Reader tsparks156 refutes the “men love smart women as much as or more than they love hot women” pretty lie by use of a simple observational technique,
Look at who are the most popular/highly rated women among men of all ages. Then check what percentage are hot and what percentage are successful in business and academia and compare. The results are predictably obvious. Rachel Riley is a popular academic woman because she is hot and the only interest men have in her brains is fucking them out of her.
No smart woman in the history of the world has given a man a boner by waving her grad school degree over his crotch or breathily whispering in his ear about the space-time continuum.
***
Sentient adds his two cents for runner-up COTW,
Ask any woman what she would rather have… a perfect SAT score or a perfect body? Do you think the millions of pages of Self, Glamour, Cosmo et al shed any light on the answer?
A poll of this nature would suffer from the problem that it would never be answered truthfully by women. Social expectation bias would be much too strong. Perhaps an airtight anonymous poll might get us closer to women’s real feelings about the matter, but in the end what counts is revealed preference, and for that we see women spending years of their lives in energetic pursuit of improving their bodies and appearances…. not their SAT acumen. Super heh.
To answer this post title’s question — women’s brains, what are they good for? — I believe female smarts are a vestigial trait resulting from women choosing smarter men as mates over the millennia, sort of similar to the idea of the clitoris as a vestigial organ of the dominant male penis.
I’m only half-kidding. Another reason for the existence of female smarts is that men with options, when choosing a long-term partner to raise their future kids, will choose less dumb women only after all the other more important mate criteria are met (specifically, youth and beauty and feminine disposition).
Men without options will take what they can get.
To put it another way, men have a lot more tolerance for underpowered IQ in romantic partners than they have for underpowered beauty.
The unspoken truth can be much different from the cultural lie.
LikeLike
“Hey check out the Stanford B.A. on that chick!”…said no man ever.
LikeLike
LBF, below here I’m talking about a Berzerkeley PhD chick with a very nice rack and a head filled with every lie that Evil Psychiatry has invented since they first lied to poor Pontius Pilate.
LikeLike
“Hey check out the Stanford B.A. on that chick!”
Exactly.
LikeLike
@ Captain Obvious
RE: Berkeley
While I was out this afternoon I spotted a young white man driving a Mini Cooper with a pizza sign stuck on top and a big “Berkeley” college sticker stuck on the rear window.
I chuckled.
LikeLike
Really hot and relatively smart is optimal. After you’ve banged her out a few times, nothing more nauseating than having to chill with a chick who doesn’t know Wyoming is a state.
But all things considered in the short term, you’re right, smarts don’t matter only tits, jaw line and slenderness come into play.
But long term nobody wants to chill with a total retard.
LikeLike
[…] Comment Of The Week: Women’s Brains, What Are They Good For? […]
LikeLike
A womans IQ supposedly will add to the kids’ IQ, but even the hogheat IQ woman is just a dumb cunt. Marilyn vos savant has given some terrible, irrational advice.
LikeLike
Such as?
LikeLike
The idea to prefer a hottie with PhD over a normal hottie is compelling – but will result in a life full of unnecessary hassle and pain… I know after a 10 year marriage with a PhD hottie… IQ makes up only a tiny part of a personality – I used the PhD as a surrogate for other life qualities, what a HUGE f…… mistake!!!
LikeLike
For reproduction purposes I would choose an intelligent 8.5 over a moronic 9. I would also choose a loyal-to-the-core 8.5 over a questionable 9 to mother my children.
You can always fuck hotter girls on the side. Don’t risk having sped kids with a whore.
LikeLike
Yeah we have enough dummies
LikeLike
Don’t knock the clit down, man. It’s the third nipple I like sucking on.
LikeLike
A man gets his intelligence from your mother. Many of the genes which code for intelligence are in the X chromosome. Usefulness aside, if you marry stupid, sons are likely to be dumb.
[CH: i’ve heard this assertion a lot, and it’s bogus. think about it. if men contributed nothing to their kids’ smarts, women wouldn’t have a preference for smart men over dumb men. this gene myth simply fails the smell test.]
LikeLike
Darwin thought female intelligence was some kind of vestigial trait, which he says is fortunate.
For otherwise the female would likely more resemble a pea hen than a man in IQ.
LikeLike
Think of the peachicks!
LikeLike
HIGHER IQ IS USEFUL IN MOTHERING CHILDREN. LOW IQ IS VERY HIGHLY CORRELATED WITH LOW IMPULSE CONTROL & POOR FUTURE TIME ORIENTATION.
