Slashdot Mirror
Smarter Teens Have Less Sex
Tech.Luver writes "Gene Expression reports,
"Tyler Cowen quotes from a new study testing the relationship between grades and delayed sexual activity.
Last December I passed a paper along to Razib showing that high-school age adolescents with higher IQs and extremely low IQs were less likely to have had first intercourse than those with average to below average intelligence. (i.e. for males with IQs under 70, 63.3% were still virgins, for those with IQs between 70-90 only 50.2% were virgin, 58.6% were virgins with IQs between 90-110, and 70.3% with IQs over 110 were virgins)
In fact, a more detailed study from 2000 is devoted strictly to this topic, and finds the same thing: Smart Teens Don't Have Sex (or Kiss Much Either). ""
in 3..2..1..
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
I am not really sure how to take that.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
Well, then I must have been ultrasmart... :(
Kids with higher IQs are more likely to have underwear wedged in their ass. I mean, come on people, haven't we seen this sterotype our whole lives? Who cares.
The smarter you are the more likely you are to be on /. and if you're on /. well... we all know what that does to your sex life.
This sig is false.
I've got a girlfriend in Brazil. She's a model and I can go down and have sex with her whenever I want.
Since slashdotters have typically IQ in the range of 160 to 220, the will remain virgins till age 72 or so by my extrapolation.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Idiocracy, here we come!
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
I know this is Slashdot, so the majority of users have not had sex. But if you think this article is implying that means you're smart.. you have just committed a common logical fallacy. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Isn't the definition of a "smart teen", one that DOES have sex? You gotta admit; the teens that have sex must be doing something smart.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Uh huh. And later in life, they're called "Yes sir, right away, sir!"
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
That explains the mouth-breathing 14 year olds pushing their babies in strollers and carrying another in their belly I see lumbering around downtown Winnipeg at lunch. They should coat welfare cheques with birth control hormones.
Trolling is a art,
The title says it all... *sigh* *deep sigh*
And here I thought it was because I get all nervous when girls are around. I talk about star wars too much. My skin, where not covered in acne, is so pale it's reflective. Huh.
--------========+++Dont Feed The Lab Techs+++========--------
I should be a super genius.
I was homeschooled and had no social life. High IQ coupled with almost no social interaction with those of the opposite sex... thank God almighty for internet pr0n.
The game.
Would be wether or not it's intentional that the IQ endowed don't mate.
Duh!
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I'm sure this news will come as a great surprise to the slashdot readership.
This would actuelly make a really cool Slashdot vote.
How old were you, the first time you had sex:
Below 15
15
16
17
18
19+
What is sex??
Maybe smarter kids generally just don't feel the need to lie about having sex. And extremely stupid ones don't think to lie about it. Just a thought.
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
I had opportunities to get my freak on back in the high school days. Had I been smoother or said the right thing (translation: been less of a nervous shit) or whatever I could've got in somebody's pants. However, I have no regrets whatsoever about not getting a girl pregnant and fucking up my life like many of my other classmates. In fact, thank $GOD that didn't happen, and if I could go back and do it all over again, I wouldn't change anything.
You gotta love how far-removed this quotation gets:
Cmdr Taco posts that:
Tech_Luver writes that:
Gene Expression reports that:
Tyler Cowen quotes from a:
Razib paper showing that:
A survey found that:
***
I'm worried that if I tell someone that I read about this on slashdot, the universe might implode.
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
you need to just, like, you know?
dont worry my ex wife was retarded. shes a pilot now.
In the Victorian era, the celebrities of the time were engineers and scientists - the people who shaped the world, rather than the vapid, talentless bimbos we celebrate today. We can only hope that at some point in the future, it will once again be cool to be smart.
Man, I wish I was born in the Victorian era. Sigh.
Peter
This ought to splash some cold water of reality on those of us who think that geek girls with a cute face and a hot bod are somehow "do-able" or "marry-able". Look, she probably sees you as just another exiled program bound for deletion - it's nothing personal.
I'm glad they posted this one in the humor department. I'd actually like to see a study that measures the mean time to divorce based on intelligence.
My personal suspicion is that, above a certain intelligence threshold, the world in general has a lot to offer people before the hormones kick in. We spend a lot of time and effort seeking out and examining all of the cool stuff and build up momentum that makes a mess of us when the hormones kick in. Below that threshold, people spend their younger years trying to figure out the aesthetics without bothering to wonder what's under the hood. It's just convenient for them that aesthetics tend to be what get people laid, especially early in life.
Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
Could this be the first (and probably forever only) survey funded equally by the religious right and the geeks of the world?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This was my thought exactly, of course I professed to being a virgin long after my purity was ruined by some dirty girl.
I still do these days, women think it is cute, and it allows my followup, "I have no children therefore you can not prove that I am not a virgin." Women don't really want to know what a dirty whore you've been, they would like to think they are one of your first few, no matter how old you or they are.
--- I do not moderate.
The thing I want to know is why. I mean I'm 21 and never slept with any one, but I made a choice to wait for someone who mattered. So I've waited for it rather than not had the chance to do it. So how many smart kids decide "I'd rather sleep with someone I care for" instead of just never had the chance?
I like muppets.
at least we have /. to bitch about not getting laid ;-)
What?!? Someone smarter than me that would marry me does in fact prove I'm smart. They are smart enough to see through my bullshit, and they still want me. If I'm smarter than my mate, maybe I'm not that smart. Maybe I'm just fooling myself, and her. I'd rather know the truth about my intelligence than believe some unchallenged fantasy.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
So...nerds don't get laid much. Who'd'a thunk it?
The word is "no." I am therefore going anyway.
Maybe the teens are smarter precisely because they're not having sex, and as such they spend more time with intellectual pursuits.
Then again, maybe spending time with intellectual pursuits reduces interest (and competence) in sexual endeavours.
As a matter of accuracy, perhaps middle-IQ teens are more prone to be dishonest about their virginity than the really smart and the really not-so smart.
Maybe it's a little from columns A, B and C.
Nerds don't get much play? Shocking, truly shocking.
Um, in my experience, higher IQ led to plenty of sex... but chasing skirts led to lower grades. I could only wish that a higher IQ led to good grades. I've found that excessive subservience and high tolerance to BS lead to good grades a lot more than being smart... something I didn't figure out until I was an adult. And being an adult definitely led to a drop off in sex.
Damn. I wonder which way the causality goes.
I also wonder how much this result is culturally influenced. I've seen photos of billboards down there with a smiling teenager, reading "I want to be an engineer! Sex can wait!" There's a certain kind of youngster who'll buy into that sort of thing.
Not to mention that this is a statistical phenomenon. I can see all sorts of overbearing parents misapplying the result of this study. "Don't have sex! It'll make you smarter!" or "That child couldn't possibly be very smart. He's had sex!"
A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.
"Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
CowboyNeal never puts out, darn it!
So you lie to sleep with women? Yea you're a real catch, right up there with Hannibal Lector on the trust worthy scale.
Hint hint : If you're fucking someone you risk having kids with them (not all protection works) if you have to lie to her to get her into bed you two sure as hell aren't suitable to raise kids together and shouldn't be fucking each other.
I like muppets.
Basic meaning, someone who jerks off so much it makes them stupid. ;)
Yeah, I know, I know, "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"
;^) ) or other "normal" stuff.
But really, doesn't it make sense that the smarter you are, the more likely you are to recognize your your carnal cravings and decide not to act on them? I've been out of high school for two years, but as I recall, there were two types of teens when it came to sex:
Those who thought a first date was best spent in the back of a car going at it, and those who thought sex was a special thing to be shared after you have been dating for a long time (or even *gasp* after you are married).
Can you guess which group had more A students?
I'm not talking about just the geeks who couldn't get a date if their life depended on it, I'm talking about the smart kids who were also into sports, band (well, not so much band, but that's another story
Then again, maybe I'm just over analyzing things and it really does boil down to "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"
The creator of this post (Jacob Smith) hereby releases it, and all of his other posts, into the public domain.
becasue we wear tinfoil condoms.
Cheers!
Atheist: Buddhist in a Prius
The low chances were already at 110. That is ~40% of all males.
I misread "downtown Winnipeg" as "down to WalMart".
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
By in large, kids that get stellar grades get them by sacrificing other elements of their lives. AKA, they study inside of watching/playing/living football.
So generally, they aren't as physically developed as their less "nerdy" peers. Young women, who are just as much a jumble of hormones as young men, don't make the connection between intelligence as a reproductive quality, so they just aren't as attracted to the nerds.
It's a primal wiring issue, good looking bodies used to mean better provider. It's older women who appreciate the stability the great mind brings (aka the dollars.)
But toss Bill Gates and Colin Farrel in a room without name tags, and see who the woman swarm towards.
ppl like to talk to ppl they can relate to
... due to being avg have the most ppl around them in the curve... so they have more ppl to relate to therefore more likely to build up a longer relationship and therefore more likely to .. HAHA YOU KNOW
... HAHA YOU KNOW
avg ppl
so anyone deviant from the norm would be less likely to have
-judging another only defines yourself
Conversely, I've noticed that if a woman does know what my past was, they get this competetive streak within them that makes them think they can "change" me, and make me settle down. That makes them try HARDER, but I'm guessing this leads to problems upon actual marriage, once they "have" you.
Let's stop dilly-dallying and just change "-1: Overrated" to "-1: Disagree" or "-1: Doesn't Subscribe to Groupthink".
Simpler then that...
Teenagers with low IQ normally are not left alone to do what they will. Because parents don't trust them to do the smart thing because they arn't, combined with the fact they get usually get extra adult help means less exposure with other kids, and the oposit sex feels guilty about sexual activity with that group, so combined that will make a lower rate.
High IQ teens stop and think and realize that risks of Sex as a teenager (STD, Pregnacny) will get in away with their life plans being with higher IQ society expects more from them with their life plans so they stay away from such risks. Basicly I am not going to let a Baby get in my way to become a doctor. After I get my degree and a steady job then I may focus on having a family, Logical reasoning by people with higher IQ.
Teens in the middle are not pressured to become a Doctor or whatever so they have less ambitions for life and figure it may be worth the risk. Combined with the fact they may not think things fully out and let biological pressures take over what people say they should do.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
What exactly do you expect them to be doing with these cheques?
Thus, by trivial application of evolution, we see that the human race is biased towards being stupid. Over a long enough interval, intelligence will be relegated more and more to a genetic disease that prevents reproduction (add on the fact that high IQs also correlate with autism, which lowers your chance of reproduction as well). It's no wonder the public is fascinated by stupidity!
How long before nerds are bred out of the system?
I'm a frickin' GENIUS
i wonder,
in my opinion, teens living in a more difficult environment are less likely to have elevated morals about sex. and in the same pattern, teens from richer and more educated grounds are more likely to have been taught better.
but im really not sure it has anything to do with IQ at all, or if that's the case, i wonder if living in a poor environment, filled with drugs, sex and alcohol just doesnt stimulate the brain and ends up in low IQ people.
i would think its a mix of both situation. but i always find funny to see studies like that being made public about associating early sex with low IQ and trying to play on our influencable teens by telling them they're dumb to have early sex. not quite what i call education.
If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. - Will Kommen
Now that I think about it I had many good friends who were not religious and were very intelligent that waited until later in their college years to take their relationships to that level. So one humble opinion here is that more intelligent people just put more thought into their relationships and who they have sex with than the general masses. Which is good because evolution will take over as the "average population" dies out due to STD's and angry relationships, the intelligent individuals will prosper and the population will grow more intelligent over time.
CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
Maybe whilst smart ones were busy working on school papers, not so smart (cool) ones were busy partying/alcohol.
Seriously, even among Slashdot readers, I doubt many of you guys would marry someone smarter than you.
Of course not, but mostly because it's really hard to find someone smarter than me.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Sadly it is actually the dumb jocks that somehow get into management. Us engineers just design the actual products and get no respect.
Just you and me.
For instance, rIght now I'm choosing not to have a three-way with two girls, because I'm waiting for the right people, Jessica Alba and Jessica Biel.
Not true. I think that would be very nice.
However it seems especially women find it hard to fuck down, and would never marry someone they consider less succesfull (though typically they would find other excuses even to themselves). This means you pretty much have to give up on smart or successful women, they seem to strive for a life of loneliness.
Or decides that she's hungry and wants to eat them! Now that would be worrying. And disturbing. And wrong.
There is plenty of time for sex and sex when you think you know so much when you actually know very little is much more likely to lead to complications.
But there's only so much time for sex with teenagers. Get it while you can guys.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
YouTube linky: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ5IaIxWNzI .
They simply got the correlation->causality conversion wrong. This study shows that having sex makes you stupid!
I'm in my mid-twenties, and I didn't have sex until the very end of high school, and didn't date at all, and I seriously don't feel like I missed out on a damn thing. Sex when I was 18 was awkward and boring, I can't imagine the kind of horrible flopping around I would have had if I had been 14 or 15.
