Do You Need A Mental Equal In Your Partner? [Archive]

rara avis

04-16-2009, 07:43 PM

There are a few problems with this discussion.
1. It's often difficult to measure mental prowess, especially if the person is an introvert.
2. Mental prowess often does not manifest itself positively or in the way one would expect/desire.
3. People are intelligent in different ways.

Actually, these problems can be condensed to one: Intelligence is multi-faceted.

Example: John Nash from "A Beautiful Mind". I know many of you would want to date someone like that because the movie idealizes and romanticizes it, but try to imagine what it would really be like to be with someone like him.

I agree with the multi-faceted thing. I just want someone who can hold their own, in their own way - not necessarily competitively with me. I don't care about IQ, or academic status, etc. More that they have similar values and well-reasoned ethics. Someone with similar values would have to be more or less on par with me in terms of whatever brand of intelligence, I think.

As for the John Nash thing - my ESTP ex told me that movie reminded him of me. (The sad part is that you know the resemblance he saw wasn't to do with math skills...)

Acextreme

04-16-2009, 08:00 PM

Interesting, mental equality is an absolute must-have for me. Then again, I'm not exactly a genius or anything. I suppose if you were extremely bright, then it might not be as high on the list.

I also wonder if it has to do with gender differences. Perhaps women want someone as smart or smarter than them, while men don't care as much? Just making broad generalizations to tick people off, sorry. ;)

Well, again we are on the intelligence topic. I am similar to you in the sense that I wouldn't consider myself to be a genius but I know I am definitely smarter (maybe by quite a distance?) than the average and intelligence in my partner was initially a very high priority of what I am looking for in a partner. Then I realized it's actually mission impossible. We are talking about stats and numbers. An IQ of 143 has a rarity of 1 in 482!!! Now if you were to go work that out, finding someone within your intelligence range can be quite a depressing idea to introspect. And bring into consideration that this is just finding someone and we haven't really go into the intricacies and complications of getting into a relationship.

So in the end, it ended up as not that important a criteria after all, provided that we can talk without me getting bored and that she could at least follow me intellectually even though she might not be able to contribute much to my introspection, but that's ok. Besides, there are other things that can compensate that, which I place a higher value on. For example, if she can draw me out emotionally, understands me and my heart, etc.

Honestly, and this is something I really want to know, do you girls really want a guy smarter than you? From my experience, that don't seem to be the case. The recent girl that I found some slight interest in seems to be raving about how intelligent I am to the point that I perceive that that's the only thing she can see in me and she seems so totally awed by my intelligence that I am beginning to feel that there is a barrier between us, like that of a god and follower kind.

eternaltriangle

04-16-2009, 08:03 PM

No. I think it is fair to say that I have never dated anybody smarter than me, and I think that is a good thing. I am very competitive by nature, and I don't think my constantly challenging my mate would be a good thing.

That doesn't mean I want somebody stupid, or that I would rule out dating somebody smarter than me, but equality is not a need. Moreover, people have many positive qualities - dating somebody necessarily involves a tradeoff between positive attributes.

Somebody that is beautiful, smart*, and say, a good cook, is unlikely to be unvoluntarily single, and in pursuing such a gal, I would face a lot of competition. Finding happiness in dating requires a degree of satisficing and accepting imperfect outcomes.

*I have heard a lot of smart women claim that they find it hard to find dates because men are intimidated by their intelligence. Usually these are not very attractive women though (I think there is an inverse relation between intelligence and looks at the very highest levels - it is simply a function of priorities). Moreover, the people that do get dates on account of their stupidity are much more likely to be taken advantage of.

At any rate, I believe dating is a market, where individuals attempt to sell themselves for the best possible partner they could find (based on their own internal judgment). Value on a market is a function of utility and scarcity. If some quality is rare (and high intelligence is rare by definition, because intelligence is relative), certainly those at the extreme end will find little trouble finding mates. I suspect I would be quite romantically successful if I weighed 900 lbs, for instance, because even if only 1% of women liked morbidly obese men, fewer than 1% of men weigh 900+ lbs.

Of course, the market does not always work out that way because we are restricted by geography and our access to people. In a town of 10,000 people, chances of 900 lb me running into somebody with a fetish for such people would be small. However, things like the Internet have made dating closer to a perfect market.

Zsych

04-16-2009, 08:05 PM

To answer the topic:

Yes, I would like a mental equal. Or rather, someone who was decently intellectual. I would expect both of us to surpass each other in different ways, and at different times, since we would both be evolving. I would also like that they value intellectually, what I value so we can be mutually beneficial to each other.

Acextreme

04-16-2009, 08:11 PM

If some quality is rare (and high intelligence is rare by definition, because intelligence is relative), certainly those at the extreme end will find little trouble finding mates.

Really? Well, I did and it's not because I have very high standards in that regard, and I believe quite a lot find trouble too. The thing here is people don't really want their mates to be too different, that also means intelligence; if you are too intelligent, I believe that it would be a hindrance on a subconscious level for them...

Latro

04-16-2009, 08:11 PM

A true mental equal? That is, someone who is quite literally the same as me mentally? Clearly not. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

A mental equal in the sense of someone with the same general faculties as me? Not quite. I don't need someone to help me with chemistry or something like that, for example.

A conversational equal, though? Most definitely.

greenblob

04-16-2009, 08:13 PM

Plane Stress

04-16-2009, 08:17 PM

I am definitely looking for someone who is intelligent, but he doesn't have to be exactly my equal. I would prefer to be more knowledgeable than him in some subjects, and have him be more knowledgeable than me in others.

Agreed. I don't want to be with somebody who clearly doesn't operate on a similar level of intelligence as me, and I also don't want to be constantly be put down for not being as smart as my partner. I would rather be in the sort of relationship where my partner furthers my intelligence and I further theirs, kind of an equal balance overall... learning from each other, understanding ourselves... maybe that's a bit idealist but whatever.

Rho1334

04-16-2009, 08:35 PM

Absolutely...that is very high on my list. I need someone who can match me stitch for bloody stitch. I definately dont need a mental inferior, I'd feel like I have to dumbify myself so they could understand. I do that enough in public, i don't need that in a relationship too.

eternaltriangle

04-16-2009, 08:36 PM

Really? Well, I did and it's not because I have very high standards in that regard, and I believe quite a lot find trouble too. The thing here is people don't really want their mates to be too different, that also means intelligence; if you are too intelligent, I believe that it would be a hindrance on a subconscious level for them...

I should have said, rare relative to the demand for smart people. Utility drives demand - how useful/beneficial is it to have an intelligent mate. Scarcity is the supply side of things.

In the case of intelligence, you are right, there may be some additional complications. I will posit that on balance, intelligence neither helps or hurts in finding a mate - although extremely intelligent and extremely stupid people will do well. I do think data can answer this question somewhat. One way of putting it might be to look at what proportion of phd's are married versus the rest of the population. Marriage is not necessarily a goal for everybody, but reflects at least some degree of success in relationships.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Census data finds that 91% of female high school grads, 88% of college grads, and 86% of women with at least 3 years of grad school get married. This is a very small gap, likely explained more by women at the high end choosing not to get married than any lack of demand for educated women.

Acextreme

04-16-2009, 08:40 PM

I honestly find it difficult to believe that people are having trouble finding intelligent people. There are plenty of lonely math nerds out there!

This is what I'm imagining:
A group of intelligent people are eyeing each other, thinking, "I just want someone who is intelligent like me!"

Stop thinking that you're sooo smart or special and get some perspective.

You know what, that notion of yours is going to be broken to pieces by me...since I certainly aren't thinking I am sooo smart. :p

Well, the thing is, it's not about me, it's about the people around me. They are the ones who keep thinking that I am sooo smart, etc...and I didn't really like that. I actually was quite disappointed recently that people are constantly viewing me as the smartest one in class, the top student, etc (sorry, I am not trying to be proud here but I am trying to illustrate something that actually happen)...and they are constantly and explicitly raving about it and it's annoying me to no end. Why? Well, if they keep doing that, they are automatically segregating themselves from me. There is no longer any healthy exchange of conversation.

So you see, sometimes it's really not about what one thinks about themselves, but rather how others think about them. Sigh...it really saddens my heart that the people around me can only see my intelligence and nothing else. It's analogous to a situation where a very pretty girl is being praised constantly by guys about how beautiful and pretty and gorgeous she is. It's not that flattering; if anything, you will start to doubt people's intentions and motives...that's how I am feeling right now...

Sylar

04-16-2009, 08:40 PM

It is this exact reason why I always worry that I'll be forever single. I keep searching for a mental equal only to be unsuccessful while getting to know the person. Needless to say, it's important to me.

Acextreme

04-16-2009, 08:46 PM

I will posit that on balance, intelligence neither helps or hurts in finding a mate - although extremely intelligent and extremely stupid people will do well.

Well, I actually have issues with this statement. Intelligent people really does have problems finding a mate even if they are no picky about the intelligence criteria in their mate. So I kinda disagree in your statement that says extremely intelligent people will do well? Doesn't sound coherent at all...and certainly extremely stupid people is going to have a super duper hard time. In general, being on the extreme side of either tails of the normal distribution curve aren't exactly good news...

WyohKnott

04-16-2009, 08:53 PM

I definitely want and/or need a mental equal. However, it's more important to me to be able to freely discuss anything I'm interested in with my partner. I tend to be fascinated by strange and slightly random subjects, and I've only ever found one person who can keep up with me both in intelligence and in curiosity about the world. It's far more important that I know he will never meet one of my excited "Did you know [random fact about the world]?"s or "Have you ever wondered why _____?"s with the blank stare that I so often get from other people, than it is for his IQ to be greater than or equal to mine.

(He does, however, need to be capable of following extremely long run-on sentences :p)

Brittle

04-16-2009, 08:56 PM

I definitely think it's important to have someone who is mentally on the same level for a partner. They don't need have the same level of intelligence in the same areas (that would be boring), but certainly the capacity to understand.

It kind of amuses (and frustrates) me that my SO bangs on about how smart I am, and I have to remind him, he's the Uni graduate who uses complex mathematics in his everyday worklife, while I'm the unemployed high school drop-out. I just read more than he does and therefore come out with more unusual words from time to time which comes across as being "smarter". Overall though, I think we are very well matched intellectually, our strengths just lie in different areas.

When it comes to friendships, I also prefer people on a similar level, although I find very smart people incredibly stimulating to be around. I also have a few friends that are not quite as bright (that sounds so arrogant, but it is what it is), but they are still stimulating in their own way... sometimes they can be far more insightful about some things than me.

Jantei

04-16-2009, 09:04 PM

Yes. No. Maybe.

My ideal relationship is more or less an equal partnership, but such a balance could potentially be achieved across an infinite spectrum of varying traits and abilities, some of which I might not even be aware of at this moment.

I try to keep an open mind, and to leave myself open to surprises.

AliTree

04-16-2009, 09:16 PM

i want mental equality, personally.

Storm

04-16-2009, 10:18 PM

Good thing I remembered by boots today.

We are talking about stats and numbers. An IQ of 143 has a rarity of 1 in 482!!! Now if you were to go work that out, finding someone within your intelligence range can be quite a depressing idea to introspect. And bring into consideration that this is just finding someone and we haven't really go into the intricacies and complications of getting into a relationship.

Forgetting for the moment that IQ is not really a very accurate measurement of intelligence, the above assertion would be a keen observation if IQ were randomly distributed. However, I would bet that you're going to find higher IQs in jobs requiring a lot of schooling (engineers, doctors, lawyers, CPAs, etc.) than you would among jobs requiring less schooling. Not that there aren't dumb people who managed to get a degree and smart people who didn't have the chance or didn't want to, but that overall that's what you're going to find. Which means it's much easier to seek out those high IQ people than you have led yourself to believe.

You know what, that notion of yours is going to be broken to pieces by me...since I certainly aren't thinking I am sooo smart. :p

Well, the thing is, it's not about me, it's about the people around me. They are the ones who keep thinking that I am sooo smart, etc...and I didn't really like that. I actually was quite disappointed recently that people are constantly viewing me as the smartest one in class, the top student, etc (sorry, I am not trying to be proud here but I am trying to illustrate something that actually happen)...and they are constantly and explicitly raving about it and it's annoying me to no end. Why? Well, if they keep doing that, they are automatically segregating themselves from me. There is no longer any healthy exchange of conversation.