WE ALL KNOW HOW THAT TURNS OUT.
LikeLike
You’re forgetting one key thing: attractive people are consistently smarter. Those “sexy” traits? Hips = rich baby nutrition and a sign of high omegas. Bust = baby feeding and youth. Good skin = healthy hormones, youth and smarts. Low WHR = smarts. Slight, hard muscles = smarts. Why are sexy women sexy? Because the things men find sexy are either an indicator of her value as a baby-vessel or an indicator of her intelligence as a human female.
Looks or brains? Statistically speaking, you’re more likely to find them together than to have to choose between them.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200903/beautiful-people-are-more-intelligent-i
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1347651/Attractive-people-higher-IQs-Beauty-brains-DO-together.html
LikeLike
It’s interesting innit. Somewhat annoyingly, people think that studies are the only way we can know something, so let’s all pay money to some professor that will then perform a study and write it up using as much technical and academic jargon as possible to find out what men prefer in women completely ignoring all the evidence around us as pointed out above. The most popular female academics are the best looking ones, the most popular women in general are the nicest looking ones. Presumably, there are more female beauty products sold to women than textbooks, or academic robes, or time on super computers. I am not sure why economic data is ignored.
LikeLike
Martin, Biological Calvinism says that you are required to ponder the possibility that kindness and intelligence and charity and grace all CORRELATE with facial beauty – that our innate sense of beauty evolved as a mechanism to help guide us towards the women with whom we ought to mate and have progeny.
LikeLike
I don’t disagree, attractive women are attractive for a reason. I would add that to me intelligence doesn’t seem very important yet people worldwide value it incredibly highly. It doesn’t seem to be the most important trait in partners for either men or women, and intelligent people are relatively less common than not. That doesn’t stop people from continuing the worthless academic career path. There is one group that seems to deny their own instinct and prefer phd’s, well two actually, the chinese and ykw. isn’t hillary clinton’s daughter a doctor of some sort? didn’t she marry a jewish man not that long ago in spite of being one of the least attractive women ever? it’s a manifestation of credentialism.
LikeLike
The reason women have intelligence is to manipulate men.
Their intelligence is a cunning one. (Sorry author Wright, you’re wrong about it being “wise”) It gives them some control over their reproductive success or failure (ie shit tests).
If it correlated with the success of children, or their ability to be maternal, IQs would be rising, they are not.
Neoteny is important here.
Raising children can be boring, and being less smart makes it easier to spend all day playing Candyland with the three year old.
If you have watched enough families, you will notice that when the children reach their teenage years there is often a huge schism between the mother and the teenagers. This can be lessened if there is a father in the picture depending on his nature.
It is mainly because a lot of women behave like teenagers through life regardless of age.
LikeLike
I met a chick who has a PhD from Berzerkeley and who is a professorette of GEOGRAPHY at a local university. I asked her: 1) What’s the capital of Gondwanaland? 2) What’s the difference between Budapest and Bucharest? And she had no idea as to the answers to either question. Nice rack, though. Very nice rack.
LikeLike
So I went to her department’s website, and it turns out that [SURPRISE!!!] nowadays “Geography” consists of e.g. the effect of the Patriarchy on Geography, the effect of Feminism on Geography, the effect of the climate on Geography, the effect of Ghey Lettuce Bacon and Tomato on Geography, etc etc etc. Or vice versa – the effect of Geography on the Patriarchy, etc. It’s as though Evil Psychiatry Inc has created an entire anti-factual anti-reality for their puppets to inhabit, wherein there are no actual facts, but instead only nonsense and gibberish and lots and lots and lots Cluster B emotions, to include heaping doses of hyper-narcissism and self-idolatry.
LikeLike
“It’s as though Evil Psychiatry Inc has created an entire anti-factual anti-reality for their puppets to inhabit…”
There’s no ‘as if’. That’s precisely what they’ve done, and with due deliberation. Because that’s what you must do when you declare war on nature.
LikeLike
Cultural Marxists have taken over geography? What?
LikeLike
lolzlzolzlz so THAT’s what those AP study books on “Human Geography” are about, I guess?
LikeLike
> “THAT’s what those AP study books on “Human Geography”” – LS, you laugh, but Evil Psychiatry Inc has managed to corrupt the rote memorization of nations and their capitals. And their puppets don’t even realize it – the puppets are living in a carefully constructed anti-reality un-world, just like frigging Jim Carrey in The Truman Show. I wonder if the Eskimo professors gather around the water cooler at the Synagogue and put some popcorn in the microwave before they sit down and trade thigh-slapping comedy stories of how they hoodwink their Shkotzim students into believing rank gibberish and nonsense?
