be surgically corrected, if necessary. There is no such procedure for stupidity.

 

[mattmns]

I voted way too early, now I am undecided. I think personality matters a lot, and with the right (or wrong) personality I could go either way.

 

[Mk]

There is no such procedure for stupidity.

Oh man. I'm using that!

 

[JasonRox]

I voted way too early, now I am undecided. I think personality matters a lot, and with the right (or wrong) personality I could go either way.

I didn't vote at all.

I don't see why everyone thinks we live in a world where we can only choose one or the other.

 

[Astronuc]

I didn't vote at all.

I don't see why everyone thinks we live in a world where we can only choose one or the other.

There are two choices, an arbitrary constraint, so pick the better of the two. It's like voting in the US. Hold your nose and vote.


Attractive AND intelligent is the ideal combination, and presumably everyone would pick that. I've met a number of very attractive women who are highly intelligent, and many have PhD's at this point. The women here at PF tend to be attractive and intelligent.

 

[rewebster]

I tend to think that 'average' looking women can be very attractive. Rather than 'attractive' though, in the 'beautiful' sense, most women I find that I'm attracted to are attractive for their smile and their 'connective-ness' and generally may be in that average category, not necessarily whether they are considered 'attractive' by others.

Zantra's post is a perfect example. Some women who think of themselves as 'beautiful' have an ego that I find personally hard to deal with in the way that their perspective of their own beauty is of more importance than the personal relationship. Let them find a shallow minded man who appreciates just a 'beauty'/'show piece' level of a mate.

Another facet is that a lot of the 'most' beautiful women that I've met tend to often have more 'idiosyncrasies' that that are so mentally time consuming that I really don't want to deal with (not that we all don't have some to 'some' degree , but I rather be with a woman that has a similar amount of them and a similar level of them).

----------------

One thing about the poll here---it's on a physics forum---the comments will more than likely lean toward 'intelligence'----put in on another 'forum' and I'd bet the comments wouldn't be the same.

 

[Evo]

I think this puts things in perspective:

THIS APPEARED ON CRAIG'S LIST

What am I doing wrong?

Okay, I'm tired of beating around the bush. I'm a beautiful (spectacularly
beautiful) 25 year old girl. I'm articulate and classy.
I'm not from New York. I'm looking to get married to a guy who makes at
least half a million a year. I know how that sounds, but keep in mind that a
million a year is middle class in New York City, so I don't think I'm
overreaching at all.

Are there any guys who make 500K or more on this board? Any wives? Could you
send me some tips? I dated a business man who makes average around 200 -
250. But that's where I seem to hit a roadblock. 250,000 won't get me to
central park west. I know a woman in my yoga class who was married to an
investment banker and lives in Tribeca, and she's not as pretty as I am, nor
is she a great genius. So what is she doing right? How do I get to her
level?

Here are my questions specifically:

- Where do you single rich men hang out? Give me specifics- bars,
restaurants, gyms

-What are you looking for in a mate? Be honest guys, you won't hurt my
feelings

-Is there an age range I should be targeting (I'm 25)?

- Why are some of the women living lavish lifestyles on the upper east side
so plain? I've seen really 'plain jane' boring types who have nothing to
offer married to incredibly wealthy guys. I've seen drop dead gorgeous girls
in singles bars in the east village. What's the story there?

- Jobs I should look out for? Everyone knows - lawyer, investment banker,
doctor. How much do those guys really make? And where do they hang out?
Where do the hedge fund guys hang out?

- How you decide marriage vs. just a girlfriend? I am looking for MARRIAGE
ONLY

Please hold your insults - I'm putting myself out there in an honest way.
Most beautiful women are superficial; at least I'm being up front about it.
I wouldn't be searching for these kind of guys if I wasn't able to match
them - in looks, culture, sophistication, and keeping a nice home and
hearth.


THE ANSWER


Dear Pers-431649184:

I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully about
your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament.
Firstly, I'm not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your bill;
that is I make more than $500K per year. That said here's how I see it.

Your offer, from the prospective of a guy like me, is plain and simple a
crappy business deal. Here's why. Cutting through all the B.S., what you
suggest is a simple trade: you bring your looks to the party and I bring my
money. Fine, simple. But here's the rub, your looks will fade and my money
will likely continue into perpetuity...in fact, it is very likely that my
income increases but it is an absolute certainty that you won't be getting
any more beautiful!

So, in economic terms you are a depreciating asset and I am an earning
asset. Not only are you a depreciating asset, your depreciation accelerates!
Let me explain, you're 25 now and will likely stay pretty hot for the next 5
years, but less so each year. Then the fade begins in earnest. By 35 stick a
fork in you!