So you see, sometimes it's really not about what one thinks about themselves, but rather how others think about them. Sigh...it really saddens my heart that the people around me can only see my intelligence and nothing else. It's analogous to a situation where a very pretty girl is being praised constantly by guys about how beautiful and pretty and gorgeous she is. It's not that flattering; if anything, you will start to doubt people's intentions and motives...that's how I am feeling right now...

Well, don't worry, you won't face that kind of prejudice from me. It sounds like you are in high school - where a lot of people don't care yet. Don't worry, people start to care soon enough. Be prepared for that.

Alcestis

04-16-2009, 10:42 PM

I believe it's the female rationals that wants someone smarter than them. That is coming from a book.And what book is this?

yepunsarang

04-17-2009, 12:59 AM

I absolutely CANNOT love a person without my level of intellect or higher.

Valielen

04-17-2009, 02:25 AM

It kind of amuses (and frustrates) me that my SO bangs on about how smart I am, and I have to remind him, he's the Uni graduate who uses complex mathematics in his everyday worklife, while I'm the unemployed high school drop-out. I just read more than he does and therefore come out with more unusual words from time to time which comes across as being "smarter". Overall though, I think we are very well matched intellectually, our strengths just lie in different areas.

I get the same feeling from my SO. He did an Engineering course which involved mathematics at a level that even the Math students were bewildered about. He also did a Masters, earns twice as much as me and is involved in Project Management in Construction which involves technical expertise at different levels. I barely got an Honours degree and he still thinks I'm the brainy one (mostly because I'm not British and my english is better than his).

I believe I have discriminated partners based on their mental ability during my dating times. It was a conscious decision at first but I had the wrong definition of mental ability. I have, in the past, been infatuated with guys based on my perception of their intelligence. This was not very inaccurate because my perception was usually based on achievements. A few of the objects of my adoration were students in Portuguese version of MIT. It was quite a feat to even know them since I was still at school back then. Little did I know then, that academic achievements are not an accurate guide to intelligence. One of the most brilliant and focused persons I know happened to be a guy who failed a year at school just because he was bored.
After dating a few of the nerdy types without considering other factors, I came to see that mental ability went beyond measurable signs of intelligence.
What I found from my experience, is that equal or superior mental level encloses a multitude of factors. The one I think I value the most is practicality. There is nothing sexier to me than someone who can transfer its problem solving skills to any field in life. With this usually comes the inherent attitude of “I can do it, I will do it”. Add that attitude with intelligence, will power, emotional balance, patience to understand or just accept me, the ability to challenge me to grow and we have a winning combination.

On another note, what if your loved one lost some degree of their mental ability due to illness or an accident? Would you stop loving them? Would you consider them to be less of a person or a shell of their former self if you cannot perceive the same mental level?

zibber

04-17-2009, 02:58 AM

My s/o is ESFP or ENFP, I think (I'd get her to do some tests if she took MBTI seriously), and even though she is intelligent as hell, sometimes we just think too differently (or demand different things from a discussion) really to complement each other intellectually. Quite frequently, I find myself entering into some rapid stream of thought she can't follow (if only because I make leaps only intelligible to myself), or I am too critical of things she'd rather not question; that's just the way it is. Sometimes I think it would be nice to be with someone a little more, well, NT, but love is love.

A better perception of emotions does not mean a lower intellect.

Bingeaux.

Freedom Geek

04-17-2009, 04:10 AM

Yes. I want a intelligent being not just a bag of flesh.

Geodess

04-17-2009, 05:16 AM

Intelligence does come into it for me... I have been nicknamed a "degree whore" by some close friends when it came to light that the over the last 8 years, i haven't dated anyone without a masters degree.. Is it that I am looking for that conscienly, i dont think so... i truly like applied intelligence, engaging conversations and goofiness that can only come from countless hours of researching...... In summary, I have dated/search out people who are pretty similar to me in intelligence or in this current case smarter ... I like being challenged, and given alternate perspectives...and people who can get all xkcd cartoons... Maybe Near Mental Equalness is what i strive for... sometimes over/sometimes under

Harmony

04-17-2009, 05:27 AM

I have tried to give people a chance (as friends and dating) who are not the brightest. In fact, my best friend isn't very bright...And she'll be the first to tell you that. It really depends on how the person is. My girl friend can carry on a normal conversation, but if you branch off into something intellectual you get the blank stare... A guy I dated that wasn't the brightest couldn't even accomplish a normal conversation... He had a strange way of phrasing his questions, it was kind of creepy actually.

I really prefer someone to at least be in the same ballpark as me when it comes to intelligence. Or at least to have a different "field" of intelligence per say. For instance, I enjoy music and know some things about it, my cousin is a musical genius and I love talking to him about music. He just provides such a different perspective... But to talk to him about Psychology, not gonna happen. :p

Prunesquallor

04-17-2009, 07:13 AM

A mental equal is essential. I don't want someone who totally surpasses me in all areas - and my expertise, I'd like to be my expertise, and he can have his. Mostly, I don't want too much of a difference - basically not enough that either of us notices and can tell who's smarter, thus developing an ego problem/inferiority complex. Because ego problems are loathsome and a real turn-off, and I'm really really bad at making people feel good about themselves....

OneHertz

04-17-2009, 07:32 AM

Nope doesn't need to be an equal. I get more mental stimulation than I need at work so I do not require any of that to come from my partner.

ElstonGunn

04-17-2009, 08:37 AM

If you can define "mental equality" and offer a reasonable and reliable way to measure it, then I might consider the question to be useful somehow.

Shinqui

04-17-2009, 10:37 AM

Mental equality is no more important than any other type of equality, such as physical. What I find more useful is to date those within a sphere of tolerable similarity in all things, including, but not limited to, mental prowess.

As an INTJ, so much of my life is spent in my mind that in order for there to be compatibility there needs to be a level of understanding and interest that typically can only be achieved through partners of similar, but not necessarily equal, mental traits.

That and it’s nice to date a girl that can kick your a$$ at a strategy game now and again. Or all the time, although that hasn’t happened yet.

Acextreme

04-17-2009, 10:41 AM

Good thing I remembered by boots today.

Forgetting for the moment that IQ is not really a very accurate measurement of intelligence, the above assertion would be a keen observation if IQ were randomly distributed. However, I would bet that you're going to find higher IQs in jobs requiring a lot of schooling (engineers, doctors, lawyers, CPAs, etc.) than you would among jobs requiring less schooling. Not that there aren't dumb people who managed to get a degree and smart people who didn't have the chance or didn't want to, but that overall that's what you're going to find. Which means it's much easier to seek out those high IQ people than you have led yourself to believe.

Yes, I am well aware that I am assuming a normal distribution. You are indeed right and I am aware of that too, but the reason I chose to use the IQ rarity is because that's the only one that's more validated than something that is more of a guesstimate; how are you going to determine the probability of meeting someone your IQ in your profession with accuracy? You simply can't and for the sake of a number, to illustrate the difficulty of finding an equivalent, I used the assumption of normal distribution. Of course, I guess that's not too good a way to illustrate so...it backfired in a way...

Well, don't worry, you won't face that kind of prejudice from me. It sounds like you are in high school - where a lot of people don't care yet. Don't worry, people start to care soon enough. Be prepared for that.

Eh, sad to say, nope I am not in high school. I am in university sophomore year now, and sadly, even in college, they are people like that...oh well...

azelismia

04-17-2009, 11:28 AM

yup, I need a mental equal in a partner. if you can't have good communication and a healthy respect with/for your partner, then you don't have much of a union IMHO.

Storm

04-17-2009, 02:30 PM

If you can define "mental equality" and offer a reasonable and reliable way to measure it, then I might consider the question to be useful somehow.

Well, I would have defined it had I known that this was going to end up its own thread. Mental equal, to me, simply means someone who can keep up with me in a conversation. Someone whom I can explain all my crazy ideas to and who can offer relevant feedback, and can form solid opinions of their own. There is no litmus test I would put a potential partner through. Simply hold conversations with them on topics I find interesting and see if they can talk back intelligently.

sid4wisdom

04-17-2009, 04:24 PM

I can't bring myself to romantically like women who are mentally as sharp as me and i have known very few of them. I haven't known any who are sharper than me.

Ideal(and its a widely held desire among men) is to have a woman who is just a shade lower in mental sharpness(a delta of 10 IQ points so that i can win all the debates :) ).
Too much of a gap is undesirable.

It gets too competitive at the exact same intellectual level, even though the sparring does feel good for a while.

An intellectual superior is a total no go(if i ever run into one that is).

For the record , i don't want a woman as fiercely competitive or as hard working as me either.

I'd certainly want similar mental tastes and a respect for math / science / tech. Thats my spec sheet right there.

ElstonGunn

04-17-2009, 04:24 PM

Well, I would have defined it had I known that this was going to end up its own thread. Mental equal, to me, simply means someone who can keep up with me in a conversation. Someone whom I can explain all my crazy ideas to and who can offer relevant feedback, and can form solid opinions of their own. There is no litmus test I would put a potential partner through. Simply hold conversations with them on topics I find interesting and see if they can talk back intelligently.

That's what I thought. Being that I dislike undefined terms, especially ones that imply-but-don't-describe a distinction in personal quality, I just wanted an explanation.

So someone you can talk to without getting frustrated or bored, basically? Is anyone actually opposed to having that?

Rudy

04-17-2009, 04:43 PM

So someone you can talk to without getting frustrated or bored, basically? Is anyone actually opposed to having that?

I don't think it's a question of being opposed to it, so much as whether it's a deal breaker in the relationship.

llBradll

04-17-2009, 04:49 PM

I'm not sure if I would need a mental equal in a partner, but I would definitely not want a partner who is unintellectual.

Monte314

04-17-2009, 05:29 PM

Storm

04-17-2009, 06:26 PM

Yes, I am well aware that I am assuming a normal distribution. You are indeed right and I am aware of that too, but the reason I chose to use the IQ rarity is because that's the only one that's more validated than something that is more of a guesstimate; how are you going to determine the probability of meeting someone your IQ in your profession with accuracy? You simply can't and for the sake of a number, to illustrate the difficulty of finding an equivalent, I used the assumption of normal distribution. Of course, I guess that's not too good a way to illustrate so...it backfired in a way...

I was simply noting that higher IQs are often found in professions that have higher educational requirements. You don't have to actually be a doctor to date one. But this is all moot anyway since I don't think the actual IQ level is that important.

Eh, sad to say, nope I am not in high school. I am in university sophomore year now, and sadly, even in college, they are people like that...oh well...

Ok, college, a lot of people still haven't started caring yet. Again, don't worry, they will; especially if you go to grad school.

I can't bring myself to romantically like women who are mentally as sharp as me and i have known very few of them. I haven't known any who are sharper than me.

Ideal(and its a widely held desire among men) is to have a woman who is just a shade lower in mental sharpness(a delta of 10 IQ points so that i can win all the debates :) ).
Too much of a gap is undesirable.

It gets too competitive at the exact same intellectual level, even though the sparring does feel good for a while.

An intellectual superior is a total no go(if i ever run into one that is).

For the record , i don't want a woman as fiercely competitive or as hard working as me either.

I'd certainly want similar mental tastes and a respect for math / science / tech. Thats my spec sheet right there.

Sweetie, you want someone sharper than you? I'm right here. :p Just kidding, I have no idea what your intelligence level is, or mine for that matter. Anyway, if you always have to "win" arguments, if you see a relationship as being a winner-loser arrangement at all, well, I hope you find someone that likes to lose. Good luck.

That's what I thought. Being that I dislike undefined terms, especially ones that imply-but-don't-describe a distinction in personal quality, I just wanted an explanation.

So someone you can talk to without getting frustrated or bored, basically? Is anyone actually opposed to having that?