I know we live in an ephebophilic society where your teenage years are supposed to be when the best years of anyone's life, but let's all be honest here: Being a teenager sucks. You can't drive, you can't drink without having to sneak around, you're kind of an idiot, you don't know what the hell you're doing when it comes to members of the opposite sex, and that's not even starting to mention acne, braces and a bad fashion sense. I much prefer my twenties, and I'm looking forward to my thirties. I'm having a great time compared to ten years ago.
So maybe being smart and not having sex in high school isn't that groundbreaking of a correlation. Why is it so important to have any sex when you're in high school anyways? Shouldn't it be more important to have good sex when you're older? Where's the study on sex lives of single smart twenty- and thirty-somethings? I'd be interested in that study.
P.S. Watch the "abstinence only" crowd use this as ammunition: "See! Smart teenagers choose abstinence!"
"An intellectual is someone who has found one thing that's more interesting than sex."
I can't imagine what. I haven't met a single nerd or other 'intellectually gifted' individual that wasn't at least moderately preoccupied with sex. The problem with them was that while they were highly social among their own kind, they had the awfullest time trying to get along with 'normal' people, most of whom didn't share their interests. I'd think that the lack of compatible partners combined with their inability to seek them out contributed more to their ongoing virginity than anything. Information in the article seems to support that claim.
If groups with different IQs have different sex habits, and I learn about your sex habits, then by using Bayes' theorem I can also make inferences about your IQ. Obviously just statistical inferences ("he has less sex, therefore, he is more likely to be smart"), but still.
i was one of those high-IQ virgins and let me state, from first hand experience, the following: HA HA HA HA HA!
yeah, right, i didn't WANT any girls to pay attention to me! that's it!
you've got to be kidding me.
i could live a little longer in this prison
The real question is, are some teens getting less sex because they are smart, or are they smart because they are getting less sex (for whatever reason)?
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
More at 11!
But seriously, did whoever conducted this study ever attend highschool?
Maybe it's not that the smarter kids are having less sex, maybe it's that they are smart enough to lie about when they lost their virginity.
... elipses...
I am a parent of two young children ages 6 and 10. I am 40 years old That means I will be 48 to around 60 when my children are in college.
I have friends who had children right out of college. Their children are now graduating from high school. This means they are paying for education while in their prime earning years and still have twenty years left to vacation and save for retirement. I, on the other hand, will struggle along trying to do all three at once (educate, save, vacation).
Who is smarter?
Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
So, we may see Darwin awards for being intelligent ?
Now if I could only remember who said that...
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
D'oh!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
sad but true, at least in my experience...
Collector's Edition
But I was 12 when I lost my virginity. I have an IQ of about 130, although at the time (goddam age being factored in) my IQ was in the upper one hundred and sixty's. Now, my hatred of Americans and their usage of IQ as a measure of intelligence aside, there are primarily social reasons that this occurs and not really any biological. Essentially, the people with an above average IQ are going to be labeled as "nerds". Rarely do the nerds happen to have sex as a result of females being inherently removed from the social population since when hormones finally kick in, the more macho (and occasionally, the substantially more feminine)males attract the females since financial stability and other important implications such as common interests are not accounted for. In my case, loss of virginity at 12, I never spent time with the nerds in my school (middle school at the time) because I was new and they were all in honours classes (which I was not in as a result of transferring in late and my district had an honours lockout that began in sixth grade) so I found my home amongst the "goths" who were a very sexual group of people. Keeping in mind that at this point I could read, write, do math, and had computer skills well above the level of my fellow seventh graders, I was clearly an intelligent individual but as a result of my exclusion from the nerds, I was exposed to sex more than the other nerds; thus: my loss of virginity at twelve while now, most of my nerdy peers are still virgins.
Actually no. In reality you get to management by who you know and social skills.
What you know and your IQ actually tend to hurt your chances.
I hate to burst the geek bubble but it's truth.
want proof? WOZ is a rich geek but never was upper management.
Gates was never a geek, he was a poser and the face man. (sorry gate's early code is horrible and first year quality) he had business sense and knew people as well as has social skills in a bizzare way.
Jobs = Face man he is the guy that makes you like him so much you will sell him your stuff at cost or buy his product by standing in a line outside for hours when there is no supply problems.
If you are a geek and high IQ I STRONGLY suggest taking etiquette classes, social interaction classes and do everything in your power to have the knowledge to fake being good at party socializing. You have to be the guy that everyone loves in the first 15 minutes of meeting them. Speak eloquently, be good at faking that you really are interested in how well her pedicure went and how that CEO of that company had a horrifying day because he had to way 30 minutes for road service to show up and fix his flat tire.
Crack the code of socalizing, get that one done and you will become upper management.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
what is this silly thing about pregnancy? I thought majority of /.ers live in countries where contraceptives are easily available. Or were all the /.ers busy studing ways of using their PCs to run pr0n instead of leaning how to prevent such mistakes like unwanted pregnancy and/or STD???
i didn't WANT any girls to pay attention to me! that's it!
I never said that... There is a difference between having a Girl Friend and Sex.
Sure people with High IQ wan't people to be attracted to them but a lot of them realize that because they have goals in life they will not put as much effort into it as someone else.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I feel like Costanza when he swore off sex and became brilliant.
:-(
Seriously, though, to be here on campus with 15,000 other young women and still a virgin. Why the hell did I major in engineering?
...in being dumb and happy.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
I mean. I couldve told them that for free.
NO SIG
"the authors note this is also the same IQ range where propensity towards crime peaks" I'm seeing a correlation between no sex and crime. The smart ones that arn't having sex just don't get caught.
Put your money where your mouth is -
My observation is that social skills and academic/logic skills tend to be mutually exclusive. The social and athletic whizzes are not the most logical thinkers and visa versa. No device can be optimized for everything, and it makes sense that the human brain would be the same way. And females are more attracted to social and athletic prowess than brains (at least in the US).
Table-ized A.I.
There are a few of reasons I think this might be true:
1. Smarter teens believe that sex can be risky. Namely: Unwanted pregnancy, disease, emotional distress and not to mention social pressures from parents.
2. Smarter teens may have higher standards as they are able to distinguish better between "good mate" and "not so good mate."
2a. Finding a good mate may mean finding an intellectual equal.
3. A deep fulfilling intellectual and emotional relationship may be more important than and a prerequisite to simple sexual pleasure.
People always lie to everyone. It's how the world works. Get real.
contraceptives are easily available but they are not 100% protecton for STD and Pregnancy? They are better then not but still if a person doesn't want to deal with kids until they are older then not is better.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
"It was one of the best decisions we ever made"
Not to pry, but... how do you know?
Frag 'em all...
i see our high IQs also allow us to invent quite plausible excuses for why we can't get laid!
i could live a little longer in this prison
KILL EVERYONE WITH A LOW IQ!
There is one problem: if you kill all below average people, it would re-average itself. Eventually you will be on the lower end and will be killed. This will continue until only the one with the highest iq is left. Being the only one left, (s)he will, by default, have the highest iq of all people and will write an article on how the smartest people have no sex.
Therefore, we should keep the lower people. If nothing else, they make the rest of us feel better about ourselves.
As an example case, I was a virgin until I was 26. Yes, if I'm honest it's true that I had utterly no clue how to understand or communicate with the opposite sex, but I'll also admit that sex quite simply isn't something that I've ever consistently had a strong interest in.
Although this is nothing whatsoever against the person who this happened with, even after losing my virginity, I can remember thinking of that experience, while reasonably enjoyable and positive, as not seeming to deserve anything like the degree of hype that most people associate with the act. Most of the people I've known seem to regard sex as being the pinnacle of human experience, and that is an attitude which I find deeply sad.
I know that a predictable response to this will probably be to speculate that I am in fact homosexual, but I do not believe that to be the case, and to be honest, that is something else about the customary attitude towards sex that I find deeply pathetic. Namely the idea that if a person doesn't have one preference, then they *must* by definition have another, because not being helplessly addicted to sex in either straight or gay form is supposedly completely impossible...in most people's minds, it just doesn't compute.
Some of us honestly view reproduction as being the domain of animals. Given that we have more than enough other human beings who are quite happy to devote their own lives to that activity, this means that those of us who have that attitude are also able to persue the expansion and enhancement of our minds, without fear as to the possible consequences to the human population.
If you're someone for whom sex is the most important element of your existence, I'd strongly advocate getting a life.
I can't believe a story that basically says, "nerds lack social skills", made it to the front page. :)
In more primitive times intelligence was seen as a defect, it interferes with "fight or flight" types of responses. In high school intelligence may still be seen as a defect, but we have evolved to a point where the average lifespan is well over 25. We evolve to fit the situation, in high school it's about looking good, playing sports, and being social, people that fit these profiles are most likely to procreate "during" high school or shortly after. They are by no means considered to be prime picks by the time they are hitting 25, because their inability to make long term plans becomes glaringly evident.
Honestly, I'm surprised more people around here aren't reading the headline and saying "duh, having lots of sex in high school is a pretty dumb thing to do".
Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
My wishful hypothesis:
1) Nerds are better with tech gadgets
2) We discover the magic before adolescence
3) The internet is for pr0n
4) Higher standards
5) Abstinence
6) You and your kids aren't in school simultaneously
7) Better grades
8) Better careers
9) Profit...
Corollary: You get 20 sexually active years with a hot chick as opposed to the 2 minutes it took you to get her knocked up.
Cheers!
Atheist: Buddhist in a Prius
Some are born celibate, others achieve celibacy, and still others have celibacy thrust upon them. Welcome to Group Three, /.ers!
"I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is one of the most insightful posts I have seen on Slashdot. This is the stuff they DON'T teach you in university but they should. Moving into upper management isn't about WHAT you know, it's about WHO you know. You can call it bullshitting, ass kissing, whatever ... but the perception people have of you determines where your glass ceiling lies. Yes, keep your skills up to date, but also keep your address book up to date and send a keepalive on your entire social network every quarter. Crap ... now I can't use my mod points here.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
The question is... what is the cause and what is the effect...
So, with 'lower IQ' types getting all the tail, doesn't this gives them a superior evolutionary edge? (albeit a little dull :). Considering the time between generations being 17-20yrs compared to say 30yrs (almost double the rate!?) they would pass on more beneficial genetic material to their offspring in shorter time. Would they eventually subdue the 'higher IQ' types with shear numbers?
Note: This sig contains nine S's, nine I's and five O's which... means absolutely nothing.
Having thought back to my High School days, much of this sounds pretty accurate. I know there'll be many Slashdot jokes around about this, but think seriously about it for a bit. Those who threw it out there too much at High School, how many of those people who you knew are now living on crap wages, in a crap job, are unmarried, uncommitted and immature parents or single mothers struggling to keep a roof over their heads with no ability to plan for the future?
;-).
I live in the UK, but the answer in my case is all of the people I could think of scarily. I caught up with a few people from High School not long ago, and the stuff that's happened to many of the people from school who concentrated on sex and immature relationships is shocking. It's a tale of divorce, single motherhood, poverty and immaturity. These people also tend to be extremely crap at romantic and sexual relationships when they're older, as well as pretty immature. Taking one example, how many people in their late twenties think that getting married to someone you only met six months ago, divorcing that person a few years later, getting back together with an ex a few months after said divorce and having a baby with that person after only a few weeks or months of being together is mature? They still act like 15 year olds, and in some cases, worse.
As for me, I have a good job with good money, working with people who I like and get on with, I have a lovely girlfriend and I'm still as horny as hell from all that High School abstinence
Seriously though, looking around from my own personal experience, scarily, I think a whole social underclass is being created. I also think this is largely responsible for the increase in divorce, the increase in single motherhood and the inevitable problems for their children that has brought with it. Those having sex in High School generally just aren't mature enough to handle sex, and that's setting them up for life.
Um, the way that smart kids avoid pregnancy and STIs is not by remaining virgins, but by using condoms when they do have sex.
invent quite plausible excuses for why we can't get laid
More importantly, we can invent other ways to be laid that do not involve a real person. Ok, "she" may be real to you, but lets face it: if "she" comes in a box and requires an air compressor, chances are you will have a tough time introducing her to your parents.
While it's true that one can't both wait and not wait in order to compare which was better, by looking at what we avoided by waiting until marriage (emotional baggage, regrets, STDs, teen pregnancy, etc.) it looks like it was a good move.
Hi Hatta,
I'm Chris Hanson with Dateline NBC...why don't you have a seat over there?
Sex is a complicated dance with a lot of involentary signals. The closer you are to "normal/average" the easier it is to relate or find a similiar partner. Those on the low end can't puzzle out what they need to do and thos eon the top end over analyse and muck up because they find it hard to relate.
With time the bottom end eventually find someone or the money to pay for it. While the top end eventually puzzles it out or find a similiar outlier partner or pay for it. By pay for it I mean either become a good provider or pay for it directly.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Very dumb women are much *less* likely to have sex than very dumb men. I would have thought the opposite.
\u262D = \u5350
Well all this line deserves is a good Dah! After all everybody knows that the natural selection of the human race is producing higher (Intelligence? --> Probably not!) survival for the human race. Well that was what the scientists (High IQ types) said anyway. Then again were they assisting the survival of the race? Don't take any of this too seriously I am just teasing here. But if it gets you thinking well you probably didn't get enough sex.