LikeLike
I have my own theory for why ‘text criticism’ is so popular in academia and you won’t like it. Basically it is because of physics envy caused by the extreme fame and fortune Einstein received, after which, other academics looking for similar treatment began to try to replicate. To them relativity was ‘relativist’, abstract, and dealt with finding hidden truths no one could see. what better way to be the einstein of geography or literature than to first become a relativist and then second to try to identify ‘structures’ no one was aware of? in other words, academia is a place for bottom feeders seeking fame and fortune.
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture_of_Critique_series#The_Culture_of_Critique_.281998.29
LikeLike
Also, given that the speed of light is constant, it really should have been called “Absolutivity Theory”. Which is entirely analogous to the all-consuming passion of the “Absolutists” to destroy and annihilate us. [Just as Freud’s theory of Projection really should have been called Reflection – when you try to observe another person’s motivations, it’s almost impossible not to be blinded by a reflection of your own motivations – and the fact that Freud misnamed the theory was a huge, ah, Freudian slip on his part.]
LikeLike
while interesting, I don’t doubt that jews are self-interested as all minority groups seem to be maliciously so and jews do consider themselves a minority. however, many leftists are not jews and jews have suffered from leftist ideas for example under stalin’s communism. But marxism, text criticism, etc all became popular after einstein. before einstein there were not many prominent jewish academics and then suddenly they all came out of the woodwork. jews to me are minorities that happen to also be credentialists, perhaps from their rabbinic culture. hence the interest in academia and the drive to overturn modern understanding in favour of abstract theories us idiots could not see before they were discovered. in much the same way einstein overturned parts of newton’s classical universe, many academics wish to overturn classical economics or classical gender theory for the fame and fortune. and whilst relativism has little to do with relativity, the press back then could not distinguish between the two.
LikeLike
Jewish academic luminaries did not just suddenly come out of the woodwork. Once the eskimos got control of academia (and awards bodies such as the Nobel Committees) they looked after their own at the expense of more deserving goyim. This is blindingly and immediately obvious to anyone who’s worked at Grad school in America – as I have.
LikeLike
you are contradicting yourself when you say that “once [they] got control of academia” and they looked after their own. who was on control before them? the simple proof is to look up theoretical physicists on wikipedia where they are displayed by birth year. compare the names before and after einstein and you will see many more jewish names after einstein and perhaps none at all before. that relativity was considered so astonishing and abstract at the time of its discovery is mirrored in the abstraction and astonishment that many modern jewish academics seek in their work in unrelated fields. einstein’s fame and prestige were noted and afterward the credentialists piled in.
LikeLike
pardon, i need to be sure it is clear that you are saying jewish academics did not suddenly appear and at the same time you are saying they took over at some point.
LikeLike
Martin. My point is that in academia – as elsewhere – Jews gradually took over the commanding heights by way of ruthless ethnic favouritism. This position enabled them to declare ‘their own’ to be the geniuses of our time and the intellectual leaders in their field.
I’ve seen it at first hand. They’ll proposes and support their own for faculty positions, for editorships of top peer-reviewed journals, favour their own in said journals etc. This created – in a bizarre use of the term – a “virtuous” cycle whereby the geniuses used their status to anoint others as geniuses, all the time largely confining it within the Tribe.
Why were they able to do this? Mainly because the scope and depth of ethnic favouritism they deploy are literally beyond the ken of Whites who, by the time they realised what was happening (most probably still can’t see it) had become marginalised and disempowered.
LikeLike
This isn’t rocket surgery.
What happens is, in the beginning, a talented “good” Jew gets a professional nod/break from a gentile… we gentiles often reward talent and/or offer a “chance” to a deserving person, no matter what their creed or color.
Once in with the in-crowd, suddenly subsequent openings within the aegis of our “good” Jew are invariably filled with his own tribesmen, with perhaps an occasional shabbos goy to serve as lackey and/or plausible deniability.
Some years go by and suddenly entire departments have somehow magically become dominated by those most unlike the original gentile who gave that first “good” Jew a shot.
You’ll find homosexuals likewise practice this sort of networking.
The ironic part of it all is that these groups are the first to scream about discrimination, but practice a variety of it so virulent that most gentiles would be ashamed to even consider such “closed shop” tactics.
