http://www.dailylife.com.au/life-and-love/love-sex-and-relationships/are-men-only-attracted-to-smart-women-in-theory-20151025-gki1j5.htmlPeople have always asked me 'You're smart, you can beat virtually anyone in a fight. How the hell can you simply not find a boyfriend?'
Well, it's mostly the fact that people simply do not like women that can let you set your own trap and then let you execute yourself on the said trap.
Why? It's mostly a perception that a woman who can strike you down without you seeing them coming is a sneaky conniving bitch. You know, the type who will sneak around your back and backstab you, turning your friends against you.
Actually, I think ANY woman who has the ability to strike people down in any sense is considered a massive threat to society as a whole. Off the top of my head, Macbeth comes to mind, and although I couldn't quote her name off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure if you've read the play, you'd know who I'm talking about. There's stuff like various witches and the like too, folklore and the like.
So there's a lot of natural distrust (at least in the modern day) of women who seem too clever by half. I don't necessarily mean smart as in the traditional 'Oh, I can score better than you in a test'.
I'm talking stuff like the ability to be perceptive (Or basically, know where the wind is blowing well before the gust arrives), the ability to pay attention, or the ability to recall things (I'm famously poor at recollection, so don't ask me to remember a damn thing). There's probably others, like the ability to rapidly assess situations and determine solutions and the like too.
Basically, society does not like women who seem to be able to get an intangible advantage over other people. Men who are successful are called career politicans, if nothing else.
There's also other bits of relationship advice that sort of disapprove of anyone who has these intangible advantages to not show them at all. Some of it is basic relationship advice - a relationship is a partnership of equals, so if you REALLY think about it...
So how does my average date manifest anyway?
Something along these lines: People offer, and if I'm interested, I'd let them suggest somewhere to meet up. Some people are disappointed, since apparently the first date is a request for sex, more or less, because I decline those.
Most people tend to arrive fashionably late.
Me? I tend to scout out the place, determine where it is, what sort of clientele frequent the place, and try to understand the person that asked, from what I know about them, and what I know from experience about people like them.
What ends up happening at most first dates (if you call them that) is that the person tries their hardest to impress me, usually by thinking they can catch me off guard. Sometimes it's some sort of trick (Yes, I actually was asked out by someone who thought they could impress me with a card trick once), other times it's an attempt to surprise me either with their perceived depth in some field, or even some sort of physical surprise otherwise (outlandish gifts or something).
Problem is that I've lived a very long time operating on the principle that being caught out in surprise can get you killed. To be fair, all my brushes with death (or with someone ELSE'S death) all coincided with me being caught flatfooted, and as some of you may be aware, I don't stay surprised for very long at all.
What invariably happens is that I'll either replicate their trick within twenty minutes, or I'd turn the tables on them and shoot their knowledge of their field (which they were hoping to impress me with) with questions that someone who doesn't know anything about their field (no matter what that field is) shouldn't be asking, or I figure out exactly where the gift they got me came from, as well as a lot of other things I can derive from their gift using other information available to me (stuff like if they're living with their parents, what sort of income they earn, what they do for a living, previous girlfriends and the like)
A LOT of people who do dates bank on that working - basically you come in with your best card to impress.
Unfortunately, I'm almost impossible to impress by that sort of standard, because I've done things like brush shoulders and have arguments with celebrities (Journalism is like that) and I find that all the celebs I've dealt with would rather be treated as a human being, rather than you being struck with awe, kissing the ground they walk on.
Of course, you could also guess at what DOES impress me. It's really not too hard, IF you make the time to know me. If you need some suggestions, perhaps 'Try to consider your next move before it blows up in your face and not make the move, not after you do it, and hell rains on you?' for one.
So their best card fizzles, and generally my date gets distrustful of me, because I seem to know what they're going to do before they do it.
If you're young and female, my advice if you want to live something resembling a normal life with a social life etc would be this - You know those dumb jokes about stupid blondes? You're statistically better off being a 'stupid blonde' because at least THEN you'll have a decent social life, and judging from one of my friends, an awesome sex life.
... Yes, I should be all about feminism and all that. It doesn't mean that I can't point out the obvious, and despite what some segments of society will claim, having a healthy sex life DOES have some advantages, and it's not about you being a slut. (excuse me)
Then again, I know all kinds, including someone who frankly could write a revised edition of the Kama sutra. Besides, apparently if a male hits up 20 women, he's considered a stud, but if a woman hits up more than 1 male, she's considered a shameful slut. Is it just me, or is there a massive 'wait a second, didn't anyone do the math?' moment?
So there's another word of wisdom, if you can call it that - intelligence (of any kind) is not necessarily considered an asset, not if you want any sort of social life.