Well, I would say it's a bit more than just someone I won't get frustrated or bored with, although that's certainly a large part of the equation. I want someone who can challenge my ideas, who can push me to my limits, I guess. That sounds a bit cheesy. Aw well, a little cheese is okay.

jcb

04-17-2009, 06:45 PM

Personally, I don't think intellectual parity is as important as others here do. I think mates can have disparate intellectual depths, breadths, and interests, and still be well-suited for each other.

agreed. there is much more to compatibility than a "by the numbers" approach.

but then, this is my perspective coming from a long-term relationship. i suspect i might think differently if i was searching for a new partner entirely.

in general, i like the idea of someone who can broaden my horizons - but not necessarily intellectually. it could be via artistic or personal/emotional avenues etc.

Polymath

04-17-2009, 07:31 PM

Nah... and if I did, I'd almost definitely stay single for the rest of my life. [/conceitedbastard]

ezri89

04-17-2009, 07:37 PM

I think there's much more to it than being a mental equal. I wouldn't even search for equality so much as compatibility.

solitaira

04-17-2009, 08:59 PM

Absolutely.

I need a mental equal for two reasons:
1. so he can challenge me in conversation. This is vitally important to me. I need someone who will put forth his arguments and know that they are actually decent arguments, and be prepared to defend them if I disagree. None of this "oh, well, you're the quarks expert, I suppose, you must be right" business.
2. so he can understand my humour. This isn't so much part of the general definition of intelligent, but we are talking mental equal, not intellectual, so I guess it counts! A lot of my humour is subtle, or based on references that not a lot of people will get. It is vital that he understands my jokes.

I agree with the people who are saying that they don't want to know who is superior. I don't want a guy with exactly the same IQ that I have. I don't particularly want to know his IQ, actually. And I would definitely prefer that he not be in the same field as me. Both for competitive reasons, and because you need different perspectives in a relationship - I don't want my partner to be my clone! But he definitely has to be interested in the sorts of things I do, even if they're not his main area of interests. He should WANT to learn more about quarks, both because they're darned interesting and so he can hold his own in a conversation with me about them.

That said... I am not exactly looking for a long-term partner at this stage in my life... but it still applies!

Jantei

04-17-2009, 09:06 PM

Interesting! I've noticed that a lot of posters so far seem to dislike the idea of an intellectual superior.

Personally, I'd be delighted to be the subject of affection of one such, provided they didn't get bored of me. What a learning opportunity! I might become plagued by doubts about what exactly I am contributing to the relationship, however.

darynthe

04-17-2009, 09:20 PM

malefide

04-18-2009, 03:29 AM

Mental equality is very important. I need someone that I can communicate with intellectually in order not to get bored and frustrated with a relationship. Note that this refers to "significant" relationships, like those with a good friend or lover.

However, I think a balance between mental similarity and mental difference is desirable. As Plane Stress said, I like people close to me to further my intelligence and for me to further theirs. An intellectually symbiotic relationship. That is exactly what I have as well, and I am continually fascinated by all the things this mental symbiosis can provide for us both.

sid4wisdom

04-18-2009, 07:41 AM

I am not at home with the idea of someone to broaden my mental horizons. Theres just a tonne of written and podcasted material out there on any subject.

My personality has been shaped massively by the material i've read, far more than any human relationships.

Imposcillator

04-18-2009, 08:59 AM

Personally, I want someone who is on the same conversational level as me. They don't need to be my mental equal in all areas, and they can certainly surpass me in some, but if we can't discuss a topic of general interest on equal footing, it's no good.

Exactly the same for me. Intelligence is a highly valued trait for me and I am not threatened by it when it exceeds mine. I want to evolve and better myself so someone that holds me back in that regard will never be a potential compatible partner.

TravelnTrain

04-18-2009, 08:59 AM

Well, I don't want someone who's mental, as in deranged, because that person would obviously not be my equal. :cool:

Like-minded is most important to me, but that goes beyond intellect. I wouldn't mind someone of a similar intellectual prowess, if that happens, but it must also be non-competitive, as another poster mentioned.

So to answer another way, being of different intellectual capabilities is not a deal-stopper. (Hmm...sounds like I definitely need someone who can handle answering a question from many angles other than the one requested...) :love:

Stratego

04-18-2009, 09:18 AM

There are so many excellent comments already that I have little to add but my own resounding, unequivocal, and passionate yes.

Not claiming to be a genius--check
Can't measure intelligence--check
Don't care about IQ (tests may not represent true potential)--check
Not looking for an Academic Superstar---check and check

But gods---I needs me a smarty, no buts about it. It's actually more important to me than looks, believe it or not. ;)

For fun I'll add an anecdote to illustrate:

I once had this huge, epic crush on this guy, George. Hot as all get out--tall, raven haired, with a whispery voice that made me melt. So I work up the courage to ask him out to a dance (this was during high school) and he said yes. There I was in raptures, fraught with nervous jitters the whole week, and was swept up into many fantasies of a fabulous evening galore.

On the day of the dance we get there early and have a chance for some conversation, and oh no---gods above---it is revealed to me very shortly that the man is a mental midget, that he doesn't have a single complicated thought in his handsome head, and just like that---all of my attraction vanishes,*poof* into so much dust.

/sharing

greenblob

04-18-2009, 09:32 AM

I can't really blame people for being so quick to judge a person's intelligence, but I have a problem with it. I am most insightful and thoughtful when I am alone and I shut everything else out. When I'm with other people, my mind tends to draw a blank unless I plan everything out ahead of time. If you want a good conversation, or even any conversation, out of me, you're going to have to make me extremely comfortable.

Imposcillator

04-18-2009, 09:42 AM

I once had this huge, epic crush on this guy, George. Hot as all get out--tall, raven haired, with a whispery voice that made me melt. So I work up the courage to ask him out to a dance (this was during high school) and he said yes. There I was in raptures, fraught with nervous jitters the whole week, and was swept up into many fantasies of a fabulous evening galore.

On the day of the dance we get there early and have a chance for some conversation, and oh no---gods above---it is revealed to me very shortly that the man is a mental midget, that he doesn't have a single complicated thought in his handsome head, and just like that---all of my attraction vanishes,*poof* into so much dust.

/sharing

Same story, only I had a gigantic crush on this girl in the last years of highschool (I even came out of my INTJ shell to approach her but she was younger than me and apparently I was both physically and behaviorally intimidating) and finally when we got to talk I realize she's just an immature idiot and I lose all interest. :laugh:

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 09:47 AM

I once had this huge, epic crush on this guy, George. Hot as all get out--tall, raven haired, with a whispery voice that made me melt. So I work up the courage to ask him out to a dance (this was during high school) and he said yes. There I was in raptures, fraught with nervous jitters the whole week, and was swept up into many fantasies of a fabulous evening galore.

On the day of the dance we get there early and have a chance for some conversation, and oh no---gods above---it is revealed to me very shortly that the man is a mental midget, that he doesn't have a single complicated thought in his handsome head, and just like that---all of my attraction vanishes,*poof* into so much dust.

Again, it's amazing the mechanism that nature uses in human attraction to guide human evolution. Obviously, there must be a reason why nature requires women to want partner that are at least as intelligent as they are.

jm123

04-18-2009, 09:53 AM

Mental equal, no.
Emotionally superior, yes.

I do not need another mastermind in my life. I need someone that can help me with my emotions, and can show me how to loosen up; I in turn, can show them how to improve their intellectual life.

I guess that is why my wife in an ESFJ, which in hindsight I would never recommend to another INTJ. That is unless you wanted to be up against someone that can be just as stubborn as you, but in a completely irrational way.

Chibi

04-18-2009, 10:01 AM

Yes. For me intelligence is the most important feature of a potential 'mate,' I need someone to have deep and meaningful conversation with. If not then there's no point of having them around.

But... on the other hand, while my boyfriend is intelligent its in a different academic field than me, if I'm honest I don't think I could be in a relationship with someone who is more intelligent than me about certain things.

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:02 AM

Again, it's amazing the mechanism that nature uses in human attraction to guide human evolution. Obviously, there must be a reason why nature requires women to want partner that are at least as intelligent as they are.

You seem to have ignored the fact that Imposcillator, a man, has an analogous story because it doesn't fit in with your pet theory of "Women need smart men, but men don't really care."

I'll add in that I've had similar experiences with women, of being initially attracted, then losing all interest upon realizing that they are dingbats.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:12 AM

You seem to have ignored the fact that Imposcillator, a man, has an analgous story because it doesn't fit in with your pet theory of "Women need smart men, but men don't really care."

One example doesn't mean much. With any social theory, there's always are a minority that deviates from it.

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:13 AM

One example doesn't mean much. With every social theory, there's always are a minority that deviates from it.

And yet you used one example from a girl to support your theory? I'm very confused. :thinking:

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:14 AM

And yet you used one example from a girl to support your theory? I'm very confused. :thinking:

You can look up other examples yourself if you really care about it. Do a survey or poll and analyze the results.

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:15 AM

You can look up other examples yourself if you really care so much about it.

It's not that, so much. The thing is you're advancing a theory of yours, using the posts that agree with your theory as evidence, and ignoring the posts that don't agree with it. This is not the path to correct conclusions, as even a cursory examination of the scientific method will tell you.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:17 AM

It's not that, so much. The thing is you're advancing a theory of yours, using the posts that agree with your theory as evidence, and ignoring the posts that don't agree with it. This is not the path to correct conclusions, as even a cursory examination of the scientific method will tell you.

Like I said, do a survey...

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:21 AM

Like I said, do a survey...

Jinxu, I'm sorry, but you're not understanding me.

I'm not particularly interested in the answer to this question, at least not enough to start a survey on it. What I'm concerned about it that you are advancing methods for deriving conclusions that are patently bad, and should not be extended to any subject. One does not support a theory by only looking at the favorable data.

Storm

04-18-2009, 10:23 AM

Like I said, do a survey...

A survey on this forum wouldn't be good either since it would be self-selecting. You'd need a random sampling of thousands to get anything close to a real answer.

I would never date someone who needed me to be dumber (subjectively defined) than them to be happy. Such a person is probably an egotistical jerk.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:29 AM

Jinxu, I'm sorry, but you're not understanding me.

I'm not particularly interested in the answer to this question, at least not enough to start a survey on it. What I'm concerned about it that you are advancing methods for deriving conclusions that are patently bad, and should not be extended to any subject. One does not support a theory by only looking at the favorable data.

Again, doing a survey is the scientific way of reaching conclusion. But you are forgetting that making observation and forming hypothesis are the first two steps. That's simply what I am doing. The next step is to test your theory, which is what a survey would accomplish.

Push, you seem to be using your own experience and personal preference as the basis for your argument. What makes you think that as an INtJ (a minority), your view would represent the majority?

Jinxu added to this post, 1 minutes and 32 seconds later...

I would never date someone who needed me to be dumber (subjectively defined) than them to be happy. Such a person is probably an egotistical jerk.

Or maybe just insecure?...

Storm

04-18-2009, 10:30 AM

Push, you seem to be using your own experience and personal preference as the basis for your argument. What makes you think that as an INtJ (a minority), your view would represent the majority?

Rudy hasn't advanced any theories. He's simply stated his own opinion on the matter and pointed out that your theory within the confines of this thread, has already been shown to have some holes.

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:30 AM

Again, doing a survey is the scientific way of reaching conclusion. But you are forgetting that making observation and forming hypothesis are the first two steps. That's simply what I am doing. The next step is to test your theory, which is what a survey would accomplish.
In this case, you should make it clear that what you are saying is simply a hypothesis. You've been speaking as if it were revealed truth.

Push, you seem to be using your own experience and personal preference as the basis for your argument. What makes you think that as an INtJ (a minority), your view would represent the majority?
Jinxu, I'm not advancing an argument, I'm simply counteracting yours. I don't know, in fact, whether intelligence in a partner is statistically more important for women than for men. I doubt it, but I just don't know; I do not have enough information on which to base an argument to either effect.

EDIT:
Rudy hasn't advanced any theories. He's simply stated his own opinion on the matter and pointed out that your theory within the confines of this thread, has already been shown to have some holes.
Right. This.

Storm

04-18-2009, 10:31 AM

Or maybe just insecure?...