LikeLike
It’s a real shame the Mindweapons blog got shut down. He was great at discussing this kind of networking and how we can adapt/do it for our benefit.
LikeLike
Greg, irishsavant, that is precisely what I was suggesting. Before einstein, jews did not encourage their own to go in to academia, it wasn’t until einstein received huge notoriety that suddenly becoming a physicist/chemist/mathematician became a possibility for them and they relentlessly pushed toward this. i am not discounting that they favour their own, particularly in america where it seems they have a much larger population. but i am saying that the idea of being a phd was not always around for them.
LikeLike
i personally find it distasteful and contrary to what academia should be to value being a professor or having a doctorate so highly. look at feynman for example, a poor jew encouraged to be a scientist since a young age. huge numbers of them did this. there was a stasis in academia before, it was considered staunchly conservative. fwiw, jews were restricted in many universities and from many powerful positions in the west before. i don’t believe that for some reason, anglos are welcoming and jews arent. the laws were twisted and favoured minorities.
LikeLike
I think it started before Einstein… think Franz Boas and Sigmund Freud in their respective fields, where “hard” science isn’t so, well… hard.
Plenty of gentiles still in the chemical, mechanical, and physics fields… but of course, they have to be twice as good to get half the credit.
LikeLike
Are guys like Feynman, Sagan, et. al. really all that? Or are they household names because their press agents have press agents?
LikeLike
I don’t know, and I am not even sure that Freud’s work had an immediate impact. einstein and freud submitted things at practically the same time. but if you look over press clippings from when relativity was published you see that they believed some well understood tradition was turned over for some abstract, weird, ‘relativist’ theory. the word relativity really confused people i think. you see art suddenly start changing at the same time, throwing out tradition. so much leftist work patterns what the press said about einsteins work. that their work overthrows an established tradition we were too stupid to see for some new abstract, modernist, relativist, theory. not to mention, it appears to me that jewish people are very highly credentialist.
LikeLike
Greg, you ‘get it’. That’s exactly the way it works in academia. And undoubtedly most other areas as well.
LikeLike
“Are guys like Feynman, Sagan, et. al. really all that? Or are they household names because their press agents have press agents?”
That’s the gist of what I’m saying. Whoever has become a household name/genius (e.g. Sagan) has ipso facto the power to anoint others to that status. That was the ‘virtuous’ cycle/circle jerk that I was referring to.
Same thing in technology by the way. I used to scratch my head as to why certain nonentities were catapulted into stardom. Which contributed to my awakening to Evil Psychiatry.
LikeLike
CH – mod release please – there is some good stuff from YaReally and others from the Eye Contact post a couple weeks ago and the Devalidation post last month still stuck in mod
LikeLike
“CH – mod release please…”
Does that prayer really work?
LikeLike
@Putin – heh. Worth trying..
LikeLike
CH – I think this is my third prayer for what Culum has requested lol. Would be very much appreciated.
LikeLike
Back when director John Hughes was writing for National Lampoon, he published an “Engagement Guide” (Nov. ’79) that was both hilarious and full of red-pill wisdom. On the topic of “Her Mind”:
Phi Beta Kappas are swell, but they can’t cook and they don’t make the leap from quantum physics to the ironing board with much grace, All you should want from a girl is enough sense to marage the house, hold a decent job, arid not embarrass you at a dinner party by asking the British ambassador if her dress makes her look fat. Here is a simple intelligence test for prospective brides.
Question:
‘What is at the core of our current problems with Mexico?”
If she answers:
“I just love this song, turn it up! Oooo, I love the nightlife!”
She is a dumbass.
If she answers:
“You haven’t phrased the question very well. Are you referring to the natural-
gas pricing debacle or the general ill feeling toward the Yanqui?”
She is a smartass.
If she answers:
“We’re not very nice to them; let’s fuck, then I’ll make you dinner and vacuum out your car.”
Don’t wait for the wedding. Elope and buy her anything she wants.
LikeLike
Is there such a thing as a smart woman with big tits?
Ive never met one.
It seems like there is an inverse relationship between IQ and breast size?
amirite?
LikeLike
t*h*w*a*c*k, we’ve been throwing around the hypothesis that small t!ts and wide hips and manjaw are all counterintuitive artifacts of The Pill and the contamination of the groundwater with so much estrogen and progesterone, not to mention pseudo-estrogens in plastics and soy products, etc etc etc.