It does make one wonder about the evolutionary development of the human race though. If more intelligent people have less sex, then I suppose they have fewer kids and are being bred out of the human race anyway. Maybe we should reverse that classic poster of the development of man.
Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
Thinking about it a bit more, there's different types of nerds. It's hard for me to imagine the theater folk and band geeks being 30 year old virgins. At the same time, there's also the engineering geek, who may well fit that stereotype. My hunch is that the standard deviation in virginity age is merely greater for those who have a higher IQ, and those 40 year old virgins skew the numbers;)
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Quick heads up: you should also have an apostrophe in your subject line, which indicates "is" as a contraction afterwards.
Obvious news is obvious.
Rudd-O - http://rudd-o.com/
Get the ability to control your penis if you have to lie for sex. Some of us don't lie because we don't do stupid shit and want to benefit from it.
I like muppets.
This just in...
Chicks don't like nerds
I wonder how this would correlate to masturbation.
This is one of the most insightful posts I have seen on Slashdot.
I second the motion.
Humans are social animals _by definition_. Social graces trumps IQ, looks, physical strength, or basically any other single quality.
The apostrophe key is stuck.
That's a bit of a leap. What makes you think that smarter people have an inherent drive to succeed? Many brilliant people fail out of college, and many hard-working but normal IQ individuals become doctors.
Way overrated, and not might I add a smart thing to do.
Humanity has become a blight upon the earth, with 6 Billion and counting.
Heres hoping a little "correction" happens soon.
We have entirely too many people here who shouldn't be here.
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
Episode 143: The Abstinence 11/21/96 "George becomes smarter when he stops having sex, but for Elaine it has the opposite effect. Jerry is bumped at a junior high assembly gig. Kramer starts a smoking club." (http://www.seinfeld-fan.net/epguide_short_prt.php )
For some reason, everything can be related to a Seinfeld episode.
But then who would take our lunch orders, pump our gas, and deliver our packages of electonics and porno rags?
Smarter girls can't be swayed by the "if you love me show me" or be as stupid as "not wanting to be left out of the group". So they delay their sexual encounters.
So if you want to have sex you'd have to pick the more stupid girls. The kind that likes muscular guys and show offs.
In other words, smart girls delay their sex life because they choose to. Smart guys delay their sex life because the circumstances force them to. But it's not that bad - I've met a lot of people who have ended up working to support their children, because they had the LUCK of having sex whenever they wanted to.
If what you want is a girlfriend, you should look for a girlfriend, not for a girl to have sex with. So stop watching so much pr0n and get your mind out of the gutter. This will help you find many female friends, and eventually, a girlfriend.
It is merely not in the benefit of the species to have a greater number of inordinately intelligent people. That is sensible.
There is an argument about lefties. The number of lefties has been relatively consistent at around 10 percent IIRC. There are advantages to being a lefty enough to support that number of lefties - an advantage that would diminish if lefties became more populous.
Civilication needs a critical mass - this critical mass needs to be populous and not really specialized.
this isn't proof that intelligence is being selected out. It's proof that intelligence is so potent that a little goes a long way.
un burrito me trampeó.
Later sex != less sex. Just because you start a couple later doesn't mean you get less, and especially not less good. A lot of the very smart people I know have perfectly good love and sex lives - or at least as much as I can conclude from their habbits, speech and the fact that they have steady, attractive partners.
Plus in average calculations you shouldn't forget that sex at very young ages has always been a problem (yes, problem - see teenage pregnancy) of the lower classes.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I'm still surprised anyone gives these studies any credence at all. The only data we have about this is the testimony of the person, and there's a substantial stigma against remaining a virgin, hence a very large incentive to lie.
Fair enough. My experience was just the opposite, though seemingly with similar results. My wife and I had sex very soon after we first met (as teenagers) and did not get married until 5 years later. We seem to have avoided all of the same issues in any case. (Yay anecdotal evidence!)
Frag 'em all...
meh. "Biological Pressure"* will win out no matter what if the situation is right. You can also apply the parenting thing to the smarter kids. *There's a joke there somewhere.
You left out one other major factor, people with very high and very low IQ's typically have much poorer social skills, particularly during their teen years, and poor social skills also leads to less sex.
That's true. It wasn't until I was talking with the job placement office that they let slip that really, 70% of the positions filled at most companies are the result of networking. If you don't know anybody it's quite a bit harder to get in. Once you're in there, you gotta make friends with your boss and his bosses if you really want to get anywhere past middle management. Even in companies that try their hardest to promote based on merit (IE, actual work done), trying to measure that is often too difficult and it comes down to a judgment call on the part of the manager anyway.
On the other hand, you really can't teach charisma. You either got it or you don't. About the best you can do is give some pointers, but what works for some people won't work for others.
I read the internet for the articles.
Excuse me?
Now, don't get me wrong, but since when sexual activity has been prescribed at high-school and lack of it is labelled as "delayed"?
I mean - it would be rational to think that smarter kids (or at least those with better grades) would on average spend more time studying than, excuse the pun, fucking around. Still plenty of years for sex as well.
"Timmy, you're thirteen. Isn't it about time you got laid?"
"But dad, I'm reading The Fountainhead!"
What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
If you're someone for whom sex is the most important element of your existence, I'd strongly advocate getting a life.
It's not the imost important element of my existence, but I certainly do enjoy it. You don't. Ah well, we all have things we enjoy and things we don't, right? I consider myself intelligent (I must be since I read slashdot!), but I don't consider myself above 'animal' behavior like so many of these posts imply or directly state. Besides, animals don't talk to each other during sex, so there's at least one thing that sets us apart from the ordinary reproductive animal.
And by the way, having sex once really doesn't show you how enjoyable it can be. You were probably nervous your first time, right? That takes a lot of fun out of it.
The point of this post is: don't just dismiss after having sex once or twice. There's fun to be had by all when it comes to sex.
And we refer to the others as "Coffee boy" ;)
(A)bort, (R)etry, (I)gnore?_
It's for lack of social skills. Smarter ones may choose the 'safe' approach, but a high percentage didn't have the social skills to pull it off (now there's a reverse pun) back at my old highschool.
An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
Come on MIT women, let's get on the ball (or something else) here.
Although this is nothing whatsoever against the person who this happened with, even after losing my virginity, I can remember thinking of that experience, while reasonably enjoyable and positive, as not seeming to deserve anything like the degree of hype that most people associate with the act. Most of the people I've known seem to regard sex as being the pinnacle of human experience, and that is an attitude which I find deeply sad.
To put it bluntly, sex is good. Sex is really good. Sex is GREAT! But... it's not great for everyone. Not everyone has the same feelings of sex that you or I have. Like many things, sex isn't about like it or don't like it, or heterosexual/homosexual. It's a spectrum. Some people, like yourself, look at it as something mildly entertaining but not an incredible experience. Others, like myself, think it's incredible and, quite honestly, have a high drive for it. There's nothing wrong with either of us, as long as neither of our behaviors hurts ourselves or others around us. It's just different brain chemistry.
Some of us honestly view reproduction as being the domain of animals. Given that we have more than enough other human beings who are quite happy to devote their own lives to that activity, this means that those of us who have that attitude are also able to persue the expansion and enhancement of our minds, without fear as to the possible consequences to the human population.
It's ironic that you make this statement, because animals use sex solely for reproduction. Humans are the only species that have sex for recreation, and we of course have tons of contraceptive tools now to increase the amount of sex we have while decreasing pregnancy. The way humans have sex is a very uniquely human thing on this planet.
If you're someone for whom sex is the most important element of your existence, I'd strongly advocate getting a life.
I find this statement rather close minded. Up until this point, I figured you were simple someone who chose not to have sex. But honestly your statement is simply illogical and jumps to a judgmental conclusion. Are you resentful that the world is a little too oversexed and your own desires don't match it so you simply rail against it?
It's your choice not to have sex, and it's your right not to. However, don't look down on others simply because they chose to have it. There are tons of people having sex for the wrong reasons, but there are tons of people also having it for the right reasons. It feels good, it's a stress reliever, it does cure headaches (stress related only, not the migraine or sinus kind), and it's all around a good time. Why, there are plenty of intelligent people who do have sex and find creative ways of doing it to enhance the experience.
Don't judge others for your own choices in life, and they won't judge you.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
If groups with different IQs have different sex habits, and I learn about your sex habits, then by using Bayes' theorem I can also make inferences about your IQ. Obviously just statistical inferences ("he has less sex, therefore, he is more likely to be smart"), but still.
Except that the change happens in both directions away from the average, so the most you can make is a statistical inference about how far from the norm they probably are, rather than in which direction.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Except, mr. AC, that even if you took out the person information, my point about the survey being flawed because it chalks it up to biological instead of sociological factors is still valid.
...smart teens are geeks, and everyone knows that geeks don't get laid.
Oh, nonsense.
Some smart, successful women may not be interested in partners less smart and successful than themselves. But many are just completely uninterested in whiners.
She may not want to get involved with someone who sees her as "fucking down."
Hint: Just because someone isn't interested in you doesn't mean she's striving for a life of loneliness.
What I say does not represent the views of my employers, my friends, my cats, or myself.
> > So my solution? KILL EVERYONE WITH A LOW IQ! It is the only logical answer.
>
> But then who would take our lunch orders, pump our gas, and deliver our
> packages of electonics and porno rags?
Liberal Arts majors with high IQs? Plus, of course, those of us who needed a job during college (although I never delivered packages, personally).
Smart people know this even when they're not teens. Doing something you can be proud of (writing code, writing a book, breaking an athletic record, writing music, building a house, sculpting David) is like touching eternity, but any idiot can have sex, get drunk, take a dump in someone's hot tub, etc.
technical writing / development
My observation has been that those who are more hard-working or studious tend to have less time for relationships, physical included, and the other things that come along with them (children, etc). Perhaps it's not so much that they're smart as that they're busy?
Throw alcohol into the equation and the results completely change.
"Alcohol: Getting Dumb and Ugly People Laid Since The Dawn of Time"
there's only so much time for sex with teenagers
Because they come within 5 seconds?
Virtual Betting on Facebook for non-geeks.
If we were really smart, opposite-sex smart people would pair up and spend nights in the sack, making babies. This would increase the general level of intelligence in the gene pool, increasing the level of human advancement, yadda yadda. Not trying to go on a socioeconomic rant here, but, again generally speaking, its those with the least desirable traits that have the most influence in the gene pool due to their high amounts of fornication. Evolution worked for a long time, since smarts actually increased your survivability; however in modern culture, anyone can survive due to soup kitchens and welfare and all (which I support), so we have to take explicit means to keep the gene pool smart. Get in bed with another slashdotter today!
I think that is bs. No matter how "smart" you are iq wise, there are still biological urges. I think the results presented in the summary neglect the amount of people that fall into each IQ slot.
People with HIGH IQ's are DIFFERENT. They sometimes go to college when they are 16, or are in upper level classes with older kids. Most of the high IQ people will have have nothing in common with their classmates. Just becuase you are a freshmen in a senor class doesn't mean you are going to have watched the same tv shows and played with the same toys everybody else grew up with.
So you are this outcast in a sense, there aren't many people around who are going to keep up with you, and at this point in your life, you probalby don't know how to relate to other people and present yourself as an attractive individual.
I think it is really the iq difference creating a barrier for forming close relationships with the opposite sex. People who fall in the middle of the IQ bell curve are going to meet lots of other people that are at the same speed as them, and concequently have an easier time finding a mate, leading to sex.
And sure, some teens do avoid sex. I did...after i had done it, of coarse. I knew all the risks and really didn't want to have a baby at 17. But that still didn't change the fact that I needed to crush the "virgin" status first, and then after the fact, I avoided sex as much as possible with my GF.
Anyway, people chose not to have sex for a multitude of reasons, and IQ alone isn't enough to conclusivly prove that "if you're smart, you don't have sex". I still think the number one reason teens do not have sex is that they do not know anybody who wants to do it with them, and don't know how to open up and present themselves in a way that someone will want to sleep with them.
the Universe won't implode, but odds are you will be telling Kevin Bacon.
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
I went to MIT, and, trust me, the lack of sex in the human male can lead to some wird pathologies.
(This may get modded as funny, but it is the literal truth.)
I think the real problem here is that, at an IQ of about 145, I'm in the .5th percentile for IQ, meaning there are only a million and a half people in the US with an equivalent or higher IQ than mine. Worldwide, this amounts to about 30 million people. Seems like a lot, but other qualifications start narrowing down my options even further. For instance, age. I'm 21, so I wouldn't want to marry someone who's 30. I'm 6'3 so I wouldn't want to marry a girl who's 5'0, so lets say taller than 5'6. And then there's the attractiveness factor, and the ability to laugh at my retarded jokes while tolerating my technical nature...
I'd estimate that my chances of finding a woman as smart or smarter that meets these other criteria at about 6 in the world, give or take. And given my luck, 5 of those 6 have boyfriends, and the sixth most likely will not speak a lick of English.