That could be it too. Insecurity, however, is still not very attractive, so my statement stands.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:32 AM

Jinxu, I'm not advancing an argument, I'm simply counteracting yours. I don't know, in fact, whether intelligence in a partner is statistically more important for women than for men. I doubt it, but I just don't know; I do not have enough information on which to base an argument to either effect.

Do a survey...

rain

04-18-2009, 10:34 AM

Intelligence is always nice- but I prefer a man who is street smart and has good common sense, mainly because occasionally I'm more of an intuitive/abstract thinker- so if he is complementary and doesn't necessarily have book smarts, but is socially adept and good around people, then that's initially what I am attracted to.

I also love men who are emotionally expressive. Mainly because I always hide my feelings, and I like it when men are warm, nurturing types that can bring me out of my cold little self.

Storm

04-18-2009, 10:34 AM

Do a survey...

A survey on this forum wouldn't be good either since it would be self-selecting. You'd need a random sampling of thousands to get anything close to a real answer.

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:36 AM

Do a survey...
Jinxu, there are several reasons why I'm not going to do a survey.

One, I'm not that interested in the answer to this question because, even if your theory turns out to be true, which I doubt, it doesn't affect me at all, except that it might leave more smart ladies for me. ;)

Two, for the reasons Storm mentioned, surveys on a web site are not a reliable way of determining anything about the general population. There is far too much self selection involved. At best, they enable you to say something about the INTJ population that uses computers, but there is even self-selection within that group.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:38 AM

There's is a little advice given to a young man from an older man once:

"Never marry a women that is more intelligence then you are. She will be the one in control. Pick the ones that are a little bit less intelligent than you are, but not too much."

Jinxu added to this post, 1 minutes and 8 seconds later...

Jinxu, there are several reasons why I'm not going to do a survey.

One, I'm not that interested in the answer to this question because, even if your theory turns out to be true, which I doubt, it doesn't affect me at all, except that it might leave more smart ladies for me. ;)

Two, for the reasons Storm mentioned, surveys on a web site are not a reliable way of determining anything about the general population. There is far too much self selection involved. At best, they enable you to say something about the INTJ population that uses computers, but there is even self-selection within that group.

I was speaking that you do an actually survey (or study) since you are a graduate student and have the resources (college students) availiable.

ElstonGunn

04-18-2009, 10:40 AM

I would never date someone who needed me to be dumber (subjectively defined) than them to be happy. Such a person is probably an egotistical jerk.

Yeah, but you also run that risk with people who over-value intelligence.

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:41 AM

"Never marry a women that is more intelligence then you are. She will be the one in control. Pick the ones that are a little bit less intelligent than you are, but not too much."
You have a proverbial saying on your side? Well, now I'm convinced.

I was speaking that you do an actually survey (or study) since you are a graduate student and have the resources (college students) availiable.
Meh, that's a lot of work, and money, and my first reason would still apply in any case.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:43 AM

You have a proverbial saying on your side? Well, now I'm convinced.

Older man with experience, I think I'll listen to him...

Jinxu added to this post, 0 minutes and 44 seconds later...

Meh, that's a lot of work, and money, and my first reason would still apply in any case.

So the mystery continue to remains unsolved...

Rudy

04-18-2009, 10:45 AM

Older man with experience, I think I'll listen to him...

If I were to find an experienced older man who said you should marry a woman of equal intelligence, would you listen to him?

Storm

04-18-2009, 10:46 AM

There's is a little advice given to a young man from an older man once:

"Never marry a women that is more intelligence then you are. She will be the one in control. Pick the ones that are a little bit less intelligent than you are, but not too much."

So, from this statement we can conclude that you view relationships as power struggles which, you, as a man, must win. I'm sorry you have such a warped view of relationships. Well, I guess we're not destined to be together.

Note: As others have mentioned, intelligence, as I have defined it, simply means you can talk to the other person as a peer, and does not speak to level of expertise in a particular subject area or IQ level. Intelligence alone should not be used to pick out a mate. Obviously there are many other factors to consider when picking out a partner. This thread is speaking only to if intelligence is a necessary component, not if it's the most important.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:49 AM

If I were to find an experienced older man who said you should marry a woman of equal intelligence, would you listen to him?

Depends on who's more successful, richer, and have the hotter wife. :rolleyes:

Jinxu added to this post, 2 minutes and 18 seconds later...

So, from this statement we can conclude that you view relationships as power struggles which, you, as a man, must win. I'm sorry you have such a warped view of relationships. Well, I guess we're not destined to be together.

It has been from my experience that women do not respect men of lower intelligence...

JustMel

04-18-2009, 10:54 AM

That might be nice, but it's not something I put much emphasis on. I don't think that I'd be against it or consider it a negative trait, but there's probably a dozen other traits that I value much more than that.

Exactly. I don't need my mate to be as intelligent or more intelligent than me. I just need them to not be bothered by the fact that I am intelligent. You obviously don't want someone who puts you down for your intelligence. If it's someone who has no clue about anything chances are you're not going to be attracted to them anyway for very long.

The person you choose as a mate should be attractive to you in more than intellectual ways. My husband may not be able to discuss politics with me or get really deep into most science issues but he has other qualities that make up for those. I don't consider him lacking he's just not interested in those things. He listens to me even when he doesn't get the whole concept and will ask for clarification. He asks good questions. From a young age he wanted to be a dad and have a family. He's content in that role. I'm content being the bread winner in the family. It's not about intelligence, it's about being compatible.

The only women I have ever heard say "I want someone who has the same intelligence level I have or we can't be happy together" weren't very intelligent anyway.

Just because you score higher on a test or have a PhD or MBA or whatever combination of letters you desire after your name doesn't mean you're smarter than everyone else---it means you applied yourself to those areas because they were important to you but aren't as important to other people. There are different kinds of intelligence and if there weren't we wouldn't progress.

Someone has to find the next disease cure. Someone has to find the next fuel alternative. Someone has to find the next stain remover. Someone has to find the next best frozen food product. Someone has to provide for the kids emotional health while someone else provides for the existence. Intelligence is relative to the subject you're discussing.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:54 AM

Well, I guess we're not destined to be together.

I'm not sure why you made this statement, but I believe it is with an intent to insult. Anyway, that's okay I haven't even thought about that.

rain

04-18-2009, 10:55 AM

Depends on who's more successful, richer, and have the hotter wife. :rolleyes:

Well there are a lot of dumb women out there, so I suppose you'll have no problem finding someone of lesser intelligence. ;)

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 10:56 AM

Well there are a lot of dumb women out there, so I suppose you'll have no problem finding someone of lesser intelligence. ;)

Again, many of you seem to have missed an important part of the statement. Read again:

"Never marry a women that is more intelligence then you are. She will be the one in control. Pick the ones that are a little bit less intelligent than you are, but not too much."

JustMel

04-18-2009, 10:59 AM

It has been from my experience that women do not respect men of lower intelligence...

There's also the possibility that they don't respect men who think they are overly intelligent because they come across as arrogant jackasses....

This is a broad statement based on a limited bit of experience. Have you ever been married? How many women have you dated? How many of them didn't want to date you because you weren't their intellectual equal? How many times have you heard that you're arrogant? How old are you---age is relative to experience in this instance because the old you are the more experiences you've been exposed to and had an opportunity to explore.

There are different ways to be intelligent and most of them have nothing to do with IQ tests.

rain

04-18-2009, 11:00 AM

Again, many of you seem to have missed an important part of the statement. Read again:

"Never marry a [please edit] women that is more intelligence then [/please edit]you are. She will be the one in control. Pick the ones that are a little bit less intelligent than you are, but not too much."

Because you want a less intelligent partner, it just means that you don't like getting your ass kicked. :laugh:

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 11:02 AM

There are different ways to be intelligent and most of them have nothing to do with IQ tests.

I've never said my definition of intelligence is correlated with IQ scores.

Jinxu added to this post, 0 minutes and 41 seconds later...

Because you want a less intelligent partner, it just means that you don't like getting your ass kicked. :laugh:

I don't think I'll have that problem anytime soon...

Anyway, it's been fun debating, but now it's time to get back to work.

JustMel

04-18-2009, 11:03 AM

Well there are a lot of dumb women out there, so I suppose you'll have no problem finding someone of lesser intelligence. ;)

There are also a lot of women that are perceived as dumber than they are by people because they want them to believe they're dumber. I've known a lot of women that simper and flutter their lashes and people think of them like a barbie doll to be protected but they aren't stupid, in fact they're intelligent enough to downplay their intelligence to get what they want in life. They can have someone support and pamper them without having to do any manual labor.

Women haven't always been respected for their intelligence and in fact a lot of men will tell you they are intimidated by an intelligent woman so women have learned to downplay their intelligence which actually makes them smarter because they don't fight the same battles the women who don't dumb themselves down fight.

Storm

04-18-2009, 11:06 AM

Women haven't always been respected for their intelligence and in fact a lot of men will tell you they are intimidated by an intelligent woman so women have learned to downplay their intelligence which actually makes them smarter because they don't fight the same battles the women who don't dumb themselves down fight.

I'm confused, are you still talking about within the realms of a relationship, or have you expanded the discussion to just playing dumb in general?

rain

04-18-2009, 11:08 AM

There are also a lot of women that are perceived as dumber than they are by people because they want them to believe they're dumber. I've known a lot of women that simper and flutter their lashes and people think of them like a barbie doll to be protected but they aren't stupid, in fact they're intelligent enough to downplay their intelligence to get what they want in life. They can have someone support and pamper them without having to do any manual labor.

Women haven't always been respected for their intelligence and in fact a lot of men will tell you they are intimidated by an intelligent woman so women have learned to downplay their intelligence which actually makes them smarter because they don't fight the same battles the women who don't dumb themselves down fight.

I typically think that's prolly more true with the older generation of Americans. It's like what Jackie Kennedy said "Women must hide their intelligence".

These days though, men always seem impressed with women who are smart. And really, the fact that they are more intelligent means more interesting sex in the bedroom.

ElstonGunn

04-18-2009, 11:09 AM

These days though, men always seem impressed with women who are smart. And really, the fact that they are more intelligent means more interesting sex in the bedroom.

Huh? How does that follow? Does it also inherently imply that they can make better pies and that they're better at vacuuming?

Sinequanon

04-18-2009, 11:09 AM

I think my SO is brilliant, but she's incredibly humble. She'd never say that about herself. She calls me analytical, and I think she appreciates that type of intellect more. I think she's incredibly insightful, which I personally value more. We complement each other extremely well.

JustMel

04-18-2009, 11:10 AM

I'm confused, are you still talking about within the realms of a relationship, or have you expanded the discussion to just playing dumb in general?

I was thinking more towards a relationship in this instance but it could be widened I suppose.

JustMel

04-18-2009, 11:13 AM

I typically think that's prolly more true with the older generation of Americans. It's like what Jackie Kennedy said "Women must hide their intelligence".

These days though, men always seem impressed with women who are smart. And really, the fact that they are more intelligent means more interesting sex in the bedroom.

I live in the deep south and I can tell you the practice is still alive and well. How does higher intelligence equate with better sex? I would say a loss of inhabitions would lead to greater sex.

rain

04-18-2009, 11:13 AM

Huh? How does that follow? Does it also inherently imply that they can make better pies and that they're better at vacuuming?

There's a mental connection that's necessary when having great sex. It's like having your mind fXXXXed over. Um...that is all I will say about it. :)

Making pies and vaccuming requires no mental effort. I learned how to cook by watching television.

altoid

04-18-2009, 11:16 AM

I certainly don't require someone of a particular intellectual level. I would much prefer commonality of thought and, as others have said, that extends beyond mere intellect. Similar sense of humor and general outlook on life, the universe, and everything are more important to me that just having someone with whom to intellectually spar. This may sometimes translate to a similarity in intellectual level, but it doesn't necessarily need to be the case.

I recognize that different people look for different things in partners, and as such can't really scorn anyone for their own preferences. If someone wants a partner with whom to debate foreign policy or particle physics, fine. If someone else wants a partner to bake pies and raise children, that's fine too. There's someone out there for everyone.

rain

04-18-2009, 11:30 AM

I live in the deep south and I can tell you the practice is still alive and well. How does higher intelligence equate with better sex? I would say a loss of inhabitions would lead to greater sex.