LikeLike
Breasts are where women store their confidence. I have long noticed that when women are asked about their boob job, the usual answer is “I have a lot more confidence now”. Who knew that confidence was made of silicone?
LikeLike
Does that also apply to the inverse relationship between IQ and blond hair?
LikeLike
Is there such a thing as a black woman with a small ass?
I’ve never seen one.
Definitely seems to be an inverse relationship between IQ and big asses.
LikeLike
Is there such a thing as a smart woman with big tits?
Ive never met one.
I’m sure you haven’t, down in da hood. Or even among the white fatties who look for your sort.
LikeLike
One day your face will meet the concrete with the help of my foot to your neck.
LikeLike
On the three-point scale of Negro rhetoric, is the “chimpout” gambit (even if limited to written form) a form of Muh Dik, or is it a separate rhetorical device?
LikeLike
My shiv must be getting good if I’m able to p!ss off both Strapon and t-h-w-a-c-k in a single weekend like that.
LikeLike
both you fags spit very weak game; you’re not clever, not witty, no creativity…good thing you are white.
LikeLike
And because you say it, t-h-w-a-c-k, that makes it so. :duckface
LikeLike
TRIGGER WARNING
Here’s a blubber blob who would emphatically contradict what is said in the article:
—> https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/
(Pic under green line)
LikeLike
Tbh, this is a big strawman. These people know that men don’t care about intelligence as a cue for arousal. They are talking about long term partnerships.
While the study is guaranteed to be garbage, smart men preferring pretty and bright women over absolute stunners with below average IQs is hardly unbelievable.
The counterarguments don’t hit the target, if you know what I mean.
LikeLike
[…] Source: Heartiste […]
LikeLike
In German we have the saying “Dumm fickt gut”, what means “Stupid fucks good”.
LikeLike
Related to the observation above that low intelligence in a woman causes problems with mate suitability re: reliability/fidelity, there has to be some rough parity in intelligence between a man and a woman to allow for verbal communication:
“An acquaintance of mine, an academic in the human sciences (not Charles
Murray) holds the opinion that across an IQ gap of more than one standard deviation (i.e. about 15 points), communication between two people becomes difficult, and that beyond two standard deviations it is effectively impossible…”
http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Culture/talkingtoplumber.html
Less of a problem for a natural, of course; a bigger concern for the sub-alpha/non-natural who has to be more ‘on his toes’ around women.
[CH: this fits with my observation that +/- 15 IQ points in a woman is about the limit a man can tolerate before the gap becomes an obstacle to long-term romance.]
LikeLike
Intelligence in women is desirable because intelligence isn’t (or mostly isn’t) sex-linked (unlike color-blindness for example), so smart mothers have smart sons, who in turn will be sexier to future females because of the additional intelligence. Also, it’s likely that intelligence is selected for in women because it takes a certain amount of intelligence to recognize intelligence in a mate. If an intelligent man has the potential to dominate his environment (socially or otherwise), it takes an intelligent woman to recognize that and decide to gamble on him to a greater degree than other (less intelligent) women.
LikeLike
Women who want to be thought of as smart never stop taking care of themselves. Smart women don’t need to prove shit and just look like a hobo. Look at your marketing and engineering dept.
LikeLike
So the smv occam’s razor wouls suggest the dumbest women are ones who had looks and let them go or worse, were slim and got fat.
LikeLike
If you’re wondering about Rachel Riley’s spectacular rise to media stardom wonder no more. Despite the Irish/Scottish name she’s actually Jewish.
LikeLike
That fact has most likely, as you say, propelled her on her way. However what first got her into the public eye is that she could do math well enough to replace Carol Vorderman while being hot enough to make a whole new generation of heterosexual men dream of fucking her. Just take a look on youtube at some the outfits she appeared in.
LikeLike
I agree. She’s gorgeous AND brainy. But you mean to tell me there aren’t dozens of others just as good looking and brainy in Britain? No, whenever there’s an otherwise inexplicable meteoric rise to stardom you’ll find a Tribal connection. Just check out the HebeBC. http://irishsavant.blogspot.ie/2015/04/the-hebebc-anyone.html
LikeLike
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you, as I said what you say may well be true. There is also the, right thing, right place, right time factor which could also be part of the explanation.
LikeLike
No amount of studies designed to re-engineer what “men” find attractive will change the fact that how a woman looks is what sparks attraction. The only option left to the ugluminati is to make normal male heterosexual desire a hate crime and that is exactly what is taking place in the west today. Hence all the talk of male privilege, and the evil hetero-patriachy.