(A)bort, (R)etry, (I)gnore?_
Frankie's theorem
------------------
Anybody who knows what or who is Bayes' theorem is very
unlike to have much sex
SIGSEGV caught, terminating
wait... not that kind of sig.
I suspect that a significant contributing factor to these results is the correlation between high IQ and introversion. Introverts generally want less sex and are less appealing to others for sex. As for the retards, they're generally undesirable unless they also have A.D.D.
Next article on Slashdot, people with average IQ have more sex than people with non-average IQ. Researchers believe this will cause average IQ to stay average.
My finance is psychologist and we have had a similar discussion regarding IQ. It is pretty well known in psychology circles that people who's IQ scores are 2 standard deviations from the "norm" have harder time with social interactions than "normal" people. Since sex is ultimately a social activity it would make sense that farther an IQ score moves away from 90-100 the less likely that person would engage in sex (with another person).
Lunch
"You're either incredibly smart or incredibly stupid." - Gene Hackman to Will Smith, in 'Enemy of the State'.
Another idea I have is that - for my generation at least - people with higher IQ know better than to give into the culture of sex found in the media. I don't mean to sound too conservative (or "christian" if you like), but a lot of what kids with these average IQs get their idea of sex from are Laguna Beach, American Pie, and music. Case in point: they might not know how to think for themselves. Smart individuals with higher IQs (I can safely put mine waaaaaay past the 100 mark) know better than to set their values to those passed off by popular media, and therefore are less likely to lose their virginity.
It's like what Neo saysin the final Matrix movie, it's "[b]ecause I choose to."
So what if one loses their virginity later in life? Whose standards are you trying to live up to, your peers', the media's, or your own?
It may be that IQ only measures intelligence of the Intuitive / Thinking type (as in Myers-Briggs personality types), whereas Emotional Intelligence (F) is more useful for understanding how/why people act the way they do and Sensing (S) intelligence is more grounded in the "present", it's a faster type of intelligence in some way and speed is essential for seduction.
Ah, charisma. How do you define it? I was in high school, and my dungeon master defined it thusly, during a discussion:
Player: What is Charisma anyway? That means I'm good looking, right?
DM: No no, that is not charisma. Charisma may include that, but is also how you interact with people, and how people feel about you, how they're comfortable with you, etc.
DM: Take for example, the B0fh here. He is not good looking at all. But I think we'll all agree that he has high charisma. Look at the amount of people who interact with him and know him.
the B0fh: Gee, thanx, I think...
Smarter Teens having less sex? Say it ain't so. You mean the stupid/ulgy, smart/ulgy, smart/socially awkward kids do not get laid in high school? Completely shocking news.
Its simpler than that for the high IQ group.
Maybe, just maybe, we're viewed as LESS ATTRACTIVE by normal-IQ people. I know when I was in high school, one of the reasons girls wouldn't touch me is because I was the smart kid. Different areas of the country are different, but smartness is NOT attractive everywhere.
aka.. people that are socialize with the "normal" crowd are more likely to get laid. I would bet dollars for doughnuts that this has more to do with social interactions than to IQ.
Oh, and everyone who said that the smarter you are the more likely you are to understand the ramifications of sex I nearly spit coffee all over my keyboard. Boys do not care about ramification they have these things called hormones that are in far greater control of their body than any IQ could ever be.
It's more that you can either focus on getting laid, or focus on your grades.
You can't take the sky from me...
It makes total sense that low IQ teens wouldn't have sex. Assuming that people's taste when it comes to mating behavior has something to do with natural selection, it makes sense that 'stupid' people would be less likely to survive and thrive, therefore they make a less attractive mate.
But does this suggest that high IQ is also bad from an evolutionary standpoint? Perhaps high IQ people are less likely to take care of their offspring because they are too busy with other activities? Perhaps high IQ people tend to have personality disorders that make them a less stable partner? We tend to think of people with high IQs as 'superior', and those with low IQs as 'inferior'... but perhaps there are significant problems with being too smart that make it better, from a natural selection standpoint, to be of average intelligence?
What is interesting about delay of an active sex life is the limitation of immediate satisfaction to effect a future gain. For small kids it is the realization that a dollar might be more valuable that a piece of candy. For older kids it is the realization that stealing that candy may not be the best course of action. A smart girl and responsible boy might not want to limit their future choices by introducing a dependent.
I think that most would agree that such an ability would be useful and respected i the workplace, and that such people, who perhaps need less supervision as they will be less likely to make decisions based on short terms gains, will be left to manage themselves. Such people, in fact, will be more likely to decide what they think needs to be done. Such a person might not have control over other people, but at least they have control over themselves.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
I'd actually like to say a bit about that. Much has been made of the fact that there are those guys in every city, in every walk of life, who want to have sex with teenagers. Usually this is spun as "omg predators everywhere!", but that's hardly a rational analysis. Do you know why there are so many of those people? Because it's entirely natural and normal for a sexually mature male to want to have sex with a pubescent female. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Now I'm not saying they don't catch any deviants. Obviously they do. There's a lot of social conditioning against our natural desires, and it takes someone somewhat deviant to ignore that. I'm just saying that these guys are not sick freaks because they want to have sex with teenagers. Most of them are just lonely people with natural desires who think they've found a willing partner and made the wrong decision. The way they are treated by Dateline, the legal system, and the general public is more disgusting than anything they'd do with a willing partner.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Sex in itself is nice and warm and reasonably enjoyable like you say. However good sex (which probably happens after you and your partner has practiced a bit together) is something different. Not to mention good sex with someone that you love. I think you might have given up too soon. Some research has found that around 99% of humans need a good f**k every now and then. The remaining 1% are truly asexual. (But many of them still like to hold hands and raise babies together!)
You need to get laid. Im teasing, of course.
any examples of these classes you're talking about? English is my forth language, so picking some tips is useful.
Nothing like avoiding the good things in life because you're afraid of the minuscule possibility that something might happen.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
What you know and your IQ actually tend to hurt your chances.
I hate to burst the geek bubble but it's truth.
want proof? WOZ is a rich geek but never was upper management.
Gates was never a geek, he was a poser and the face man. (sorry gate's early code is horrible and first year quality) he had business sense and knew people as well as has social skills in a bizzare way.
Jobs = Face man he is the guy that makes you like him so much you will sell him your stuff at cost or buy his product by standing in a line outside for hours when there is no supply problems.
If you are a geek and high IQ I STRONGLY suggest taking etiquette classes, social interaction classes and do everything in your power to have the knowledge to fake being good at party socializing. You have to be the guy that everyone loves in the first 15 minutes of meeting them. Speak eloquently, be good at faking that you really are interested in how well her pedicure went and how that CEO of that company had a horrifying day because he had to way 30 minutes for road service to show up and fix his flat tire.
Crack the code of socalizing, get that one done and you will become upper management. Sounds like a pretty hollow way to scrape a living to me.
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
Maybe they're picking quality over quantity :).
//Didn't RTFA
If sex is no big deal, then why the rush to do it? I ask this question not for my own enlightenment, as I've already been with more than a few women. It really isn't a big deal, and those waiting for someone they actually care about aren't missing out on anything they can't do for themselves. And unless you're inept, you'll have no problems with pleasing your partner on your first time through. It's not quantum physics.
Perhaps the guy respects himself enough to know what he wants, understands the risks involved, and honestly chose to avoid it? I did that myself for a long time, especially since one fuck up or malicious woman could cost me for the rest of my life. I finally caved in because of asshats like yourself that made it sound like sex was something that I just had to do and wasn't a man until I did so. Honestly, I can say that I felt more like a man before I had sex than I do now. C'est la vie.
But then again, having an IQ in the 130s tends to bring about a kind of logical clarity. Now if only I could have been born into a family with money and gone to a good school...
yeah, but it's the drama geeks that make it into the movies... not the cheerleaders (For the most part)
Those of us who think they know everything annoy those of us who do.
It's like if you'd just learned to ride a bicycle and said that it sucked. OF COURSE first time ALWAYS sucks. You don't know how to do it yet. Once you do know how to do it, though, you'll understand the hype. There's a learning curve. Do it a hundred times and you'll get a hang of it.
I'm above average IQ, had a great GPA, and got laid all the time. I think they need to correlate things like hygiene and social adjustment to this matrix, because being smart is completely orthogonal to sexual prowess, unless you crave or outright need a self-puffing excuse for letting the jocks get all the tail. This is most definitely and issue in search of a tissue.
First, I'm not going to call you a homosexual (not that there's anything wrong with that!).
I'll just point out that from a scientific perspective, we are animals, and from a genetic point of view, reproduction is the pinnacle of our existence. From an evolutionary standpoint, there's not much purpose to our lives if we don't pass on our genes. I know that not every smart person is scientifically inclined, but I think it's safe to say that scientific understanding takes intelligence. It is not unintelligent to recognize the importance of sex in human lives.
From a non-scientific standpoint, I think there is an important debate, common to us all, about what provides the greatest satisfaction and enjoyment (and meaning) in life. Is it achievement, or is it connection? I think it's safe to say that you'll find many smart, successful people who nevertheless believe that their love and family is the most satisfying and important part of their lives. The idea that sex/achievement is a binary choice is false. Einstein and Hemingway and Picasso (and etc) all had lovers.
From a strictly physical standpoint, sex can create feelings that are unachievable any other way. But the same is true from an emotional standpoint as well--there's no closer emotional connection that can be made to another person. Physical intimacy is the distinguishing characteristic of love, of partner from friend. I don't find anything sad about that.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
I think most of you are flailing about on the wrong lines, which doesn't make sense if you are all supposed to be so smart; then again, maybe it does make sense if you are all supposed to be flirtatiously inept.
Basically I want to draw your attention to this: opportunities for sexual encounters are derived from social interactions; the more people you meet and the more you talk and meet up with the people you know, the greater your chances of locating a person willing to enlist you amongst their romantic prospects.
Therefore, sex is a result of popularity, which explains some of the intelligence rating questions.
If you are very, very dim you probably have no social skills and have few friends, and thus meet up with few people. When you do, you probably have very little of interest to say and nobody thinks you are particularly attractive.
However, if you are very, very smart, you probably also have a restricted social group. This is because the elitism of the upper echelons of cleverness prevents them from forming a wide circle of associates with similar interests, et cetera. In other words, if you are a geek you are likely to engage in some graceless enthusiasm about a particular area of geekiness which only a limited range of others also get all bouncy about. A lot of people who have no particular interests in anything intelligent (those from the middle marsh of intelligence ratings) will assume you boring and unsociable because they cannot indulge in the same topics that you do. Thus the range of available partners is reduced, so the likelihood of sexual advancement is less and sexual realisation is delayed.
I also want to point out that this does not mean being a geek means being less sexy (as is the common stereotype). This just means that very few people are prepared to accept that you could be sexy because of the overwhelming crime you have committed by being a geek.
To be honest, I think everyone already knew this, they just weren't thinking about the situation properly because it either seemed better to use intelligence as an excuse for virginity or because they wanted to assert moral reasoning behind choice of abstinence. Ok, fair enough, but the statistics must depend to some degree on lack of choice, because smart teens are often just as horny as average teens. True, concentrating on work can lead to lack of interest (I revised for about 400 hours for my A-level exams: I KNOW that feeling), but it doesn't crush it completely. Verily, clever teenagers lack the opportunity and biological pressure to obey their reproductive instincts because social occasions just don't arise with the same kind of frequency.
Obviously as the high IQ virgins should realize, correlation does not equal causation.
Personally I think this has more to do with:
1) The social stigmas and rewards we put on sex and having sex
2) The activities available that interest kids and adults other than sexual activity
3) The Emotional quotient of the parties involved.
1) Lots of movies extol the "virtue" of getting laid at the big party. At the same time, religious groups, scared parents, and sex ed teachers, put the fear of doom and gloom not to have sex. This conflict simply puts different groups at odds. Jocks tend to be less intelligent and more likely to want to have sex because that's their culture.
On the other hand, everyone remembers "one time, at band camp..." from American Pie. While most kids would find it disgusting to masturbate with musical instruments, Band is a sexual proving ground as well, and I'd be willing to bed band kids have a tendency towards higher IQ as well.
2) If you are involved in 6 clubs, band, art, and taking 4 AP courses for which you have to study every night, you might not have a lot of time for sex. If you don't think these things are important and have fewer activities and take fewer hard classes, you're tendency to think about sex is probably much higher.
3) The jock who says "If you love me you'll have sex with me" has a low EQ because that's a lame line and you know he's just trying to get laid. The girl who goes along with it, also has a low EQ because she has low self esteem and gets sucked into that. If a Jock tried it on a nerd girl, it depends on how she feels about herself. She could could have a 200 IQ and get straight As, but if she's the nerd girl, she's probably not popular, and might have esteem issues that make her think that this might make her popular or at least get with a good guy.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Teenage geeks have difficulty getting laid... this is surprising news HOW exactly?
Exactly!!! Why give up a job I enjoy that pays well for a job I hate that pays extremely well? Once you hit a certain level of comfort, more money != more happiness. The worst thing about my job is that I keep taking on more and more management-style responsibilities (we're a small shop, it's got to be done by somebody, blah blah blah). I can't imagine how miserable I would be if all I did all day was convince other people to do what I think needs to be done. I want to be the guy doing it, dammit!