In my experience, in the deep South, men are typically the providers, bread-winners and treat a woman as if she were the most important and valued person on earth.

I also think that in the South, being polite and socially gracious is more important than being a career girl.

ElstonGunn

04-18-2009, 11:34 AM

There's a mental connection that's necessary when having great sex. It's like having your mind fXXXXed over. Um...that is all I will say about it. :)

Making pies and vaccuming requires no mental effort. I learned how to cook by watching television.

How does being smart aid in the mental connection? There are tons of anecdotes about smart people who have difficulty in that area. I don't see much of a difference between the idea that intelligence is somehow conducive to better sex and saying, "Smartness is good, and therefore anything that's good has to be caused by it."

rain

04-18-2009, 11:38 AM

How does being smart aid in the mental connection?

It's a seduction process. Perhaps some people have problems with the physical side, but your brain is really the biggest sexual organ. There's good sex- in which all the body parts fit together nicely, then there's great sex- when sex is the culmination of overlapping perceptions, mental behaviors and emotional expression.

Storm

04-18-2009, 12:37 PM

I'm not sure why you made this statement, but I believe it is with an intent to insult. Anyway, that's okay I haven't even thought about that.

It wasn't an insult. I said that it's clear you view relationships as power struggles. I find that kind of attitude unhealthy and view relationships as true partnerships.

sid4wisdom

04-18-2009, 12:57 PM

Relationships aren't power struggles, but i guess it is fair to say that males have big egos and the NT males typically build their ego around their brain and intellect.

To be consistently less smart than 'anyone' will be a huge turn off for me, and there is no reason why it should be any different with a girlfriend.

This could be the case for some females too who have a strong identity around their intellectual abilities. But i guess(strictly a guess) the trend is that even the smartest of females choose partners still smarter.

WyohKnott

04-18-2009, 01:13 PM

I typically think that's prolly more true with the older generation of Americans. It's like what Jackie Kennedy said "Women must hide their intelligence".

These days though, men always seem impressed with women who are smart.
(emphasis mine)

I have to disagree with that. In my experience, men who are not intimidated by intelligent women are not nearly that common - I would say that at least 60% of the "eligible males" that I've met have a decidedly negative attitude toward women who are noticeably more intelligent. This is not always shown in direct unfriendliness, but rather in their reluctance to even consider dating those women, and a slightly hostility toward them during friendly debates.

Also, for my own amusement, I have deliberately "played dumb" in certain situations with guys who do not know me well, just to see if they treat me differently - and sure enough, the times when I've done that, guys have been distinctly friendlier. I certainly don't make a habit of doing that, but it was an interesting experiment.

Storm

04-18-2009, 01:36 PM

JustMel

04-18-2009, 02:48 PM

In my experience, in the deep South, men are typically the providers, bread-winners and treat a woman as if she were the most important and valued person on earth.

I also think that in the South, being polite and socially gracious is more important than being a career girl.

Not true. We insult regularly we just do it differently than most. Ex: We all know Bobby is a moron and will never amount to anything but we don't say that instead it's something like this, "Poor Bobby, you know he's not right in the head bless his heart". You can insult anyone anyway so long as you follow it with "bless his/her heart"

A lot of southern men do treat their women like they are the most important and valued person but there are a lot of them that replace the word person with object and think it's the same thing.

Southern girls were raised to marry well but that is changing and more and more of them are becoming career women. We're also seeing more stay at home fathers like our own situation too.

JustMel added to this post, 10 minutes and 54 seconds later...

This could be the case for some females too who have a strong identity around their intellectual abilities. But i guess(strictly a guess) the trend is that even the smartest of females choose partners still smarter.

Incorrect. That is implying that men are smarter than women. That has not been proven nor do I think it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The Eurythmics' song - Sisters Are Doin' It For Themselves:

Now, there was a time,
when they used to say,
that behind ev'ry great man,
there had to be a great woman.
But oh, in these times of change,
you know that it's no longer true.
So we're comin' out of the kitchen,
'cause there's something we forgot to say to you.
We say, Sisters are doin' it for themselves

Page 77 and 78 of this book (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. elves&source=bl&ots=uxccZCJxf4&sig=UQObAxqHgmzJtdBvWdKzxNR1nAw&hl=en&ei=b0nqSYP3IKDFtgfMkpjEBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result#PPA77,M1) also make a good point that some men prefer women less intelligent than themselves so they don't have to compete with women they way they do with other men. Keep in mind when reading parts of the book that it is talking about women using emotions to make decisions and that's not always true. I rarely tend to make decisions based on emotion but a lot of women do and are comfortable doing so.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 02:53 PM

It wasn't an insult. I said that it's clear you view relationships as power struggles. I find that kind of attitude unhealthy and view relationships as true partnerships.

It only becomes a power struggle when the two party wish to play the dominant roles. I find that relationship works best if one party leads and the other follows. If you're a man that want to play the submissive role, then go ahead and find yourself a dominant woman. There's nothing wrong with that.

As a matter of fact, the current social trend is that males are becoming more feminine "caring" men, while females are becoming more masculine "independent" women.

Imposcillator

04-18-2009, 03:03 PM

It only becomes a power struggle when the two party wish to play the dominant roles. I find that relationship works best if one party leads and the other follows. If you're a man that want to play the submissive role, then go ahead and find yourself a dominant woman. There's nothing wrong with that.

As a matter of fact, the current social trend is that males are becoming more feminine "caring" men, while females are becoming more masculine "independent" women.

1) There is a different thread about "nice" guys and all that jazz. Please keep the conversation relevant to the thread's topic.

2) Since when does wanting your SO to be intelligent / not minding if they're more intelligent than you mean that you're submissive? Why do you truly believe that one must always lead and the other must always follow? In certain aspects of the relationship that might happen, but people will different skills and strengths can work together, and that is being equal and having respect for one another.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 03:05 PM

2) Since when does wanting your SO to be intelligent / not minding if they're more intelligent than you mean that you're submissive? Why do you truly believe that one must always lead and the other must always follow? In certain aspects of the relationship that might happen, but people will different skills and strengths can work together, and that is being equal and having respect for one another.

It doesn't, but that's what the other posters are implying. If you want a business partner as a wife, there's nothing wrong with that either. One guy I know who has a dominant personality tried to date a woman who also has one. They spent the entire date arguing over who was right.

Imposcillator

04-18-2009, 03:09 PM

It doesn't, but that's what the other posters are implying. If you want a business partner as a wife, there's nothing wrong with that either.

"Business partner"? Please elaborate on this. I don't see what part of my (or others') posts implied such a thing.

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 03:12 PM

"Business partner"? Please elaborate on this. I don't see what part of my (or others') posts implied such a thing.

You said, "people will different skills and strengths can work together." Which is implying a business-like relationship similar to the ones you have with your co-workers.

JustMel

04-18-2009, 03:18 PM

You said, "people will different skills and strengths can work together." Which is implying a business-like relationship similar to the ones you have with your co-workers.

No it's not the same thing. A relationship requires that two people work together to acheive common goals. You both bring different strengths and weaknesses to the table but there the comparison to a co-worker ends as I hope it's not the co-worker that you also develop an emotional bond with/toward.

ElstonGunn

04-18-2009, 03:20 PM

Also, for my own amusement, I have deliberately "played dumb" in certain situations with guys who do not know me well, just to see if they treat me differently - and sure enough, the times when I've done that, guys have been distinctly friendlier. I certainly don't make a habit of doing that, but it was an interesting experiment.

Just as an idea, do you think a possible explanation might be that people who are exceptionally smart often (not always, or even necessarily most of the time) give off an air of hostility or coldness. They are more likely to find fault with things, not because they're pricks, but because they naturally evaluate things, judge their worth, and often let those in the vicinity know their negative opinions. So it's not that men want you to be stupid, it's that they don't want to be criticized and judged by you. They would rather relax or let loose with the type of person you consider dumb.

If you take the traditional gender roles as a starting point, it makes sense that men look for someone who would be good at helping them unwind after working all day (which would involve a lot of traits other than intelligence), whereas women look for someone who's able to provide (i.e., smart).

Just a thought, there. I'm not married to it, so go ahead and tell me why it's wrong if you want. I'm not saying that it should be that way, or that it makes absolute rational sense, or that that's exactly what I want, or that that's what everybody wants, or that it applies in all situations, or anything other than that as a vague idea, it kind of makes sense to me in a way.

It only becomes a power struggle when the two party wish to play the dominant roles. I find that relationship works best if one party leads and the other follows. If you're a man that want to play the submissive role, then go ahead and find yourself a dominant woman. There's nothing wrong with that.

Is it possible to phrase that without the buzzwords? What does it mean to lead or follow? What is the submissive role compared to the dominant? Do these apply at all times, and in an all-or-nothing setup wherein one person is the dominant partner at all times and in regard to all subjects without exception and the other is always submissive about everything and has no expressly stated opinions or volition of his/her own?

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 03:21 PM

No it's not the same thing. A relationship requires that two people work together to acheive common goals. You both bring different strengths and weaknesses to the table but there the comparison to a co-worker ends as I hope it's not the co-worker that you also develop an emotional bond with/toward.

The best example of a business relationship I can think of would be an INTJ/ENTJ. It would work well if you wanted to build a business and turn it into an corporate empire. But as some of you know, ENTJ females like to be the one in charge.

Synamon

04-18-2009, 03:24 PM

The best example of a business relationship I can think of would be an INTJ/ENTJ. It would work well if you wanted to build a business and turn it into an corporate empire. But as you all know, ENTJ females like to dominate.

As we all know??

Please stop with the unsubstantiated claims.

Relationships take work. That doesn't make them a business.

2obvious

04-18-2009, 03:25 PM

The person you choose as a mate should be attractive to you in more than intellectual ways. My husband...From a young age he wanted to be a dad and have a family. He's content in that role. I'm content being the bread winner in the family. It's not about intelligence, it's about being compatible.
You've touched upon a very salient point, regarding our intellectual preferences, JustMel: the pressure to conform societal norms.
There are also a lot of women that are perceived as dumber than they are by people because they want them to believe they're dumber. ...Women haven't always been respected for their intelligence and in fact a lot of men will tell you they are intimidated by an intelligent woman...
Although I'm not sure how helpful a post-feminist synopsis is to the subject at hand...
Southern girls were raised to marry well but that is changing and more and more of them are becoming career women. We're also seeing more stay at home fathers like our own situation too.

...nor do I see how stereotyping southerners won't invite more tangents...

Jinxu

04-18-2009, 03:25 PM

As we all know??

Please stop with the unsubstantiated claims.

Relationships take work. That doesn't make them a business.

It has been changed as ordered. Ma'am.

JustMel

04-18-2009, 03:28 PM

...nor do I see how stereotyping southerners won't invite more tangents...

Feel free to tangent away. I'm a southern girl so I can stereotype since I know what's truth and what is stereotype. There are still a lot of fathers that raise their daughters to marry well and have children instead of getting an education. I deal with them daily.

Phoenix rising

04-18-2009, 04:15 PM

Personally, I would rather have an average looking women of comparable intelligence than a dumb stunner.

gdsdiana

04-18-2009, 10:00 PM

Though I have certainly been enthralled by men who I don't think can match me intellectually, they usually have something very unique about them that draws my interest. It might be that they have a view of the world that I've not encountered before or that they are just a solid, kind, and caring person. There are so few people in this world who are sincere and good to the core. When I find that, it trumps all. That being said, I still like having a sparring partner who can debate me on topics such as politics, economics, history, religion, etc.

rain

04-18-2009, 11:16 PM

The best example of a business relationship I can think of would be an INTJ/ENTJ. It would work well if you wanted to build a business and turn it into an corporate empire. But as some of you know, ENTJ females like to be the one in charge.

So do ENTP men. However, INTJs and INTPs don't like being in charge, they hate the responsibility and would rather someone else do it because they don't like dealing with people. ENTJ females might like making the important decisions, but ultimately if you think about it, everyone has strengths and weaknesses, and ENTJs value hierarchy (ie, a younger ENTJ woman will appease an older ENTJ women even if the older one is WRONG.)

