Hey, babe, easy on the Plutarch
Neil Kramer reads Cosmopolitan so you don’t have to, and finds stuff like this:
Guys are looking to avoid that overeager girl who goes out of her way to show everyone exactly how intelligent she is. If you find yourself using the names Hemingway, Dostoevsky, or Nietzsche more than once per conversation, you may be guilty of academic name-dropping, which reeks of insecurity.
The hottest woman I ever met had a Ph.D. in medieval French literature or some such thing. And you know what? Not once did it ever occur to me that she might be able to correct my misapprehensions (if any) about Molière’s Tartuffe, nor would it have bothered me greatly if she had.
I suspect Neilochka is dipping into the Double Secret Irony stash for this:
There’s a reason the librarian always TAKES OFF the glasses. We like the woman to be stupider than us. Of course, a woman should read, but preferably material like Cosmopolitan, chick-lit, or maybe a few mommyblogger blogs. Nothing too heady. Men are known to be better in math and science, so please don’t try [to] show off any of your math skills. It is a real turn-off. The only mathematical term you should be using in conversation with a man you are dating is “big,” as in “My Gawd, you are so big!”
Either that, or he’s letting the wang do the talking again.
Now if you’ll excuse me, Michel Houellebecq awaits.
Francis W. Porretto »
4 November 2006 · 5:12 am
What? You say you might have misapprehensions about Tartuffe? Oh, the shame!
Seriously, though, there are certain tensions that arise in couples that have a significant difference in intellect or education. They tend to be at their worst when she is much smarter or better educated than he is. Those tensions can spoil what might otherwise have been a fine and fulfilling romance. I could tell you stories…but November is Be-Kind-To-Your-Exes Month, and I don’t need the extra psychic odium.
Eternity Road »
4 November 2006 · 6:50 am
Off-Road Punditry: Romance And The Smartness Gap
It’s not that long ago that every newspaper in every city or town in this blessed land was trumpeting the struggles of unmarried Americans at finding someone suitable to love. It was the heyday of the singles’ ad, the dating service, and the …
Andrea Harris »
4 November 2006 · 8:14 am
It’s not that the woman is smarter than the man, it’s that both sexes tend to have problems relating that have nothing to do with intelligence. From my experience and observation (full disclosure: mostly observation), women who are intelligent have been told all their lives how wonderful they are, how much better than everyone, especially men, who will want to keep them down. (I am obviously talking about contemporary women.)
CGHill »
4 November 2006 · 9:19 am
Well, I did actually see Tartuffe on stage, albeit in translation, which means that if I missed something, I can theoretically blame the translator.
[We pause briefly while the world contemplates the incomprehensible: there was a performance of Molière in Oklahoma, fercrissake.]
These days I am inclined to believe that being au courant is inimical to our intelligence, that the need to keep up with the Zeitgeist has a deleterious effect on our sense of self and our grasp of the Big Picture.
Francis W. Porretto »
4 November 2006 · 9:46 am
You have a good point, Andrea, but still, major differences in intelligence or erudition are one of today’s larger stumbling blocks to romantic compatibility. I think that even if gender-war feminism could somehow be subtracted from the equation, it would still be difficult for two persons with a pronounced “smartness gap” to balance it.
CGHill »
4 November 2006 · 5:05 pm
Then there’s this:
“It’s depressing when every girl you talk to is dumb or obsessed with money or has no sense of humor or won’t shut up about herself or prattles on about some stupid TV show. It’s depressing when you find out that everyone is dull and stupid, but it’s even worse when you realize — so are you.”
(Found by Bill Peschel, just in time.)
Matt »
6 November 2006 · 3:18 am
If only the whole gender-war thing hadn’t gotten involved, the first quote would have been entirely on-point.
Even those of us who love genius girls (I’m happily engaged to marry one) are turned off by “academic name dropping” (not a term I’d use, but not _wrong_ either). It _is_ a sign of insecurity, and there’s a big gap between someone who’s smart and someone who’s always out to prove how smart they are. When we find the latter, we run.
Of course, I’ve seen the exact same behavior in men, and frankly I’ve seen it way more often. I doubt women find it any more attractive in men than men find it in women.
I’m not 100% on-board with Mr. Porretto’s thesis, but I suspect it’s probably true in a lot of cases.