...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
Folks below seem to justify it with IQ and whatnot, but I believe it's much simpler than that. I lacked (and still do, to a degree) social skills, I almost never went to parties (see #1), I wasn't "bad" enough for girls to like me, and I tried too hard to get them to like me. Let me tell you, helping a girl with her homework won't get you laid - I'm speaking from experience. NOT helping with homework and beating someone into a bloody pulp might, though.
And those who say they "didn't have interest" - please, guys, give me a break. I remember myself when I was 15. I'd get a boner just from being close to a girl. When you're 15, things like this are really out of your control and you'd jump at the first opportunity to bang someone if you weren't so scared or if there was in fact an opportunity.
The illegal Mexicans! And they'll work for less, too. It's a win-win situation.
(Wow, I am horrible.)
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
I never said that... There is a difference between having a Girl Friend and Sex.
Sure people with High IQ wan't people to be attracted to them but a lot of them realize that because they have goals in life they will not put as much effort into it as someone else.
LOL, sounds like a virgin to me.
I have a friend who would always try to tell me how it's bad to have sex before marriage - until he finally got laid. Now he's all up in that hittin it day and night. Homeboy is now a certified lady's man.
Just goes to show there is still hope out there for you, jellomizer.
And besides, having a high IQ may make you feel smart, but you're still a dumbass when it comes to life. If you're a male above the age of 14, getting laid should be your highest priority and should be held with the utmost importance. I'm just going to say that most virgins, especially with age, are often weird, and usually very creepy.
Oy! Lads! Trevor over 'ere finks there's an whole 'social underclass' being created. Any a you seen any 'underclass' being created in the UK? Not bloody likely in my lifetime, mate! Pull the other one, Trevor!
Breakfast served all day!
What about all the "smart teens" that went to band camp? That was suppose to be a 24/7 orgy.
All jokes aside, "smart" teens are typically the "nerds", "geeks", (old-school) "dorks". Also, in my high school, most of this group were male, most were sexually deprived and showed it.
I find it much more likely that "smart teens" have sex less often not because it may be the smarter choice, rather its because they can't get any.
Reality is not always as deep and meaningful as fairy tales.
Microsoft Sucks, F/OSS Rocks. I get mod points now right?
As I said: "They will typically find other excuses even to themselves". Add a bit of Freud and you get: And they will be hostile when challenged with the truth ;)
Of course everybody have different standards of success, for some it is beauty for others it is income or even intelligence. But however you see it, you can not get around the fact that woman has more choice and are more picky than men.
I am not trying to whine here, I am just musing over why the only virgins I've been with had Ph.Ds, and why I went from always rejected to women seducing me; after I got older, higher educated and rich.
Bingo. One thing anthropologists discovered very early is that, basically, people lie even on anonymous polls. Or not exactly "lie" consciously, but paint an image closer to how they'd _like_ to be, rather than how they _are_.
E.g., a tribe was asked whether they're hunters or agricultors or what. Virtually everyone proclaimed themselves to be a brave hunter, even though they had in the meantime gradually evolve towards mostly agriculture, and IIRC a lot didn't even have weapons any more. But their culture glorified the hunter/warrior archetype to such an extent, that everyone still pictured themselves as just that.
E.g., a rural community was asked several questions on a poll, such as if they work the fields together and help each other build a barn, and stuff like that. The vast majority said that, yep, they do it all the time. Turns out that the last time anyone helped build a barn was half a century earlier, and if you wanted help in the fields you had to hire someone. But their culture was so biased towards selfless helping each other, that people _imagined_ themselves being still all tightly knit and helpful even long after they had changed.
E.g., at one point there was a hike in the price of meat, and people were polled whether they eat more meat, less meat, or the same. The vast majority said they're not putting up with that kind of prices, and they're definitely eating less meat in that time. Turns out that in reality, they ate _more_ meat on the average. (Presumably to show themselves that they can still afford it.)
Etc.
Basically I'd take all polls with a grain of salt. Unless you can actually observe those people and/or validate the data by other means, they _will_ tell you something closer to their ideal self-image than to the real self. Especially in situations where one of the choice has a strong negative conotation, there'll be a lot of taking the other one.
So maybe all this shows isn't even IQ vs honesty as such, but more like "IQ vs realistic self assessment", mixed with a dose of "IQ vs realizing you don't need to lie on an anonymous test." E.g.:
- at the high end, people probably are more aware that saying "yes, I have sex all the time" won't make them more popular
- as you get closer to the middle, people are driven more by peer-pressure and by their image, so they're less going to admit they're anything less than perfectly cool
- move lower than 100 and gradually some start even having some problems understanding how an anonymous poll works and how social perceptions work, and start to lie even more for reasons like impressing the interviewer or something equally dumb
- move _much_ lower, and you start to deal with people who have trouble even understanding what's really asked of them, what the consequences are anyway, etc, and are increasingly under near-permanent supervision. So you start to get anything from people who haven't figured out yet how their peer's opinion of it works anyway, to "omg, if I say that I had here, mom will find out and yell at me."
If the last one seems unlikely, remember that they had one category for people under IQ 70, and that's a lot dumber than a gorilla. Literally.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Be Smart, Act Dumb, Get More.
While I agree that high IQ teens stop and think about the risks associated with sex, I don't think that is the only thing stopping them from having sex. A lot of it comes down to interpersonal skills, common sense, the crowd you hang out with, the social stigma attached to that particular group, and your attitude towards girls/dating/sex.
My Sysadmin Blog
Pregnancy/STD isn't a reason to decline sex - but it is a good reason to talk to your partner before having sex.
Batshit-crazy girls is a reason to decline sex.
My Sysadmin Blog
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Even if you have sex with an infected person, completely unprotected, your risk of catching HIV is something like 0.1%. So yeah, you roll the dice, but, most of the time, you'd actually be fine.
This is my sig.
I, like a great many /. faithful, was an awkward, geeky child. I do not know if this was due to all the D & D and late night BBS sessions, but that certainly did not help. I can tell you that my friends who were attractive enough to draw hot girls at the 11-13 year range had a tendency to stop showing up at our Friday night pizzafests and Boy Scout weekends because they had what we can loosely term a life. Others clued in through time for various reasons - I was a decent guitar player and when people started to figure that out (~16 years old) I started to get invited to parties that actually had girls at them. Suddenly, I wasn't coding C64's and perfecting my Eddie Van Halen solos with my free time - I had discovered girls and what they were for. As awesome as this was, it wasn't contributing to my IQ near as much as my previous activities and it (they) took a lot of my time. So smart kids have less sex? This should read "Kids who can get sex automatically dumb down because it's pretty much all they think about".
This was proven in Idiocracy. It only applies to 1 country, however. Smart Europeans have the same amount of sex as dumb Europeans. Smart terrorists have 100x the sex as dumb terrorists. So who is going to run the planet in 1000 years?
wow I always thought it was because I was shy and inarticulate not to mention scrawny obsessed with my computer and constantly reading. Now I know it was because my IQ was to high. Crap, I need my medical marijuana.
Added Pressly: "Oh, and by the way, milk is nothing but liquid meat."
I've an IQ of 153, and I get it everyday...
Maybe I'm just lucky.
Actually no. In reality you get to management by who you know and social skills.
... Gates was never a geek, he was a poser and the face man.
No, Bill Gates is brilliant. I know smart technical people who've spent some time with him, (one is the CEO of a competitor and doesn't have to suck up) and they say he's brilliant. Gates did have rich parents, though. That knocks 5-10 years off of the time needed to achieve success.
George Bush Jr. is the epitome of someone who made it through connections. He's the ultimate frat-boy. Business people who met him in his private sector days say he "wasn't much of a businessman." (One of the most encouraging things about the upcoming election cycle is that all the candidates from both parties are far more qualified than Bush.)
Crack the code of socalizing, get that one done and you will become upper management.
That's not enough by itself, but it will get you a good career in sales.
If you are a geek and high IQ I STRONGLY suggest taking etiquette classes, social interaction classes and do everything in your power to have the knowledge to fake being good at party socializing
Wow, you've really stereotyped geeks that much? I like to think I have a CHA modifier of at least +4.
Too many people still believe that a good marriage (or similar) relationship is about love and whatnot.
A good strong healthy marriage starts with commitment. If you and your partner are committed to the relationship, you'll try to solve problems. Divorce will be the absolute last resort; something you wouldn't even consider until there was nothing else left.
Most normal people, if they have a disagreement with their boss, don't think, "Okay, the first thing to do is consider quitting." Most people don't think about quitting a job until they've exhausted other options. How much more important, then, is it to be committed to a marriage?
Maybe I didn't put that well, but I hope you all got the gist.
I'm not sure about this .. but maybe its changed in the 20 or so years since high school.
:P -- ahh memories.] I had friends that were Band geeks, burn outs, and muscle car freaks.
.. kids that are 'smarter' are really just kids that have a higher emotional understanding of the dangers that go with sex now a days.
.. everyone has seen American Pie right ?
:( One would think that high IQ breeding pairs should biologically desire to produce MORE offspring, not less.
I am well in the 110+ category, and had quite a lot of sexual activity in high school. Certainly not 100's of girls, but 'several' would be a polite guess. I was most certainly a geek, but I was a social geek. I could talk to anyone [If I chose to, which is a different issue], and really, aside from a few people that had issues with me, seldom noticed or would abide by the typical high school hierarchy. I swapped jokes with football players, and chemistry nerds. Hung out with the punk kids, and dated the president of the honors society. [Whom incidentally, also fell well into the 110 + category, and not only surpassed me in numbers, but in sheer wanton gusto - quite the slutty pair we made
Maybe today its different, maybe with the aids scare in the 90's
Otherwise, I would suggest that social skills, in place of IQ or academics, has more to do with sexual activity in teenagers. I mean
What *IS* curious though, is that personally I have noticed a parallel to their study. It involves the same IQ ranges, and the number of children married folks in those ranges seem to have. Lets face it, who hasn't been to walmart and seen the large group of seemingly uneducated, possibly low IQ'ed, family consisting of like 8 kids and mom, maybe dad. Maybe the real secret here is not that lower IQ people have more sex, but that higher IQ people know when to stop (or at least wear protection).
Kinda makes you wonder what evolutionary quirk set THAT particular survival trait up doesn't it
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
The sexist thing in the world is a woman that is smarter than you are. (listen to Nerd Porn Auteur)
"Follow me" the wise man said, but he walked behind.
Also, many smart kids don't give a damn about marks. I know I didn't, and my IQ is well over average. I got extremely high marks in classes I enjoyed (like comp sci, comm tech, and physics), and very low marks in ones I disliked.
It has been my experience that highly intelligent women are usually the freakiest in the sack, but this is applied to women in their mid 20's and early 30's.
OK, but why are smarter kids less likely to have sex? Because they're more responsible? Because they have other things that are important to them? because they're more conservative? Or is it because the pretty girls dont' want to kiss or jump onto the nerds? Is it the smart person's choice, or the lack of opportunity to them because they are losing in the popularity game?
I went to Johns Hopkins, and we had a lot of smart people there - it wasn't pretty.
..........FULL STOP.
So...
Find a nerd, or a stupid girl, and get laid. They are obviously desperate. Since you are desperate and they are desperate you may have a chance.
In other news, Men prefer Skinny Girls, Fat girls get laid more.
I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
Perhaps there is a connection because perhaps geeks (I mean smart people) have difficulties getting girls. Weird Al said it best .....
"...But so far they all think I'm too white and nerdy
Think I'm just too white & nerdy
Think I'm just too white & nerdy
I'm just too white & nerdy
Really, really white & nerdy
First in my class there at MIT
Got skills, I'm a champion at D&D
MC Escher, that's my favorite MC
Keep your 40, I'll just have an Earl Grey tea
My rims never spin - to the contrary
You'll find that they're quite stationary
All of my action figures are cherry.."
McFly69 - I don't be knockin' on them, I am part of em.
NO! NO! Please don't mod me, I'm too young to die a troll. *click* Oh the pain, the pain...
Look at Office Space, Beavis and Butthead and King of the Hill. Judge's humor is so close to his subject that it is hard to see where parody/insult ends and identification/sympathy begins.
Look at "Fuck you, I'm eating." It's funny as a down your nose look at how dumb society's low expectations are. It is also just plain dumb funny.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
The 'mouth-breather == stupid' meme always bothers me when it comes up, because I was a mouth breather for a very long time. And I always did very well on all the standardized tests. I had some reminder stickers: 'lips closed, teeth together', but they didn't help much at all.
I learned about Donna's work about 5 years ago, from a Martial Artist who'd reverse-engineered Donna's techniques to make him a better fighter. I got the book first (many libraries and most large bookstores should have a copy), and did the exercises as best I could. But things didn't really start to come together for me until I had a couple sessions with one Donna's senior TAs, someone who'd been learning with her since the 1980's, and who can also see the body's energies quite well (not as well as Donna herself, but better than all but a handful of the rest of the people on the planet). And the first thing she did with me was hold the bellybutton/third eye hookup for quite a few minutes, before moving on to other things. And now, three years later, my tongue is almost always planted at the roof of my mouth.