Besides it's all about the long term vision, and the people who support you to accomplish your goal, so it would be rather foolish to try to take control of a project when really there will be more important projects in the future in which you will be awarded when you earn your stripes.

Of course, if you're building a corporate empire, then it really doesn't matter who does what as long as there is financial benefit which is distributed in the terms that were agreed upon.

Control is an illusion- but retaining rights and creative vision is key to being happy in general.

sid4wisdom

04-19-2009, 10:51 AM

JustMel

04-19-2009, 12:45 PM

@JustMel : Please do read my posts more carefully before quoting me. When i say something is 'strictly a guess', i mean it.

Evidentially, i do know a few smart women who've told me in conversations that they'd want men smarter than them.

I did read it and I saw the "guess" portion. I would still respond the same way. Newsflash: women lie.

JustMel added to this post, 2 minutes and 39 seconds later...

This could be the case for some females too who have a strong identity around their intellectual abilities. But i guess(strictly a guess) the trend is that even the smartest of females choose partners still smarter.

You said GUESS, not that the guess was based on personal conversations. However, I have never heard a woman say she wanted a man smarter than herself. Equal too- yes, more so than- never.

sid4wisdom

04-19-2009, 01:16 PM

JustMel

04-19-2009, 01:53 PM

@JustMel :

'Women lie' isn't a strong enough reason for me to assume that i was lied to on these occasions. If 'Women lie all the time' or 'Women lie most of the time' were true, i could think i was lied to be these women.

And i still don't see how a hypothetical feminine desire for smarter mates would make them dumber on average. That is a completely invalid inference.

Anyway, i don't think i have any substantial evidence to what 'most' women want as their partner's intellectual level, or if it varies by culture / geography. I guessed, and my guess could be right or wrong. (You haven't proven it incorrect yet if you thought so).

All i can say is that i know a few smart women who want smarter mates (I was also told that this is sortof a consensus opinion at an all women's hostel in a top tech school in india). Also, I don't know of any smart males who want women smarter than them.

There is the crux--you're talking India and I'm talking US. I have never met a woman in the US that said "I want a mate smarter than myself" I have however heard a lot of them say "I let him think he's the smart one". I don't know enough about Indian cultures to know if that is the difference.

I do know women and most women lie to get their way. I don't but a lot do and I don't know if it's type based or just what women do to one another and to men. A lot of women tell men what they think they want to hear. Men do the same thing though in my experience they wait until they're in a relationship to tell the person what they think they want to hear.

I'm not trying to prove you right or wrong. I don't care one way or the other who is correct. I'm simply showing the other side of the coin.

rahdam

04-19-2009, 02:15 PM

I need someone that compliments me.
A "mental equal" sounds like a check list item.

Storm

04-19-2009, 02:28 PM

And i still don't see how a hypothetical feminine desire for smarter mates would make them dumber on average. That is a completely invalid inference.

If all women or even a vast majority of women wanted a man smarter than them, and, assuming that these women are successful in their endeavor to find a smarter man, then it would follow that women, as a whole, are not as smart as men.

QED

sid4wisdom

04-19-2009, 02:46 PM

If all women or even a vast majority of women wanted a man smarter than them, and, assuming that these women are successful in their endeavor to find a smarter man, then it would follow that women, as a whole, are not as smart as men.

QED

:D Circular logic. "assuming that these women are successful in their endeavour". This can only happen if men are actually smarter on average. You assumed what you set out to prove.

sid4wisdom added to this post, 9 minutes and 3 seconds later...

There is the crux--you're talking India and I'm talking US. I have never met a woman in the US that said "I want a mate smarter than myself" I have however heard a lot of them say "I let him think he's the smart one". I don't know enough about Indian cultures to know if that is the difference.

I do know women and most women lie to get their way. I don't but a lot do and I don't know if it's type based or just what women do to one another and to men. A lot of women tell men what they think they want to hear. Men do the same thing though in my experience they wait until they're in a relationship to tell the person what they think they want to hear.

I'm not trying to prove you right or wrong. I don't care one way or the other who is correct. I'm simply showing the other side of the coin.

Yep, i am open to the other side of the coin. It may be a cultural thing, or it may not be a general phenomenon even in india. not enough data. thats exactly why i said that the proposition is 'strictly a guess'.

I know little about the lying habits of women :D I see no clear reason to believe that i've been lied to.

Storm

04-19-2009, 02:49 PM

:D Circular logic. "assuming that these women are successful in their endeavour". This can only happen if men are actually smarter on average. You assumed what you set out to prove.

I wasn't trying to prove anything, just showing you what your statement could lead to. I only included the assumption because I thought that is what you were assuming.

So, you now are saying that women who want a smarter mate and are very smart will be doomed to a life alone because they can't find a mate smarter than themselves?

sid4wisdom

04-19-2009, 02:58 PM

I never assumed that 'men on average are smarter'. I didn't assume that 'Women who try to find smarter men' will fail or succeed. I just guessed that maybe, just maybe a significant chunk of women want smarter mates. THATS ALL.

[whats happened to the quality of inference here !]

Terian

04-19-2009, 11:47 PM

I would get bored way too quickly if my partner couldn't keep up with me mentally. This greatly limits my number of potential mates.

Maedhi

04-20-2009, 09:13 AM

I too have had several Indian women tell me that they wanted a man who was smarter than them. In fact, I have never heard a woman say that she wanted a man who was as smart as her, they have always wanted smarter.

lancelot

04-20-2009, 09:36 AM

Wait, there are people who don't want a mental equal? :huh:

NOTE: Split from this thread To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I once read a woman would prefer a man to be equal or above her IQ; but a man would not feel the same way. Most of my friends are intelligent, and enjoy discussion. My ex wife was very intelligent but had little to say.

Julia

04-20-2009, 09:42 AM

For an intimate relationship I generally prefer a mental equal, although typically with a different areas of expertise. This provides a greater degree of mental challenge with less need for competition. I get a chance to learn something I likely would not have otherwise, and my success and/or failure do not impact the other as directly.

I would tend to avoid an overly emotional partner especially if it created many "walking on eggshells" kinds of scenarios. Being reasonable, which implies balance in terms of emotion, is quite important. It is rather needed for problem solving and that is pretty much what life is.

eternaltriangle

04-20-2009, 10:27 AM

In practice, does it make sense to think of attraction in terms of specific qualities? I suspect that in practice there are a lot of people out there whose intelligence could very well make them more or less attractive. One of the big problems with online dating sites, for instance, is that you search for people based on specific details, not a sort of holistic sense of what a person is like.

For instance, somebody might be attracted both to very tall and very large men or women because they are submissive and like the feeling of smallness. However, a tall and overweight person could seem both less tall and less physically large than otherwise - the sum is less than its parts. I think there are usually underlying themes to our attraction - bigger than specific facts - and we need to deduce what those themes are. In the above example simply looking for large or tall women/men is not getting at the underlying theme (seeking a dominant partner).

I sense a few different motivations to seeking an intelligent partner. I can see a lot of instances where this poses problems.

1. "I want a good conversationalist"
I am also not sure whether big "I" intelligence is the best determinant of conversational ability. Indeed, this forum has a lot of people who are very smart, but who have difficulties communicating with others. One could imagine as well that one's intelligence might be directed at many different things. A highly intelligent person might devote almost all of their time to understanding say, quantum physics, while an above average person becomes more of a Renaissance man/woman. The latter is a far more versatile conversation partner, and can give you a really witty deconstruction of the rise of pop culture trends or a solid analysis of some film. I have had many conversations with very smart people turn towards "what is the best programming language" (in which all I can do is assert that Turbo Pascal should make a comeback).

2. "I wouldn't want our kids to be stupid/have learning disabilities"
Again, while intelligence is genetic, there is also a large "nurture" factor. My family (extended and immediate), for instance, tends to have widely varying degrees of job success (I think being naturally smart makes a lot of us lazy). My cousin is a postal worker, while his sister has a phd, and was the top student in the province back in high school. It would be fair to say, nonetheless, that they have pretty similar genes.

3. Dominance/position in the relationship
This one also applies for people who don't want an intellectual superior, but I think it is pretty clear that the dominant role in a relationship is rarely occupied by the smartest. Confidence, physical strength, and extroversion are probably much more important factors in control (depending upon the situation). My youngest brother is not the sharpest tool in the shed (I think he has intelligence but has not nurtured it), but he is stubborn, assertive and controlling nonetheless. The thing is that he doesn't value intelligence as the be-all and end-all, so he has no problem being confident without evidence.

4. Intelligence by association
Nobody said this, but it is pretty obvious that this is a latent factor for a lot of folks (particularly the ones lamenting how this limits them). Particularly those that lament the vagaries of the distribution of intelligence (actually this is going to be a big problem for Gen Y, since ~88% of Gen Y'ers consider themselves to be above average intelligence). If this is a motivating factor, then seeking intelligent people does make sense. However, not all smart people will work. One of the world's smartest men works as a bouncer. Some of the dumbest (apart from some obscure facet of human knowledge) people I have talked to have PhD's.

Aristotle (I think it was him) once asked Alexander the Great what his plans were. Al responded that he wanted to take over the world, essentially. Aristotle asked what Alexander would do after he succeeded. Alexander was thrown off by the question, paused a while and then said he would probably rest. Aristotle then responded that Alexander the Great should probably just rest - no need to take over the world.

If you want a good conversationalist, get a good conversationalist. If you want smart kids, you are going to need a DNA test (though it is worth considering how good a parent they would be as well). If you want a dominant/submissive/equal partner, find somebody who is willing to fill that role. If you want intelligence by association, pick somebody with a lot of letters after their name and give a middle finger to that philosophical garbage man.

Storm

04-22-2009, 07:42 PM

If you want a good conversationalist, get a good conversationalist. If you want smart kids, you are going to need a DNA test (though it is worth considering how good a parent they would be as well). If you want a dominant/submissive/equal partner, find somebody who is willing to fill that role. If you want intelligence by association, pick somebody with a lot of letters after their name and give a middle finger to that philosophical garbage man.

(Storm's note: Didn't quote the whole post because it was long)

I don't really understand what you're saying here. You start off by saying you can't look at any one trait and instead must take a holistic approach (I can agree), but then at the end of your post (seen above) you name off some individual traits. You seem to be saying that when someone says they want a mental equal (again, subjectively defined in the thread), that's not what they really want, but instead what some other traits. I don't see how that relates to the holistic approach.

ElstonGunn

04-23-2009, 09:25 AM

I don't really understand what you're saying here. You start off by saying you can't look at any one trait and instead must take a holistic approach (I can agree), but then at the end of your post (seen above) you name off some individual traits. You seem to be saying that when someone says they want a mental equal (again, subjectively defined in the thread), that's not what they really want, but instead what some other traits. I don't see how that relates to the holistic approach.

I took it to mean that the term "mental equal" is bullshit because it doesn't mean anything. At best, it sounds like a way to judge someone based on a cursory overview of how smart they seem to you, but without making yourself sound judgmental or dismissive.

Most people aren't attracted to others because of one or two traits. Intelligence alone could be seen as dozens of traits and abilities, if you want to look at it that way. Trying to boil it down to a two-word phrase that you use to determine a relationship factor probably isn't a very good idea. You should figure out what it actually is that you want beforehand-- what you actually mean when you say "mental equal." It could be the things ET suggested, like a good conversationalist or the prestige and respect instilled by education and titles, or whatever it is that appeals to you. Those are individual traits.

The alternative is to look at someone on his or her own terms (rather than measuring that person against a pre-determined rubric), and go from there. I might have thought that I liked blondes, but then met a brunette I really liked. I might say that I like short women, but then find a tall woman I like. Those kinds of things (but applied to personality traits).

At least that was my interpretation of the holistic/individual trait thing. I also kind of commandeered it and expanded it with my own opinions, of course. (Sorry if it seemed like I put words in your mouth, Triangle.)

OCLorelei

04-23-2009, 12:36 PM

Absolutely! When I was younger I thought not, but over time through relationships I have realized that there is an area that is no longer non-negotiable. I want someone who challenges me.