LikeLike
“Ugluminati”, nice one.
LikeLike
LikeLike
Unfortunately nowadays, if you want kids, you have to have them homeschooled if you don’t want them turned into good little Cultural Marxists at a young age, and that means your wife needs brains.
LikeLike
yep
sure, when it comes to attraction, men aren’t thinking about a girl’s brain more than her looks. no kidding. but real life is about a lot more than that.
we aren’t just animals who are meant to live our lives based only our base instincts. for crying out loud. that’s exactly how our society got into this big mess in the first place.
it’s a no brainer to me. if you don’t want messed up kids, the person raising them needs to have a good head on her shoulders. no ifs ands or buts about that.
[CH: the nature of a normal distribution ensures that most women fit your criteria. this is on reason why men don’t put much emphasis on women’s smarts. beauty and youth are simply far more valuable.]
LikeLike
+1. In an age of culture wars, a stupid wife is a big liability.
LikeLike
Very good point.
LikeLike
Here’s a listicle of hot female Ph.Ds.
http://cltampa.com/dailyloaf/archives/2012/07/26/top-10-sexiest-female-scientists#.VWuZas-4TIU
Only two of them are really sexy, though. The black cheerleader and the blonde figure skater.
Still, proof that unicorns exist and occasionally prance amongst us.
LikeLike
Negro women earning PhD’s, take time from their demanding studies to cheerlead for the NFL.
The comedy writes itself.
Let us know when one of these boopsies cures cancer.
LikeLike
Especially the negresses.
LikeLike
at least she is not causing cancer like the white man
LikeLike
At least they don’t cause cancer like the white man
LikeLike
Last I saw areas like Detroit, Camden, et. al., you could say the entire city was cancer-stricken.
Sure, white men destroyed Hirosima, Nagasaki, Dresden, and Berlin… but they’re all going concerns today.
Better to drop negros on a city if you want to destory it forever.
LikeLike
You might wanna add your credibility to that short list of things the white man destroyed.
LOLZZLOLzlzlz….
LikeLike
Prolefeed for the era of
Ima Plebe, BSc.
LikeLike
A negress with a PhD in an actual science. Well I’ll be damned.Unicorns indeed.
LikeLike
Easier to trick a dumb ho. Easier to stimulate a smart lass.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on MGTOW 2.0.
LikeLike
“Women are good for only three things: cooking, cleaning and vagina.”
(Jon Lajoie)
LikeLike
Brains and human survival are more or less a given. So it has to figure in somewhere where men do not cancel out a woman’s preference to avoid idiots. Its just not something men think about. Women with high foreheads cause more boners. So the boner does all the selection for female intelligence, leaving any higher level process redundant and unnecessary.
LikeLike
good point. we are attracted to physical traits that suggest intelligence because that clearly benefits us and our future offspring.
follows the same line of thinking that suggests the most beautiful people also tend to be the smartest, most fertile, have the best personalities, etc. people try to simplify things too much and say all we care about is looks and that it’s just superficial or whatever. but there are reasons behind why we are attracted to the particular things what we are attracted to. every trait that attracts us is usually an indicator of something positive and beneficial in a mate. intelligence, fertility, health, etc.
LikeLike
Lingering in the subject….
As one may find in any survey of men:
“For females, when it comes to faces, men prefer higher forehead, fuller lips, an shorter jaw and a narrower chin.”
And yet we see female projections of their on their own preferences “how to hide a high forehead” hairstyle. ” 30 Best Hairstyles for Big Foreheads”.. and also strangely failing to notice that Hollywood starlets are notorious for having them.
In botany plants are most reliably identified by their reproductive parts. The reason is the rest of the plant is more likely to react to environmental differences , stresses and other such dynamic needs whereas the flowering part of a plant tends to linger from more stable sexual selection. That is why the Fabaceae family can be detected by its pea flower from a locust tree to a clover rather easily.
So men don’t need higher level brain functions to detect reliable reproductive needs. Follow the boner . It’s the woman’s problem to decide who is prevailing in the current environment. So like plant foliage, the female drive is more adaptable and flexible and so she “consciously” does what we do by instinct.
LikeLike
God what a bunch of pathetic man babies
LikeLike
Beauty fades, but stupidity is forever…
LikeLike
If women’s intelligence is purely a vestigial trait from choosing more intelligent me, why are there so many women who have a higher IQ than so many men?
LikeLike
For the same reason some men have bigger tits than so many women.
LikeLike