I've seen the video you linked to before - while it's a good overview of the daily routine, it barely scratches the surface of why the exercises are important, and when they're called for. The book covers a lot of ground, and is quite a bargain for $17. Some people really need to see the exercises performed, and for them, the energy medicine kit is a better introduction.
Glad I helped you find something interesting today.
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
Does this mean you'll get a better education at Catholic school ?
If people who don't have sex are smarter, how are we going to keep the earth populated with people to be smarter than ?
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
There are plenty of ugly people of the opposite sex. Being ugly does not stop you from finding a partner. Insecurity about your own hideous appearance is really the only obstacle.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Hmmmm, maybe he wanted to imply that since there is no god, he did not get any brain. And with no brain, one can hardly think. Which could explain why he says that his brain was given by a god. Which could make us forgive him because with no brain...
I guess you get the point.
Where were we? Aaah yeah, sex.
*zip*
this sig is useless
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Should have gone to Princeton instead
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooke_Shields
There's also a strong (and obvious) correlation between physical attractiveness and IQ as well.
People who aren't physically attractive don't get as many social, romantic, or sexual opportunities as attractive people do. As a result, they are forced to spend a lot of time alone and often feel like failures when it comes to the opposite sex or socializing in general. So it's only natural that they spend their time in non-social activities that they can excel at and feel empowered by. And it's only natural that they don't make sex a high priority, because they've learned that it's just a dead-end, frustrating endeavor that shouldn't even be attempted.
As for the old theory about smart people not taking care of their appearance being the cause of their lack of attractiveness, that's clearly wrong. Plenty of smart people have great hygeine, dress well, smell good, etc, but are still cursed with being unattractive due to circumstances out of their control (ugly face, acne, balding, weight issues due to metabolism, etc).
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
Basically we can super-categorise it like this: average girls don't sleep with guys they think are weird. Whether you are 'weird' to the average girl because you don't play football or you walk around with silver foil on your head makes no difference to them - you are not what they are looking for which is a solid societal stereotype (in most cases).
Obviously there are the more enlightened ladies (thank god) who allow their intellect to surpass or guide their instincts.
In the tech scene for sure there are relatively few ladies - in the words of Scott Adams: "Female engineers become irresistible at the age of consent and remain that way until about thirty minutes after their clinical death. Longer if it's a warm day."
a. You don't need a precise peer to be satisfied with a woman.
b. Always keep someone around to bone even if you aren't going to marry her.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
In the scientific method, you can only prove something by disproving everything else.
Therefore, as a teenager, you should have sex with as many to all the teenage girls possible in order to find your life partner. Afterall, if you only have sex with one or two, instead of all of them, you'll never have scientifically proven she is the one for you. :)
I wholeheartedly agree, it would be irresponsible for you to breed. :)
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
I started having sex at 15 and 1/2, had a number of sexual partners during that time (high school). my IQ was rated in the 130s (around the same time).
Of course grades are no accurate judgement of intelligence, i hated tests and did poorly in them because they didn't hold my interest, i excelled at anything else that peaked my interest.
Neither is IQ an accurate reflection of anything imho, i think the hardest thing for man is to analyze his own brain, there is just a level of "bias/too close to the problem" there that cannot be overcome.
For those who haven't read it, let's check Wikipedia:
"The Marching Morons" is a science fiction short story written by Cyril M. Kornbluth, originally published in Galaxy in April, 1951. It was included in The Science Fiction Hall of Fame, Volume Two after being voted one of the best novellas up to 1965.
The story is set hundreds of years in the future: the date is 7-B-936. John Barlow, a man from the past put into suspended animation by a freak accident, is revived in this future. The world seems mad to Barlow until Tinny-Peete explains the Problem of Population: due to a combination of intelligent people prudently not having children and excessive breeding by less intelligent people, the world is full of morons, with the exception of an elite few who work slavishly to keep order.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons
Maybe you should try taking me a little less seriously, you presumptuous troll. For starters, I'm hardly a Republican.
only if they are into meditation, spirituality, have a developed character, have their sight and heart open and with a partner who has the similar qualities - then it becomes the pinnacle of existence.
Read radical news here
and how so ?
or you'll spend the rest of your life wondering what sex with other women would be like.
note that its very unlikely that a person which has a mindset that is susceptible to above mentioned flaw can neither find his/her soulmate, or find a person that s/he will respect and love.
Read radical news here
I can either waste my life pretending to be good at something I'm not, or actually work on something I'm good at and hopefully usher in strong AI or usable nanotech. Does anyone honestly think that the rich, famous socialites will have anything at all to do with the future once AI gets smart enough to schedule work flow and resource allocation? They might retain their status for a while, but ultimately AI and nanotech spells the end of the industrial age, and probably the end of the neo-feudal corporate sponsored governments as well.
After the singularity, the socialites will be able to go to their little parties and have all the sex they want while the nerds get to re-engineer the parts of the universe we can reach. Totally different goals and mindsets, and it doesn't make sense to try to play the social power game just to end up with a bunch of useless money and property after nanotechnology replicators become commonplace. I don't want social skills, I want omniscience, omnipotence, and immortality.
Why assume that the teens are not having sex because they are smart, rather than because smart teens tend to be unattractive?
You can't take the sky from me...
You don't need any classes, just go to a nightclub and start picking up women. In my experience trying to pickup a girl is the best way to learn social interactions. Basically when you are trying to pickup girls in a nightclub you learn 1) to identify and classify people who are potentially interested about you, 2) to learn on how to introduce yourself to a new person, 3) to read signs on are they interested or not and 4) to leave gracefully from a situation. The skills you learn this way help you in every other social situation too.
;-)
On a note about the general discussion about IQ and sex, in my own experience, I couldn't get sex nor girlfriend in high school because I just didn't know how to read body language and other signs on another person. Eventually when I turned 18 and went with friends to bar, I just tried to pick up girls failing of course miserably. Luckily after a year I got better and when I entered university there was no problem picking up or just socialising with other people.
PS. This is just the software development method applied to a real world. You run the code, crash it, find bug, fix it, and repeat the loop hundreds of times until you succeed. In real you literally repeat the loop hundreds of times before succeeding, but I think it's eventually worth it
Survey research tool for commercial and scientific use
high iq people/kids generally subconsciously shun many segments of the population, and therefore do not go into social interaction. once they are in a crowd that they think they are worth, they go out blazing.
Read radical news here
Given the poor spelling, random capitalization, and generally dreadful grammar, I can draw only one conclusion: You must have gotten tons of action in high school.
> Yours is the classic "majority rules" position.
Maybe that's the problem with your conflicting perspectives -- you just need to try different positions.
"High IQ teens stop and think and realize that risks of Sex as a teenager (STD, Pregnacny) will get in away with their life plans being with higher IQ society expects more from them with their life plans so they stay away from such risks." Does anyone else buy this sort of rationalization?
Once the hormones kick in you're never too young to have sex. It's the foresight I think that can be telling. Some people live in the moment. You make decisions that will effect the rest of your life, but if you don't look that far out why wouldn't you skip the condom. Marry out of "love" in a new relationship. Have a baby in your early twenties.
Sex is the easy part. Those of us not too awkward will have it (likely). Some of us will handle it safely thinking of the impact our decision will or could have.
I fit into both categories. I've lived rather...loosely. But no matter how out of control my situates seemed I *did* think about the long term consequences. Always. Many of the people I knew do have kids. Do fit your profile. A lot are missing or addicted to drugs (welcome to the 80's American city punk rock scene). Aside from an attempt at suicide (that counts as not thinking very clearly about my future) I always took the effect of these things into account. Drugs where avoided. While I was sexually active I knew children were out of the picture until at least my 30's and took appropriate steps. I don't drink regularly. I stopped smoking.
For me life is a balancing act. You see your actions. You project their consequences. If you fail to do that you live with the consequences, and you might not like them.
Circling back, there's nothing wrong with sex. It's understanding the importance of sex and the effect carelessness (in general) can and will have on the rest of your life. Abstinence is certainly an answer, but it doesn't exactly say anything specific about ones ability to grasp the big picture. Which really *is* the most important thing a young person can learn.
Quack, quack.
pointer of nothing. other than being able to be intravert and memorize what is told to be memorized. actually entire education in most of the world is that.
Read radical news here
Okay, so let me get this straight? I'm more likely to die from driving a car and more likely to die rather quickly than from having sex with cute people? Okay that's IT, it's time for me to put a personal in the paper ...
/., Reading and hiking. Doesn't smoke, doesn't drink unless you're buying. Can kick your ass at WoW. No more kids, PLEASE NO MORE KIDS. Seeking SWF, who doesn't want to travel in an automobile, doesn't plan on having sex ever. Email me sometime.
CWM, 00011011 Years old, Enjoys
Some terms more in depth explained:
CWM - Chunky White Male CWM
SWF - Slender white female (preferably single)
00011011 - 30
reading - electronic Newspapers including Haaretz, NZherald, and MSNBC / Struggles with dexterity involved with print based newspapers
hiking - to the mailbox to pay that one bill that just won't update to the 21st century.
Most geeks (and I do mean geek) who've spent a few years in the industry are well aware that being a "business guy" is both incredibly valuable and necessary to the success of business, and requires all kinds of social skills which we're probably not equipped with.
Some of us don't *want* that job. We *like* being the geek. Personally, I'd *hate* being the business-guy.
And I'm sure that was by choice. I'm willing to bet Woz wouldn't do anything different, if he could do it all over again.
Thanks for reminding me, now I'm going to /wrists to relieve the grief.
Free condoms are partly birth control (better than nothing), partly awkward situations (watch for cute girls taking some), and mostly for practical jokes.
On our campus, there were two very large mixing bowls on a table, and two cute girls sitting behind said table handing them out.
One way: Grab as many as you can and run. Or just calmly take a whole bowl, muttering about how it won't even last you a week...
Another: Slowly count them out loud as you take them. "Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday morning, Wednesday lunch, Wednesday evening, three for all night Wednesday... Thursday, Friday, Saturday..."
Or count them another way: "Jenny, Katie, Sarah -- whoops, better take three for Sarah... Becky, Erin, Samantha..."
Or hang a calendar on your wall and tape them to it, for when people visit. Or make a condom collage! Endless possibilities!
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
no, it was an official psychologist-given-test score. was given to me when my parents got divorced. (at 11, as part of a package of "is my child depressed" evaluations....duh! his family just dissolved!) i wasn't told what it was until i was 18 tho.
;)
but it's not the end-all-be-all that people make it out to be. it'll tell you someone has good spacial reasoning skills, or similar traits. but that's about it. i know enough to know just how retarded i am compared to the really smart people out there. (hint: when you find them, latch on and suck their noggin for ideas - good food for thought)
btw, the success rate for birth control is measured by couples, not by every time you have sex. so the pill is 99% effective == 99% of couples using it properly won't get pregnant. NOT 99 times out of 100 times they have sex. (thank dog, or else i'd have a couple of little tykes floating around!
http://kered.org
"I believe that God gave me a brain to think with and make intelligent decisions, not allow my loins to drive me. One of those decisions was staying true to who I am when finding a woman to spend my life with."
Leaving aside that there is likely little rational foundation for a belief in God, did you stop to think that perhaps there is more than one way to slice the pie? Why do you assume that finding a woman to spend your life with is a given? For that matter, even if you accept that it is a given for you, why is it a given for everyone?
I object to the notion that any homogeneous set of sexual or mating standards is applied in the same sentence as the claim to being a 'thinking person'. You have claimed that wanting to just have sex with someone is mutually exclusive with using your brain to think - but how can that possibly be the case? There are, in fact, any number of geniuses who were also philanderers - Ben Franklin jumps to mind.
In short, I think that the 'Commitment, Commitment, Commitment' based mindset is, in fact, one propagated for social stability, and that truly independent thinkers are able to see it for what it is; useful in developing many kinds of relationships but not mandatory for all interactions between all people all the time. Such a generalization bespeaks groupthink and weak rationalization. I think the thing you said that most rings true is that you have to be true to yourself; only internal reflection will give you the sort of tools you need to forge outward connections. External frameworks for how you live your life will always sit uncomfortably. I point to the >50% divorce rate.
[Ego]out
It wasn't explained in the movie, but could easily be explained by automated manufacturing/production. Think Forbidden Planet. We could create just enough to make basic sustainability easy in the next few hundred years. Hopefully, though, us smartypantses will have figured out how to stay present in the general populous.
This is exactly the sort of thing I pay taxes for. I'd like to know if Nerds and Retards are more or less likely to have sex than the average person. It was really eating me alive not knowing.