Sly

04-23-2009, 04:23 PM

Storm

04-23-2009, 05:06 PM

I took it to mean that the term "mental equal" is bullshit because it doesn't mean anything. At best, it sounds like a way to judge someone based on a cursory overview of how smart they seem to you, but without making yourself sound judgmental or dismissive.

Most people aren't attracted to others because of one or two traits. Intelligence alone could be seen as dozens of traits and abilities, if you want to look at it that way. Trying to boil it down to a two-word phrase that you use to determine a relationship factor probably isn't a very good idea. You should figure out what it actually is that you want beforehand-- what you actually mean when you say "mental equal." It could be the things ET suggested, like a good conversationalist or the prestige and respect instilled by education and titles, or whatever it is that appeals to you. Those are individual traits.

The alternative is to look at someone on his or her own terms (rather than measuring that person against a pre-determined rubric), and go from there. I might have thought that I liked blondes, but then met a brunette I really liked. I might say that I like short women, but then find a tall woman I like. Those kinds of things (but applied to personality traits).

At least that was my interpretation of the holistic/individual trait thing. I also kind of commandeered it and expanded it with my own opinions, of course. (Sorry if it seemed like I put words in your mouth, Triangle.)

Well, the term "mental equal" has been subjectively defined, again, to mean someone you can really talk to. "Good conversationalist" doesn't really cover it.

Anyway, the term is just a short hand term for a trait you want in a potential partner.Obviously, we're looking at a person on their own terms. But it's ridiculous to think there aren't some things that you find attractive and look for in a potential partner. I don't see how "good conversationalist" or "prestige" is any less vague than "mental equal."

Anyway, this whole thread was started because of an offhand comment I made in response to another post. "Mental equal" was never meant to be some end all be all trait that absolutely determines attractiveness.

darynthe

04-23-2009, 05:21 PM

Right we need to get to the point when we take each other's DNA and test it, like in Gattaca. That worked alright.:p

But seriously people, I have gone out recently with two very intelligent men. The level of their pedantry and conceit was such that it was not a pretty sight. I would add that if you want someone very intelligent, also the person should be self-conscious and non-judgemental. In fact, my own concept of intelligence includes that. What about you guys? Nope?

Rudy

04-23-2009, 05:22 PM

But seriously people, I have gone out recently with two very intelligent men. The level of their pedantery was such that it was not a pretty sight. I would add that if you want someone very intelligent, also the person should be self-conscious and non-judgemental. In fact, my own concept of intelligence includes that. What about you guys? Nope?

Absolutely. Intelligence, for me, is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition.

darynthe

04-23-2009, 05:23 PM

Absolutely. Intelligence, for me, is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition.

Why did you answer before I corrected my typos! Bad Rudy!

JustMel

04-23-2009, 05:23 PM

I would like a woman who virtually my mental equal. Maybe one notch below me! LOL .. If the woman was smarter than me (which is obviously subjective either way), it would scare the crap out of me. But it might turn me on. I'm still trying to figure that one out...

What if your areas of intelligence were completely opposite of one another? Suppose you're a mathematical genius but her area of expertise is biology?

Muumeh

04-23-2009, 06:24 PM

Hmm hmm... For me mental equality would mean similar way of thinking, not necessarily intelligence atleast in it's traditional meaning. Being in the same wavelength is more important for me.

Sly

04-23-2009, 06:48 PM

What if your areas of intelligence were completely opposite of one another? Suppose you're a mathematical genius but her area of expertise is biology?

That wouldn't intimidate me in the least. I'm only intimidated by people that know more about something I'm into. And like I said, that could be a turn on or even a challenge for me to reach their level. If they were into something totally different than me I just don't think we would mesh together very well in the first place. Common interests seems like a must.

Sly added to this post, 7 minutes and 40 seconds later...

Right we need to get to the point when we take each other's DNA and test it, like in Gattaca. That worked alright.:p

But seriously people, I have gone out recently with two very intelligent men. The level of their pedantry and conceit was such that it was not a pretty sight. I would add that if you want someone very intelligent, also the person should be self-conscious and non-judgemental. In fact, my own concept of intelligence includes that. What about you guys? Nope?

First off, Gattaca was a sweet movie! Secondly, for me pedantry and conceit equate to non- intelligence. And I'm not just saying this, I genuinely believe that but I guess we all gauge intelligence differently.

JustMel

04-23-2009, 09:03 PM

Sly;467346]That wouldn't intimidate me in the least. I'm only intimidated by people that know more about something I'm into. And like I said, that could be a turn on or even a challenge for me to reach their level. If they were into something totally different than me I just don't think we would mesh together very well in the first place. Common interests seems like a must.

I am consistently amazed by this thought process. I suppose it depends on your individual needs/wants but for me when I dated someone who was into the same things I am we didn't mesh well at all. My husband and I are total opposites--on the surface. He hates to read. Hates research. Hates being alone. I love those things. He used to party a lot even in his late 20's and early 30's. I haven't partied a whole lot since I was in my early 20's and not heavily since my early teens--my going away party when I left Denver to move back here didn't count. He is the life of the party/gathering and I hate the party/gathering itself.

We generally don't like the same movies but do go to the ones that aren't our favorites together anyway since we compromise on most of them. We don't like the same people. I hate everyone equally. He doesn't meet strangers, simply people he hasn't talked to yet. He likes bland foods and I like spice.

These seem like small differences but they're not--it's these small things that add up and kill relationships.

We have the same value systems when it comes to what we will and will not tolerate in a partner. We have the ability to compromise and use it. Because we are so different we tend to compromise more than most I think. Certainly more than I did in any of my past relationships.

Small things have changed as we've compromised with one another we have found that things we didn't like before are tolerable or even in some cases likeable now.

gavi

07-06-2009, 07:23 AM

I just want someone who can accept me. I met a guy who basically is four or so standard deviations away from me and I really like him (I made a thread on this). He has done a lot with the potential he got. He is a better person than others who consider themselves upper crust intelligent and who are in fact mostly sarcastic and mean. I think I wouldn't have the slightest problem being in a permanent relationship with him, except for the big factor that I don't want my children to have a learning disability. So that is the deal breaker for me.

I loved this post. It adds a reference to my belief that women have one set of criteria for the long term relationship but are ATTRACTED by a different type, the lover with good genes, to make kids (read sex).

So really, I think that men and women have different criteria and that women have two criteria.

darynthe

07-06-2009, 08:23 AM

I loved this post. It adds a reference to my belief that women have one set of criteria for the long term relationship but are ATTRACTED by a different type, the lover with good genes, to make kids (read sex).

So really, I think that men and women have different criteria and that women have two criteria.

Geez, I swear I am the last person from whom you could generalized anything to all women. I have been called eccentric.

I am too thinking in this. In the last years I do analyze the DNA history of prospective matches and weight pros and cons. I am sure nobody else does this.

Josephine1012

07-06-2009, 08:30 AM

Geez, I swear I am the last person from whom you could generalized anything to all women. I have been called eccentric.

I am too thinking in this. In the last years I do analyze the DNA history of prospective matches and weight pros and cons. I am sure nobody else does this.

Hmmm, I kind of do, too. Love is blind and all, but I would be really careful about getting together with someone who had a family history of mental illness, or someone who had a low IQ very prevalent in their family even if my SO was smart. I do tend to be emotional about my decsion so this may not stop me, but it would be a huge minus and I would definitely consider it very carefully.

eri

07-06-2009, 10:12 AM

For those who assume women want someone smarter than them, at least be careful how you treat women. I've had friends complain to me about their boyfriends who gave them the impression at least that they (the boyfriends) assumed the girlfriends were not as smart. Some women really hate this. Especially if it's a case of different kinds of intelligence, ie math/science vs English intelligence. I think it can be dangerous sometimes when we go too far with measures of intelligence.

I'm not so concerned with mental equality (whatever that is) as with such things as whether I can talk to this person and be comfortable with him, and can I trust him.

Landrick

07-06-2009, 04:35 PM

Well, I absolutely need someone with whom I can talk with that understands me. I've never wanted a puppy for a girlfriend or more importantly a wife. If she cannot think for herself ... well what is she good for other than sex.

BTW, I'm not a pig ... I have three beautiful daughters (ESFP, INFP & INTP).

DanteFalling

07-06-2009, 04:38 PM

A mental equal would limit my pool of potential partners to a small number.

I don't need a soul mate, just someone that's good enough that meets my minimum criteria.

That's sad. :(

DanteFalling added to this post, 2 minutes and 52 seconds later...

Well, I absolutely need someone with whom I can talk with that understands me. I've never wanted a puppy for a girlfriend or more importantly a wife. If she cannot think for herself ... well what is she good for other than sex.

IMHO, she's not even good for sex.
Sexuality does involve many different aspects of intelligence.

Also, I find people incapable of thinking for themselves, are generally people for whom it hasn't been profitable nor safe to do so. That makes me think I'm contributing to an environment in which they aren't safe and aren't rewarded for intelligent thought. I wouldn't want to f*ck someone in that situation.

DanteFalling added to this post, 10 minutes and 1 seconds later...

I loved this post. It adds a reference to my belief that women have one set of criteria for the long term relationship but are ATTRACTED by a different type, the lover with good genes, to make kids (read sex).

So really, I think that men and women have different criteria and that women have two criteria.

I think everyone (including males) is like this. We have physical attractions when young but tend to blend those and other traits together in our minds as we age in order to find a mate capable of entertaining us AND ensuring the continued existence of the children we got by f*cking.

We all like the idea of spreading our genes, but as intelligent creatures we also weigh the pros and cons of overpopulation, child death, diseases, etc. When young, both sexes can seem to gain quite a bit by sex with many partners, but ultimately the care of a child, as well as long-term companionship can play into our sexual actions.

In my mind, the seeming difference between women liking two types and men only like the f*ckable kind, stems from women being taught a more universal/harmonizing approach when it comes to gender, whereas males are encouraged to have a separation between themselves and women.

redrower

07-06-2009, 05:08 PM

Finding a mental equal that you are physically attracted to is very difficult for most people. I think that many relationships, including seemingly successful ones, are a result of one partner "settling" for the other. This settling is done much more to accommodate mental criteria, rather than physical.

curiousgeorge01

07-06-2009, 05:49 PM

I don't think I necessarily need an intellectual equal, just someone who can follow my conversation and complement me. I've dated women who were much smarter than me IQ wise as well as those not so much and we've gotten along. I think the most important thing for me is that we each recognize what we bring to the table and be appreciative of that.

curiousgeorge01 added to this post, 1 minutes and 44 seconds later...

Hmmm, I kind of do, too. Love is blind and all, but I would be really careful about getting together with someone who had a family history of mental illness, or someone who had a low IQ very prevalent in their family even if my SO was smart. I do tend to be emotional about my decsion so this may not stop me, but it would be a huge minus and I would definitely consider it very carefully.

Yea I actually have dated someone very intelligent and while she didn't have a mental disease, a lot of people in her family did but they were all very intelligent (PHds, lawyers, engineers, successful business persons). One thing I was afraid of long term wise our child being like that or me having to get involved with her family!

Brion

07-10-2009, 12:14 PM

I agree I recall the scene in the beginning of "Coming to America" when his arranged married bride is answering questions.. Eddie murphy Goes What do you like.. she answers.. with a bow.. whatever you like... it is the anthesis of what an independant women should be.

That's sad. :(

DanteFalling added to this post, 2 minutes and 52 seconds later...

IMHO, she's not even good for sex.
Sexuality does involve many different aspects of intelligence.

Also, I find people incapable of thinking for themselves, are generally people for whom it hasn't been profitable nor safe to do so. That makes me think I'm contributing to an environment in which they aren't safe and aren't rewarded for intelligent thought. I wouldn't want to f*ck someone in that situation.

DanteFalling added to this post, 10 minutes and 1 seconds later...

I think everyone (including males) is like this. We have physical attractions when young but tend to blend those and other traits together in our minds as we age in order to find a mate capable of entertaining us AND ensuring the continued existence of the children we got by f*cking.