So in Wall Street terms, we would call you a trading position, not a buy and
hold...hence the rub...marriage. It doesn't make good business sense to "buy
you" (which is what you're asking) so I'd rather lease. In case you think
I'm being cruel, I would say the following. If my money were to go away, so
would you, so when your beauty fades I need an out. It's as simple as that.
So a deal that makes sense is dating, not marriage.

Separately, I was taught early in my career about efficient markets. So, I
wonder why a girl as "articulate, classy and spectacularly beautiful"
as you has been unable to find your sugar daddy. I find it hard to believe
that if you are as gorgeous as you say you are that the $500K hasn't found
you, if not only for a tryout.

By the way, you could always find a way to make your own money and then we
wouldn't need to have this difficult conversation.

With all that said, I must say you're going about it the right way.
Classic "pump and dump."
I hope this is helpful, and if you want to enter into some sort of lease,
let me know.


And that's why I vote smart and homely well, that and the fact that I need someone I can have a decent coversation with, but I wanted to mention the ad.

Love it!

 

[turbo]

Pretty good points. Beauty is a commodity that depreciates over the years, though an intelligent woman would likely continue to learn and develop her intellect.

 

[JasonRox]

Pretty good points. Beauty is a commodity that depreciates over the years, though an intelligent woman would likely continue to learn and develop her intellect.

You can trade for a younger women as you get older.

 

[Evo]

You can trade for a younger women as you get older.

And many are, if their looks were the only thing they had to offer, or if it was the only quality the man was looking for, they do get dumped for younger, more attractive women.

The complete opposite is Prince Charles choosing Camilla. I hope someone will choose me when I get old and ratty looking, which, judging by the amount of stress I'm under ,will be sometime next week. Anyone out there that wants Evo, the time is now. The bugs bites are starting to fade, and I'm not scratching as much.

 

[EnumaElish]

Because you couldn't choose homely and dumb?

Or because you couldn't choose smart and beautiful?

Or because, in real life, the answer would be none of the above because the chances are almost nil of finding a mate that will have anything to do with you.

This reminds me of:

Two missionaries are captured by a savage tribe. Next morning one of them is brought to the Chief, who asks him: "do you choose death, or do you choose roo-roo?"

Poor missionary says "roo-roo." He is tortured for hours, then killed.

In the afternoon they take the second missionary to the Chief, who poses him the same question.

The missionary says "I choose death."

"Okay," says the chief. "But first, a little roo-roo."

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

You can trade for a younger women as you get older.

So far it has taken 18 years for my wife and I to get accustomed to each other. The process is still ongoing. No way am I going to start over from scratch. I don't care what the new one looks like or how smart she is. By the way, I asked her which she would choose and she said that neither one mattered that much to her. Hmmm.

 

[Astronuc]

So far it has taken 18 years for my wife and I to get accustomed to each other.

Wow! That was quick!

 

[rewebster]

And many are, if their looks were the only thing they had to offer, or if it was the only quality the man was looking for, they do get dumped for younger, more attractive women.

this is almost sounding like...

The complete opposite is Prince Charles choosing Camilla. I hope someone will choose me when I get old and ratty looking, which, judging by the amount of stress I'm under ,will be sometime next week. Anyone out there that wants Evo, the time is now. The bugs bites are starting to fade, and I'm not scratching as much.

OK---I'll bite





I know a friend of a friend of a friend that I'll send that photo of you on the beach to, to see if he's interested.

 

[Evo]

I know a friend of a friend of a friend that I'll send that photo of you on the beach to, to see if he's interested.

Where is he on the DD scale?

 

[rewebster]

Where is he on the DD scale?

do you mean rich and famous?

 

[Evo]

do you mean rich and famous?

No, cute, funny and smart.

 

[rewebster]

well---depends


would you rather have him cute, or smart?

----------------

(cute? --what a way to describe a man! :zzz: )

 

[jim mcnamara]

At Evo's age breathing is a criterion we should add to the list...
:ducks:

 

[Evo]

At Evo's age breathing is a criterion we should add to the list...
:ducks:

Yes, breathing, but really bad eyesight is a plus!

Smart is primary, but I have a different appreciation for what cute is. :!)

 

[rewebster]

Yes, breathing, but really bad eyesight is a plus!

from the photos, dd fits in that category (his glasses appear to be magnifying glasses)

Smart is primary, but I have a different appreciation for what cute is. :!)

yes----I think most of us would have to agree with that

so--your vote on your pole is ... both? (I don't see that option)

 

[turbo]

Yes, breathing, but really bad eyesight is a plus!

Smart is primary, but I have a different appreciation for what cute is. :!)

Think Lyle Lovett with a doctorate.

 

[Evo]

so--your vote on your pole is ... both? (I don't see that option)

I made the poll, I can vote for anything I want.