I think that these statistics have a lot to do with the degree to which an individual thinks about their decisions in day to day life, rather than any particular social stigma. People with higher IQs (in my experience, anyways) tend to consider more fully the repercussions of their actions. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that smart teens don't have sex. There is such a thing as responsible sex in a monogamous and loving relationship...even if the couple is younger than most. I personally have chosen to try to experience as much of life as possible. Drugs, sex, loud music, letting yourself be out of control- these are experiences that are as much a part of life as intellectual stimulation. Perhaps society needs to stop thinking of these things as "stupid" actions, but rather as actions that are interesting experiments with variables that need to be closely monitored.
Anyone else feel that, somewhere behind this study, is someone who just gets a boner about underage sex?
It is the wrong way around. Smart boys and girls should go at it like rabbits without protection without protection. Is it a wonder that humanity as a whole is dumbing down? So called intelligent people have less kids while social welfare losers produce a lot of offspring.
Sex is pretty complicated. Not really the act itself - though there is a fair amount of understanding what goes where when to have the act be as satisfying as it can be. I mean more the relationship surrounding sex. Sex is, after all, one of the most intimate acts you can undertake - it can cut to the core of your personality if you let it, or you can guard that core at the expense of the experience.
My point is this; I know plenty of people who wanted certain things out of their sex life but who never achieved it, because they were either afraid of rejection and so did not admit to it, or they were already committed and did not wish to rock the boat. Sleeping with people for whom you feel comfortable having an intimate relationship is not an act that you should necessarily 'reserve' for only the very most worthy situation. Sometimes it's better to learn how to be close to people, and to learn how that extreme closeness affects you, affects them, affects your relationship with them, and with others. These learning experiences are generally categorized as reckless, but I think that usually - 95% of the time - they're far from it. They're natural, and humans learn from it.
Why is it, then, that there is such a prevalence of the mindset that if you never do something, the first person you do it with will be the perfect person? That it somehow increases your chances of finding a working relationship? If anything, the people I know whom have had a great deal of sex are more in tune with how it affects their relationship. I'm not advocating being enslaved to your loins - but there are multiple ways for that enslavement to incur. Letting them run rampant is one; never learning mastery over them is another.
[Ego]out
- Chicks may dig money, but plenty of guys have more money and less ego than you.
- If you spend all of your money on floozies, you will have no money left with which to attract these "money-grubbing whores" you seek. Once they spend your money, why should they hang around?
Moral of the story, smart, rich guys get all the hotties when it matters, so just wait until you are making a good living and the dumb-ass frat boys are stuck in cube-ville with their bullshit degrees. I think that you'll find this not to be true. In addition, I think you will find that you have not discovered the path to happiness.Good luck!
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
In h.s. I was a bit of an oddity, a geek who by some freak of nature was athletically talented. So I ended up having more "jock-like" success with the ladies (although I was certainly no competition for the school's varsity quarterback). Regardless, being a two sport star I can say, and it might surprise you, but the attention you attract really isn't all that enjoyable. Most of the girls that go after that type of guy are highly competitive with each other, typically possessive as hell, and unbelievably manipulative. I doubt most slashdotter's would be very happy having to deal with that kind of drama. By my senior year I just dated a girl I met through National Honor Society.
...then you're not doing it right, or not doing it with the right person.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I would advise the opposite. Be who you are. Don't change yourself for the benefit of others or for a few extra bucks. Try to change the world instead.
Man, I wish I was born in the Victorian era. Sigh.
Uhh, you can have it man. I'd prefer to stick to my anti-biotics, refrigeration, and automobiles.
Would your parents actually cut you off if they discovered that you were sexually active while in college?
As a parent, I find that to be a little scary.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
smarter teens have less sex because the dumb ones would rather screw each other.
They're using their grammar skills there.
WHAT? An article about teen sex habits and no "I need pictures as evidence" jokes?
:)
You guys are really slipping up!
Best "String" Ever!
You can't take the sky from me...
As a long-time Slashdot lurker, I can safely say that for a male crowd claiming to be uninterested in sex, you sure talk about porn a lot.
Bonus lols: the captcha was "filthy"...
My first thought was the other direction.
They are smart enough to lie and hide it from the folks asking questions rather than risk losing it.
However, the fact is that world wide stupid people are outbreeding smart people. I think a couple SF writers have written stories about the ultimate conclusion of this trend.
Smart people tend to focus on their own personal pleasures.
It's very smart for them as individuals but stupid as a reproductive strategy for passing on "smart people" genes.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
As for asskissing/bullshitting those are in fact good ways of limiting your network. Sure that one manager might like you, but you will isolate yourself from the rest of your colleagues and you can possibly miss out on other non-vertical promotion opportunities.
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
In all my years of having sex, I have never had a condom split. Somebody must be doing something wrong.
Now let's analyze this attitude. A full 1 million Americans are HIV+ out of a population of 302 million. So there is a 1 in 300 chance that that hot chick you picked up at the bar is HIV+, give or take.
The chance of an HIV+ woman infecting a man through one act of unprotected sex is between 0.1% and 1%. The 1% figure is for men with genital lacerations. Let's take a rate of 0.5%.
Condoms are known to block HIV transmission. The average breakage/slippage rate for condoms is a whopping 4.6% (hello, people! Learn to use the tools!).
Ok. So let's say you pick up a chick at the bar and go home and have protected sex. You are two orders of magnitude more likely to get killed by a car while walking to her house than you are to contract HIV from her.
Hope that helps put things into perspective.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
Yes, and Wellesley is a great example, being a women-only school, where almost all of the students live on campus is a very close-knit community. Also note that in general, the more virginal end of the graph refers to those students who have less academic reason to leave campus, while the other side encompasses a lot of field trips and a high probablity of an exchange program. I hardly think this is indicative of significantly broader trends. It's also the age-old 20-something refrain.
First, it's cervical cancer, not ovarian. That alone should be enough to show you're full of shit.
But just to emphasize the point, the virus is not 100% fatal, nor does it cause cancer in 100% of the cases.
That, combined with your apparently deliberate misrepresentation of the pregnancy risks after a broken condom makes me wonder what your agenda is, and why you're deliberately posting false information to support a point that others have repeatedly destroyed.
Why are you lying? What is your motivation to lie to people about sex, and why do you think you're justified in doing so?
Please don't respond that you didn't lie, I gave you one example and can think of two others in this thread. It's right there for the world to see, so denying it isn't going to get you anywhere.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever. -George Orwell
Though that should really be for YRO.
Any sufficiently advanced man is indistinguishable from God
so basically the conclusion is that nerds and retards have less sex in high school than "normal" people. who knew?
I'd like to see the scientific evidence that smart people are less attractive. An IQ of 110 is not that uncommon and as I've seen it, more intelligent people are able to care for themselves better and generally have a better genetic makeup. Facial structure and body structure are all indications of internal and genetic wellness. It seems there is a point at which intelligence can be related to genetic disorders, but for the most part it is a result of well functioning natural selection.
If I had more free time, I would spend a lot of it posting after every article that correlates IQ to anything whatsoever. Or talk about. Or do anything but laugh at.
First, IQ != Intelligence.
Second, IQ doesn't mean much of anything else at all.
As detailed here -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ -- to test scholastic aptitude. The test has been criticized many many many times for being racist, classist, not anchored (average scores can drift away from "average"), and possibly entirely without any real value whatsoever. A bunch of those criticisms are also in the Wikipedia article.
As one other poster pointed out, even if IQ did mean something, correlation ain't causation. If this study means anything, it's probably indicating a gentle, general socioceconomic class difference w.r.t. teen sex. Which is not nearly such new or interesting news.
Sigh. End rant.
whats with the people who are passionate and intelligent, Schopenhauer, Freud, Hoellebeq, Hunter S. Thompson, Murakami..aso. We know, writers, artists, people who express their energy through Abstract ideas, not Technology We are doomed to be in a vacuum between the Higher-Intelligent guys and the stupid ones. "Art is useless" - Oscar Wilde Some of us are damned to Insanity an Madness. We often are as same intelligent as you but we can't focus on one part of the "show" I say that intellect makes us making question, which we often can't answer Between the sheets
if the most important thing for you in a woman is for her to be a teenager with "everything tight", you've got far bigger problems than growing old, believe me...
a far better argument would've been to gain experience in order to improve one's skills, though learning stuff along with your partner has it's charm too, but still, seriously, your post is just sad.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
Gaaaaaarn!
Online Starcraft RPG? At
Dietary fiber is like asynchronous IO-- Non-blocking!
Losing your virginity is like writing your first "hello world" program. Sex is incredibly variable and complex. Sex is much more than just mechanics. Sex is different with different people due to each persons emotional and intellectual makeup.
Yes sometimes sex can be purely primal. Sometimes getting out of your thinking head and into that space can be amazing. Sometimes it's down right violent. Sometimes it's intimate and beautiful.
I'm not saying that it's the end all and be all of existence but to shrug it off and say "oh it's not all that" when you haven't actually experienced the depth of the act is silly. Why don't you just accept that you're relatively ignorant on the topic and leave it at that?
Sometimes my arms bend back.
You are so right.
Dale Carnegie and Les Gibson's "How to be People Smart" all the way.
Geeks are not promoted. As soon as I got smart enough to stop acting smart, I started moving up fast.
Competent, yes! Smart, no.
Your end examples are very correct too. I stopped the highest executive in our department in his tracks for a half an hour with one question about his hobby. He smiles at me every time he passes me in the halls now.
The only thing I would disagree on is the faking it part. You really need to learn to enjoy other people or you are going to flame out under stress. If you sincerely appreciate and enjoy other people, then those side chats become energizing rather than draining. And the pay-off's are huge. Friendly managers and executives can make your work go so much smoother.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Just stop this! This was a survey. A s-u-r-v-e-y. What dumbelino teenager sits down and admits to anyone what pot he's smoked, how many guys she's had sex with, how many times they had illegal sex with an adult? This is science only if we are considering how many lie to an allegedly anonymous pollster. This is a metric of nothing. These "statistics" about sex and drug use amongst young people are absolute garbage. What the polls really highlight are the prejudices of the adults who are interpreting them.
I have this friend I absolutely love, but she has some downright silly ideas.
;)
Though incredibly bright, sometimes I wonder if she's actually thinking straight. Her world tends to revolve around sex and an inclination towards BDSM. (she didn't have the best childhood either, you could consider this a cause?). A few years ago in late High School, she had (and likely still has) the idea that the world needs a "Sexual Revolution". Involving mass amounts of sex everywhere, of course. Something about this is supposed to change our world for the better.
Not to mention the population increase, which I'm sure we don't need, I could imagine the rise in STDs wouldn't be so pleasant either. And now, we could all become severely stupid? Oh noes.
Well, intelligent too, but...
Any word if more sex makes you have crazy concepts that don't really make much sense? I'd like to know if our Government gets laid more than Ron Jeremy
"While you're watching the quiet ones, a noisy one will fucking kill you!" - George Carlin
So, I guess it is up to us to save the world! According to my calculations if more dumb people procreate, which creates even more dumb people, then the whole world will be full of dumb people in no time! I propose that those of use among the intellectually elite must take up this cause and have as much sex (and therefore more babies) as possible, if only to save the world. Even if we have to have sex with dumb women, we will be imparting precious genetic code, so that perhaps the baby may be a bit smarter than his stupid mother (btw you can reverse all the male/female roles in this, but who are you kidding). It is our duty, our obligation, to sleep with as many women as possible. It may be difficult at times, they will try and settle you down, however we will just have to hold next to our hearts the conviction needed to march forward toward are common goal of getting laid and saving the planet... Kind of reminds me a bit of the end of the movie "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb".
Well, let's assume that the results are true.
/.-ers like to think that 'cause they got grades, and they're intelligent, you should be able to roughly equate "grades" and "IQ".
The best predictor of how far a date goes (first base, sex, etc) is what the girl's interested in doing. If you're alone with a girl you're interested in, how many guys would say no if she brings out the condoms? Let's say "effectively zero".
So, in general, women are still the "gatekeepers".
One thing you can say about people in high school, is they're mostly not interested in deviating from the norm of their peer group. So most girls probably will end up dating the guys who are basically pretty mainstream (by any individual girl's definition of "mainstream", which is largely shaped by the opinions of her peer group).
People with very high scholastic achievement are probably also "not mainstream" in some other way as well.
So the fact that on average, high-school girls select sexual partners that are "mostly pretty similar to themselves" should be no surprise. The idea of girls selecting people "in the middle" by whatever trait you want to manage should be pretty uncontroversial.
Which should lead to the conclusions of this study.
And please, can we forget about discussing "intelligence" or IQ here? This study only talked about grades. I know most
While there is a positive correlation between IQ and scholastic achievement, that correlation only exists for IQ scores in the range of ~120 or less. For IQ scores over 120, there's basically no correlation, positive or negative, between IQ and scholastic achievement.
The plural form of "anecdote" is "anecdotes", not "evidence".
I'd rather be having sex than reading this article.
How stupid is that.
He who said 1,000,000 monkeys on 1,000,000 typewriters would eventually type the great novel, never saw an AOL chat room
Smarter teens likely are not having less sex because they're smarter.
It's more likely that the prevailing anti-intellectualism in young Western society means that the smartest are ostracized, reducing their access to partners. Or conversely, perhaps those who have low access to partners have nothing else to do with their time than study, and so tend to get higher grades. Or perhaps more intelligent teens, for whatever reason, are less prone to own up to sleeping around a lot while answering surveys.