We all like the idea of spreading our genes, but as intelligent creatures we also weigh the pros and cons of overpopulation, child death, diseases, etc. When young, both sexes can seem to gain quite a bit by sex with many partners, but ultimately the care of a child, as well as long-term companionship can play into our sexual actions.

In my mind, the seeming difference between women liking two types and men only like the f*ckable kind, stems from women being taught a more universal/harmonizing approach when it comes to gender, whereas males are encouraged to have a separation between themselves and women.

wittykitty

07-10-2009, 12:45 PM

I need someone intelligent and like-minded. However, I don't need an "intellectual." I expect a partner who is knowledgeable about the world, without being judgmental towards it. Dating an intellectual would hurt my brain. I need someone to get me out of it, seeing that I am there enough as is.

The Drifter

07-11-2009, 12:46 PM

All I need is an entertainer.

lostandfound

07-12-2009, 10:39 AM

Whew. Looks like I'm not the only person that can take something simple and make it complex! (No offense to anyone...)

I would be very happy with "equal". Emotionally open and insightful. Intelligent and curious. Honest and trustworthy. Finally...patient.

Measuring and comparing typically leads to sparring and competition. That gets old very quickly. See the thread about "getting the last word" for more details...

Baccara

07-12-2009, 11:31 AM

Without question. That's the bottom line; I need to be challenged, met on my own level. And as I get older, the more time I spend among people who are on completely different wavelengths, the more important intellectual compatibility becomes to me.

daughterofZion

07-12-2009, 06:14 PM

I think it is fine in friendships. I have friends for different reasons. For example, my six closest friends:
1) My mental equal, challenger, and confidant (F)
2) My emotional counterpart, who can bring out my well-hidden feelings (F)
3) My younger brother, whom I rely on for guy advice & mentor (M)
4) My counseling major friend, whom I can talk about psychology and emotions with (F)
5) My less-intellectual but hilarious friend, who keeps me accountable (F)
6) My country friend who allows me to exhibit my tomboy, competitive side yet treats me like a lady (M)

In a romantic relationship, however, I have found that I personally need spiritual, mental, and emotional compatability in order to "go anywhere" with the relationship. This is not the case for everyone; I am a very selective dater.

Sxq

07-15-2009, 10:38 PM

Yes, I do. Maybe not someone who is intelligent in the same way as me (as in being a nerd who's brilliant in math and science) but who is at least intelligent in some area or - not sure how to put this - has some curiosity or is willing to learn stuff.

Conservationist

07-15-2009, 11:06 PM

Mental equality is a high priority for me.

From my experience, the happiest couples are those who are matched in most ways. Not the same activities or any of that silly stuff, but roughly the same intelligence, health, moral character, class origin, ethnicity, values system, etc.

SuperBenjamin

07-17-2009, 12:44 AM

I have dated an ENFP girl and you will be surprised to find out that she is the top girl in my engineering department(UCLA).. She is very smart but dumb at the same time, always late for appointments, room is always messy(tolerable), very careless with house chores(I wasn't living with her btw), no depth in her conversation and she doesn't really have any goals in life. In the end it didn't work for me. So now to me IQ is not as important as the ability to have a proper conversation with me on an intellectual level.

jellygator

07-20-2009, 01:44 AM

I hope for "intellectually compatible" in a mate. Would be great to have similar interests, and that is a definite spark when meeting someone, though I've found it can often burn out and become competitive and filled with power struggles, too. This often (though not always) seems to correlate to the other's intelligence level.

On the other hand, some very intelligent people I've known who are distinctly different from me have been able to keep me intrigued because it challenges me to perceive things in new ways.

But someone who is too far up or down the scale is pretty much an automatic "no."

thoke

07-20-2009, 06:40 AM

Yes please! (to the thread title)

I only seem able to attract my intellectual inferiors. But I don't think I wear my brain on my sleeve; maybe that's the problem. I think people are slightly surprised when they found out I have half a brain.

overthought

07-20-2009, 11:49 AM

Intelligence to me is a deal breaker in a relationship.

Don't get me wrong, I don't need my significant other to be a genius. It is very important, however, that she and I can carry on a conversation on a topic that takes intelligence and focus to grasp. It is a regular occurrence for me to meet a woman and think she seems attractive until she opens her mouth and starts rambling about the latest gossip, J-lo's butt, etc. On the other hand, if she talks theories of psychology, marine behavior, predicting global climate trends, medicine or any other "nerdy" topic she will probably have me seeking her out to speak to again. After that though, I don't mind a bit of discussion of pop stars as long as it isn't vapid.

I have tried to analyze why I have that criteria a thousand times and my only thought is that it lets me know that she is capable of critical thought and suppressing emotion. In my profession, emergency medicine, things routinely go crazy so I have to have someone who won't freak out that I can be cold and emotionless about critical decision making.

borg87

07-24-2009, 12:30 AM

ronnijean

07-24-2009, 07:51 PM

Hi - I am new to these forums, and I only read the first and last page of this topic (sorry, got too excited to answer to read it all), but I'd like to comment still:

I'm in my late 20's and have been married for almost 4 years. When we first dated/married, we both worked in the entertainment business, and were interested in many of the same things. However, over the next couple years, I began drifting toward more academic interests (I now teach high school math), and we currently have very different passions.

In some ways, we would not seem to be equals, as I know he will never understand my excitement over numbers, or be fascinated by the Civil War (I am), or by any of my other nerdy hobbies. But he is rather intelligent in his own way, and sometimes catches me off guard with his savvy. He is very successful in his career, and has the ability to remember names and faces and companies and make connections in ways I would never be able to. He is extremely talented at putting stories together and knowing how to develop characters. We're sometimes a little awkward when we go out, as he is very sociable and wants to introduce me to people, but I have difficulty having normal conversations after initial introductions!

In other words, though we may not necessarily be considered intellectual equals, we are very compatible partners. We don't get EVERYTHING about each other, but we get each other enough to understand what parts to give and take in order to have a successful relationship. We are very happy.

So I don't think a person necessarily has to find an intellectual equal in order to have a good relationship.

timetraveler

08-04-2009, 11:57 AM

Wait, there are people who don't want a mental equal? :huh:

NOTE: Split from this thread To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To me it doesn't matter if they are a mental equal. I look at the whole person, not just one factor. Intelligence is about as important as beauty or wealth. It's not easy for me to determine who I will ultimately be with but I know for sure I wont be with anyone who is both stupid and poor. That is the one combination I will never accept.

I use a checklist system, and if they don't meet whats on the checklist they aren't qualified.
Nobody will meet EVERYTHING on the checklist, but if they meet enough of it then they get a passing mark and I'd date them at least. Some people will be mentally equal, some wont.

It's never a good idea to choose a partner based on one trait anymore than its a good idea to hire somebody based on one skill on their resume.

Golradaer

08-04-2009, 06:33 PM

What exactly is a mental equal, and how would I know if I have found one? I know a few people whose intelligence I respect a good deal, so I would say that for a relationship to succeed, I would need to be able to respect the other person -- I'm not sure if I'd need to regard her as an equal.

Kris

08-05-2009, 08:42 PM

As long as I'm able to engage in meaningful and enjoyable conversation with them I have no desire to attempt to measure their mental capacity and deem whether they are at my level or not. There are many ways to measure intelligence and I don't really pay heed to any of them when considering a woman. I guess there are some people that want to talk about particle physics all day with their partners but I place a whole lot more emphasis on other traits and being able to form a strong connection. If there are some highly technical or esoteric topics I can't discuss with my partner that's fine, as I will have friends & colleagues to converse with.

postem

08-06-2009, 08:08 AM

tinapay

08-16-2009, 03:48 PM

No! I don't want another me!

I want a complement, not an equal.

TigerL

08-22-2009, 06:06 PM

Haven't read all the comments but I would agree with finding someone at least who can converse with me on a wide number of topics and is curious about the world. One of my mentors - an older well-educated worldly man who is now in his third marriage happily for more than a decade - advised me, above all, to not marry below my intellectual level. (And yes, his wife is hot and very smart to boot!)

To enter my high school program, you had to have an IQ of at least 130 so I know mine is at least that but I don't really care to find out the exact number as I believe IQ tests only test certain types of intelligence anyway.

Dating-wise, I find that men are intimidated by intelligence - this is from friends who tell me that so-and-so was attracted to me but was afraid to ask me out because of my education. The men I have dated are generally confident I/E types who have been my intellectual equals if not superiors. I love it when they know more than me about a specific topic and are willing to teach me about it. I also agree that if someone can use their E or F sides well, that is also an advantage to balance out my I/T sides.

Intelligence is a non-negotiable trait for me. The other trait that totally melts me is genuine kindness. I can appreciate looks, wealth, status, etc. but I am not one to be attracted quickly. (I am actually suspicious of people who are quickly attracted to me without knowing me well.) I have fallen for men who are not typically handsome because over time, I found they were intelligent and kind.

linx

08-22-2009, 06:40 PM

Who doesn't enjoy to be challenged intellectually. The healthiest relationships are based on honesty. Which is often a result from being with an intellectual equal.

ADullEssence

08-22-2009, 06:54 PM

Do I need a mental equal in my partner? No.

As much as I respect and am attracted to intelligence in women, I could never decide not to be with someone because they weren't. So long as they're not ignorant to new ideas and change, the depth of their opinions, thoughts and beliefs doesn't worry me.

But who am I kidding, I love to be intellectually challenged. If a girl can do this on top of me liking her, I'm most likely going to be infatuated with her a hell of a lot more.

stroozette

08-22-2009, 08:17 PM

I have always preferred a man who is as or more intelligent as I am. My husband has an IQ of at least 20 points over me. (I clock in at about 137.) When I started reading this thread, I asked him if it bothered him that I was not as smart as he is, and he shrugged his shoulders and said that most of the world is not as smart as he is, and he's learned to deal with it. When he saw the shock flit across my face he also said that there are places in our relationship together where I am more developed than he is, and it works very well.

He has the higher IQ, but I have more education (M.A. vs his college drop-out). I drifted in my 20s while he was running three successful restaurants at once. He is a social guy with strong, life-long friendships while I crave solitude and find making true friends to be extremely difficult. My bookcases of books spook him while his collection of cars makes me crazy. I suspect I have ADD and trip from project to project while he is the kind of guy who can pull that plow until the whole farm is done, please excuse the metaphor. He has no trouble actively feuding with the entire street/community/world while I avoid confrontation whenever possible. He's got no problem getting into trouble, while I..... do. I am a natural charmer onstage while he is a natural bull-in-china shop in public. He polarizes people everywhere he goes, while I am very talented in making people feel good about me, feel good about themselves, or at worst dismiss me as innocuous.

He is better than me at EVERY-thing. Everything. If he was in the least interested in the things I do that he doesn't he'd be better at them, too. The one thing I excel at is I can forgive/understand better than he can forgive/understand. And that's precisely what he needs. He is a huge, beating, naked sweetest heart with an angry intelligence and prickly exterior, and I let him be himself. As he lets me.

After 16+ years together we function together very well. I tend to have my conversations elsewhere, as much of what we are interested in as individuals don't overlap. But we fit together, and work together. He's a deeply loving man, who thinks that he's got the better end of the deal. As do I.

MaleVolentworld

08-23-2009, 11:55 AM

Not necessarily equal, but close enough, which is just an arbitrary approximation.

But if there was a big gap then it wouldn't work.

HalfPint

08-23-2009, 06:30 PM

I wouldn't say equal, at least not in the type of intelligence sense; My intelligence manifests itself in a way I would not necessarily find attractive in a man. In my experience, most men within a standard deviation of me on the old bell curve are advanced in math or science, while I'm complete rubbish at anything requiring hard and fast facts of any sort.

But Harvard's findings that compatibility is best determined by being within one SD of each other rings true with me. As a highly social ENTP, the intelligence of my many friends and acquaintances is not nearly as important as the intelligence of my closest friends and significant other. Without his propensity for research, learning, and intelligence discourse, even on things of which I have absolutely no knowledge, I would not find my partner nearly as complex, challenging or desirable. So when it comes to intelligence, I'm looking for separate but equal.