I'd also be willing to accept a short term lease for the holidays. I bought a bunch of firewood, but I have no one to watch it with.

 

[Kurdt]

My masters supervisor looked a bit like DD's father. I have no photos however so Evo will just have to imagine.

 

[rewebster]

rather working from the top down (DD), let's see the LCD list that you have on your "have to's" ...


it may make it easier to find a luke-warm body

 

[Evo]

My masters supervisor looked a bit like DD's father. I have no photos however so Evo will just have to imagine.

I don't want his father. Well, wait, is he breathing?

 

[Evo]

rather working from the top down (DD), let's see the LCD list that you have on your "have to's" ...


it may make it easier to find a luke-warm body

LCD?

 

[jim mcnamara]

I don't want his father. Well, wait, is he breathing?

See? Toldya so.

 

[Kurdt]

I don't want his father. Well, wait, is he breathing?

I don't think he's that much older really, just his hair has turned brilliant white which I thought was quite a nice feature.

 

[rewebster]

LCD=lowest common denominator

-------------

NOT Lavish/Laughing Cerebral Drop-dead handsome

 

[Evo]

LCD=lowest common denominator

-------------

NOT Lavish Cerebral Drop-dead handsome

Thick glasses, reclussive, eccentric, smart, funny, tousled hair, skinny, tall. I love big noses.

Out of all of the men on this forum, you'd think some would fit this description.

 

[Moridin]

Thick glasses, reclussive, eccentric, smart, funny, tousled hair, skinny, tall. I love big noses.

Out of all of the men on this forum, you'd think some would fit this description.

?

 

[rewebster]

Thick glasses, reclussive, eccentric, smart, funny, tousled hair, skinny, tall. I love big noses.

Out of all of the men on this forum, you'd think some would fit this description.

well, I think I have enough now to submit your description of the man you're looking for plus one of those photos you posted to put on match.com and cupid.com------I sure we'll get SOME responses before Xmas----then, again---maybe not...

----------------------

hey--if you're already on those sites (or some other ones)--post a link to your profile

 

[Kurdt]

That dog looks like its in the Blair Witch project.

 

[Evo]

I said skinny.

?

That's more like it, he needs longer tousled hair and glasses though. <sigh>

 

[JasonRox]

Big nose and skinny looks worse!

 

[Evo]

Big nose and skinny looks worse!

nuh-uh

 

[turbo]

Here you go Evo. He's really talented, skinny, quirky, with a big nose and tousled hair. He doesn't wear glasses, but if it helps, he tends to squint when the lights are bright.

http://main.losthighwayrecords.com/artist.aspx?ob=ros&src=lb&aid=54

Be sure to turn up your speakers - good audio clips!

 

[lah214]

I didn't vote at all.

I don't see why everyone thinks we live in a world where we can only choose one or the other.

haha, its not like who your "mate" is will actually depend on this question. Its like would you rather be burned to death, or drown? Obviously you wouldn't actually WANT either of these things to happen to you, its just a tough question that makes you think, haha.

 

[jim mcnamara]

... its just a tough question that makes you think, haha.

Hm.

We're just urinatin' around here making talk and occasionally making sense, too...
The one with the pheromone-iest pee wins, I guess. Who said anything about thinking?
haha, or since Christmas is nigh, hoho.

Or: have you stopped beating your wife? (yes or no)

 

[B. Elliott]

Do you go out much Evo? The reason for asking is that after looking at the pictures you posted in the member photo thread, I don't see how you would have a problem meeting people. The license picture even looks good, and that's a rarity! You're attractive, intelligent, and seem to have your head on straight. You're good to go. Get out there and show them what they're missing.

I think what we need here are some Evo glamor shots.

 

[Evo]

Do you go out much Evo? The reason for asking is that after looking at the pictures you posted in the member photo thread, I don't see how you would have a problem meeting people. The license picture even looks good, and that's a rarity! You're attractive, intelligent, and seem to have your head on straight. You're good to go. Get out there and show them what they're missing.

I think what we need here are some Evo glamor shots.

I don't have trouble finding men that are interested in me, I have troubled finding men that I am interested in. <big sigh>

Men I've met online (with a couple of exceptions) were either boring, lacked a sense of humor, were emotionally over sensitive, or unemployable.

Men that I meet in person are usually shallow, egotistical, and not too bright. That's the kind of men that approach me in person. I have better luck online.

I actually found a homeless guy (online) that was hysterically funny and intelligent, but he was so bitter about his predicament that it ruined everything good about him. I don't know if he really slept in a cardboard box, but I do know that he was having to move in with his mother because he'd been unemployed for so long that he lost his house and car.

 

[turbo]

I don't have trouble finding men that are interested in me, I have troubled finding men that I am interested in. <big sigh>

Men I've met online (with a couple of exceptions) were either boring, lacked a sense of humor, were emotionally over sensitive, or unemployable.

Men that I meet in person are usually shallow, egotistical, and not too bright. That's the kind of men that approach me in person. I have better luck online.

I actually found a homeless guy (online) that was hysterically funny and intelligent, but he was so bitter about his predicament that it ruined everything good about him. I don't know if he really slept in a cardboard box, but I do know that he was having to move in with his mother because he'd been unemployed for so long that he lost his house and car.

How do you know, though? I can often tell in seconds if I'm going to click with someone if we meet in person, but there is no way to gauge that on-line. Between smiles, body-language, evasive reactions to threats of closeness or questions, you can tell a LOT from a person. On-line, people get a lot of time to craft their responses, and there a few of the subtle clues, unless you are a linguist.

Note: From Astronuc's posts on this forum, I had a very high level of confidence that he and I would get along well, and my wife and I thoroughly enjoyed his family's visit. Very nice visit with lots of great conversations in a very short bit of time. He and his wife and kids are welcome here any old time. The big difference was that I took Astronuc at face value from his well-considered posts here. If someone takes a personal interest in you on-line, it may be tough to form an objective opinion of them.

 

[Evo]

How do you know, though? I can often tell in seconds if I'm going to click with someone if we meet in person, but there is no way to gauge that on-line. Between smiles, body-language, evasive reactions to threats of closeness or questions, you can tell a LOT from a person. On-line, people get a lot of time to craft their responses, and there a few of the subtle clues, unless you are a linguist.

Note: From Astronuc's posts on this forum, I had a very high level of confidence that he and I would get along well, and my wife and I thoroughly enjoyed his family's visit. Very nice visit with lots of great conversations in a very short bit of time. He and his wife and kids are welcome here any old time. The big difference was that I took Astronuc at face value from his well-considered posts here. If someone takes a personal interest in you on-line, it may be tough to form an objective opinion of them.

I find just the opposite to be true. I can learn much more about a person online in a short while, I seem to have an uncanny ability to see through phonies and see red flags.

Meeting someone in person, you know absolutely nothing about them and usually have to make a snap decision on whether to give them your phone number and or accept a date. "In person" gives you no time to really evaluate the person you've just met. Anyone can keep up a charade in person for awhile, at least. I usually find after a few e-mails I can "sense" if some things are not quite right about a person. I've never been wrong, all of the people I've met in person after meeting on-line turned out to be exactly the same in person. Some have been close friends for 10+ years.

 

[GleefulNihilism]

I'm just trying to picture a situation where these options or nothing.

The only thing that comes close is the cliche "Stranded on a Desert Island" scenario in which "both" is still a viable option, although if I could only make one happy I'd go for the smart one because she's actually going to help get all 3 of us off the island.

 

[BobG]

How do you know, though? I can often tell in seconds if I'm going to click with someone if we meet in person, but there is no way to gauge that on-line. Between smiles, body-language, evasive reactions to threats of closeness or questions, you can tell a LOT from a person. On-line, people get a lot of time to craft their responses, and there a few of the subtle clues, unless you are a linguist.

Note: From Astronuc's posts on this forum, I had a very high level of confidence that he and I would get along well, and my wife and I thoroughly enjoyed his family's visit. Very nice visit with lots of great conversations in a very short bit of time. He and his wife and kids are welcome here any old time. The big difference was that I took Astronuc at face value from his well-considered posts here. If someone takes a personal interest in you on-line, it may be tough to form an objective opinion of them.

I find just the opposite to be true. I can learn much more about a person online in a short while, I seem to have an uncanny ability to see through phonies and see red flags.

Meeting someone in person, you know absolutely nothing about them and usually have to make a snap decision on whether to give them your phone number and or accept a date. "In person" gives you no time to really evaluate the person you've just met. Anyone can keep up a charade in person for awhile, at least. I usually find after a few e-mails I can "sense" if some things are not quite right about a person. I've never been wrong, all of the people I've met in person after meeting on-line turned out to be exactly the same in person. Some have been close friends for 10+ years.

I read about a study where they showed students 10-30 second video clips of an instructor and asked them to rate the instructor's ability. The ratings of the students watching video clips pretty much matched the ratings of the students that took the semester long courses.

That should work with finding mates, too, shouldn't it?

Okay, I'm a little skeptical, which is why I didn't bother to search for the paper on the students rating the video clips. It's just one of those things that might give you something to think about (value of first impressions, a good instructor has both his verbal and non-verbal communication working on the same page, etc), but probably not a good guide on how to make decisions about someone.

 

[Beeza]

An old friend of mine told me to pick a woman that can cook because when you are older your still going to want to eat 3 times a day, but there will be other things you can no londer do 3 times a day :)