You could have both.
I guess some of us are smarter than you and have figured out it's not an either or proposition.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
I personally think that less intelligent people have better social skills. Consequently to get laid, for the most part, it requires good social skills (gift of gab for instance)--hence more intelligent "nerds" have a harder time at it (no pun intended). Now the question is, do people with less intelligence acquire these social skills as a means to compensate for the lack of intelligence? Is this a social evolutionary trait? Are more intelligent persons spending there time studying and analyzing things that interest them, while less intelligent people occupy their time interacting with others. Is there a corollary between intelligence and social skills? Here's another question. Do both groups masturbate at the same rate? I'm willing to bet that's the case. Considering the main preoccupation of most, if not all, rather intelligent computer nerds is downloading pron. Just a thought.
Badges!?! We don't need no stinking badges!
The act of sexual intercourse is a very natural human instinct. I would bet that a majority of people out there have sex, or at least have had sex at some point.
In theory, 50% of the people out there, teens or otherwise, are in the middle of the intelligence spectrum. The remainder of the population naturally gravitate to one of the other extremes.
Now, by definition, people approaching either extreme of the curve are increasingly further away from the 'average middle'.
I don't have handy any information about what the personal habits of 'non-normal' people are (when plotted across a curve of intelligence), but since the mind is perhaps our singular most defining feature as a species, I would hypothesize that people of average intelligence behave in very average ways.
Since sexual intercourse is a 'normal' or 'average' behavior, I bet that most of the people with 'normal' or 'average' intelligence participate in the act according to the average frequency of their peers.
I would also hypothesize that deviations from 'average' intelligence on either side of the curve change a great many behavioral characteristics. Since sexual behavior is (in my opinion) a baser, hard-wired bit of evolutionary programming, no doubt intelligence has some relationship with sexual behavior.
A lot of the relationship here, though is probably due to basic statistics and very difficult-to-quantify variables. A majority of people behave as the majority of people do.
Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
What kind of a moron are you?
Do you think women *actually* believe me when I say that? Have you actually ever had any contact with the opposite sex? It's flirting, douche.
--- I do not moderate.
That young stuff is the best stuff in the whole world. See right now you're jail bait, they're jail bait. It's perfect. I mean, when you hit eighteen, bam! you're talking about three to five.
I guess that pretty much demonstrates the thesis...that /.'ers are below average intelligence...
I suppose I could cite the study that shows intelligent women have more and richer sex lives than unintelligent females, but what would be the point?
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I know a few people who take a few honors classes at my high school, and get pretty high grades altogether. Does that make them smart? No, actually, these people are, well, not the brightest kids on the block to put it nicely. As another example, many people tell me I'm an intelligent person, yet most of my grades around a C level, and I take all Standard classes. How much you succeed in public school doesn't have that much to do with your intelligence. I'm more convinced it has to do with how content you are with the school system, and how conveniently the work load fits into your schedule.
So many posters here with various theories on why they didn't get to have a good fuck when they were teens (or now). Jeezus, isn't it obvious? They spent more time with girls and less doing math. That way, sooner or later even you, noble slashdotter, will get fucked, so to speak, as opposed to being fucked up. Sitting in front of a computer is not conducive to a healthy sex life.
It should have been "Abnormal teens have less sex".
Of course it's harder to find someone you like if you're special. Like too smart, too stupid, too fat, too skinny, spend all your time in the stable or in another way don't fit in with everyone.
If only the smart people could find each other, they would surely have plenty of sex.
"Not to mention how DISGUSTING sex is"
I wouldn't go as far as say it's disgusting -- unless all you know about it is what you see in porn, like sluts bathing in cum or whatever. But it's certainly a very disrupting moment.
I mean, one moment you're there, having a nice dinner and good conversation with a beautiful woman in a stylish restaurant. The other moment you two are naked, sweating, in uncanny positions, talking dirty shit, exchanging saliva etc.
It's very unlike anything your social skills have ever prepared you to.
I don't feel like it...
Nerds not having sex...Holy crap! What will happen next?!!
This study is also so bogus; I don't know where to start. Not making myself out to have been a man-whore, but that isn't too far off from my High School years. I graduated with a 4.0 from a good school. I was one of those lucky guys that didn't need to study, took tests well, and memorized almost everything I read. I was Student Body President, and lettered in Football, Track, Basketball and Wrestling.
My extra-curricular activities had no bearing on my intellectual measurements during my teen years. I will say that I tended to date girls who were smart as well, so maybe it was all of those smart conversations we had...maybe not. I am going to go out on a limb and guess the person who wrote this article had their lunch money taken quite a few times.
I don't think attractiveness is everything. I see many couples where one (but usually both) partners are not all that attractive by societies standards.
People don't just bump into each other and have sex -- they talk first. It's well known that people seek others that are similar to themselves or their parents -- that goes for intellect too. If you take a person who loves talking about math with an IQ of 140 and another person who loves talking about more mainstream things with an IQ of 100, there probably won't be a great connection.
The problem is that most people in the world have average intellect. There are simply more mates that average IQ people match with.
At places like MIT, where basically everyone has a high IQ, there is another problem: most are male. In such environments attractiveness plays a great role I think.
Ask yourself this: Would you want to be with someone much smarter or much stupider than you?
One of the saddest days of my life was the afternoon after the day I banged, probably, my last teen. I was not quite 23, and had a simple feeling that after that I'd be too old for the 18-19 crowd. I mean, how fun is it to date someone who can't go to the bar with you, and how likely are you to meet a teen (legal teen, that is) at any of your usual post-21 haunts.
These days, as I near 30 I still very often work around girls in their late teens and very early twenties. I'm a photographer and most of the fashion and lifestyle models I work with are 18-22 or 30-40. As I get older though, I realize that the teens and young 20's I'm working around, as attractive as many of them are, wouldn't really be worth it to me (even if I weren't married). There is just too much emotional immaturity with most of folks I meet. They very easily become too emotionally attached, OR are acting promiscuously for the purpose of 'getting even with dad' or something which I think would just make me feel dirty.
Plus, most of the people in the 18-22 range are fairly inexperienced. 22-35 is an entirely different story. Women are, in my opinion, like wines. They do get better with age, so long as they're well maintained, you get them before they turn to vinegar.
Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
A lot of chicks are indeed taken, unattractive, or crazy. I'd say about 1 out of 10 women of my age range meets the three criteria. If one out of 10 women finds me attractive, that means I have to meet ~100 women of my age to get a girlfriend.
The problem with computer nerds is that they might only talk with a few new women every year, and then complain when they can't find a girlfriend. One actually has to work hard to get a chick. In grad school, I went to martial arts classes, dance classes, the college SCA, parties, conventions, etc., both because I was interested in them, but also so I could keep my eye out for potential girlfriends. At the ballroom dance club I was approached by a woman, and now we've been dating for years (and are engaged). Turns out she was the official club greeter, and I'd misread her friendliness as hitting on me, but hey, it worked out well.
It sounds like you're a bit afraid of the whole process. Don't be. Just get out there, talk to every person you find attractive, be willing to make mistakes (!), work on your social skills (!), possibly work out if you're not in shape, and don't expect anything, and you should be pleasantly surprised. The only hard part to dating is finding a large enough pool of new people to talk to.
Old acquaintances don't count. If you haven't asked out a woman by the third time you talk to her, she'll put you firmly into the friend box. And it's hard to break out of the friend box.
A good woman is one of the most wonderful things in the world. Don't let your fear of the process get the better of you.
As the German saying goes: "Dumm fickt gut", which roughly translates as "A stupid person is a great lay." It appears that you cannot beat experience here...
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
I'm an atheist and an antitheist, and I still think you're an idiot.
Among all the things he said, you could find nothing else to comment on?
Unlike you, he wasn't even preaching.
Grow up.
Ignore this signature. By order.
So Newton didn't use his brain?
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
But equally, I'd bet anything that Woz has had a great deal more fun than Gates through his career. Doing what you like to do and having fun at it (and he's obviously not broke) is a far more satisfying way to conduct your life than hoarding up for a golden retirement. Face it, by the time you retire, so many youthful opportunities will have closed before you. Life is short, it's only common sense to try to make it satisfying.
I've lost my virgenety at age of 30 (not thirtiin like many ohters)
I'm not saying anything about his position but you're acting like a complete idiot here.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
"One you didn't have to pay (standard dating fees excluded)."
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
It certainly shows in the current state of the world, that stupid people are breeding faster than smart ones.
Kill each other!
This is the stuff they DON'T teach you in university but they should.
School, schmool. Why didn't anyone else teach me this? This is such an obvious truth but it's not one people talk about openly. Almost as if they're ashamed by it. While growing up, I had been flat out told by several people that there's plenty of time for socializing later in life. Not only was this not true, I find that advice to be rather crippling. I was raised with a set of beliefs that are incompatible with reality and I've never been able to adjust to that fact. I wish I had slashdot as a kid. Best advice site on the net!
bump up the child support amount. In many states it's at least 25% of your monthly income.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Can I atleast be modded Insightful....
Oh yeah!?!?!?!! Well I wasn't even conceived when I lost my virginity!! I have an IQ of over 1 kabillion , although that was from an oral test administered before I was able to speak, so it would be, like, adjusted to the upper 2 kabillion's. And I was able to perform integral calculus far beyond the level of all the other non-fetuses. I also [insert bits of actual past] etc emo etc desperate gothtards etc nerds suck etc. Ohhhhh!!! You just got f'd in th A!!!!
Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
Double-wrapping a condom actually increases the likelihood of both of them breaking. The condoms rub together causing friction which will cause them to tear.
Actually, at MIT, 45% are female. However, Georgia Tech is skewed male ~75:25, and CalTech is skewed male ~85:15.
Actually, at Caltech the ratio is about 70:30. Note that the original poster was correct (>50% means most) while you are clearly wrong for one of your "facts" causing me to doubt the others. I thought Georgia Tech was significantly "worse" (meaning fewer females) than Caltech, but I could be wrong.
That being said, there are plenty of places where basically everyone has a high IQ that aren't engineering schools: Stanford, Harvard, UC Berkeley, etc. which are probably better to study simply because they don't have the extra variable of the aforementioned ratio. An unbalanced ratio messes with a lot of things, but my observations do not indicate that attractiveness plays a great role; I would conclude that it plays less of a role than it did in high school (balanced ratio, people with lower and higher variation IQs).
The stupid ones can't figure out how, and the bright ones have better things to do.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
The problem is people who think "deep and meaningful" means "dark and edgy".
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Actually, at Caltech the ratio is about 70:30
And it's about 50:50 by weight...
We're all born with nothing.
If you die in debt, you're ahead.
Actually many women like a bit of experience. Inexperienced guys don't know what they're doing or how to find out what the current girl likes. No, girls don't want someone who's likely to give them an STD but they also don't want an idiot fumbling around clumsily, which is basically what you're saying you'll be with the whole "I'm a virgin" routine.
Silly rabbit
It works the other way too. "I may be dumb, but this guy is a fucking moron!"
The real obstacle is poor social skills.
There is also an unfortunate misconception: nerds and geeks aren't just smart people. They're smart people with social deficits and, often, low cultural capital. There are smart people who are also popular, charismatic, and confident.
Life's not fair.
Note that the dumb kids also get less sex.
Bad looks and bad brains are both caused by bad health.
Nobody wants the person with the lopsided head.
are you seriously equating lying about your virginity to cannibalism?
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
I finally believe those Christian groups that think sex will ruin your life--you proved it.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
I'm fairly sure she was smarter than me, and I'm something between 145 and 180 for IQ. Damn I wanted to make kids with her!
I had to settle for a 130 IQ, which is 1 or 2 standard deviations lower than me.
00011011 ...
1+2+0+8+16
27....crap.
You're right.
Sorry, I approximated my age for that post, and instead automatically binaried my real age which is 27. I'll lie better on my age next time.
As long as it isn't one-way, emotional attachment is a sign of maturity.
Without that, you get divorces. You might even bang random teens... oh.
Maybe you need some more emotional attachment.
My then-girlfriend and I were once described as co-dependant. She was 19, and I was 22. It's been a decade since then. We're married, and life is very good. We each have someone to love, someone to count on, someone to come home to, someone to care for us, someone to need us, someone to fuck, someone to watch the kids, and so on.
The aging hasn't been good for either of us.
My grandparents, on both sides, have had emotional attachment for half a century.
The "safety" concerns about sex aren't really safety concerns. It's moral, but they're stuck in a world where people roll their eyes and laugh if you moralize like that ol' time religion. So they disguise their moralizing as a concern for safety. Ironically, this shows a lack of integrity, which is morally concerning to me. Why should I trust someone who would misrepresent their motives?
Smarter in all the ways that I am not?
Seems it parallels the activities of their parents. Parents who attend higher education tend to put off having children longer *and* have fewer children than those less educated.
Makes sense -- the smarter and more educated you are the more you might think about "consequences" -- those put off alot of people having children! They are probably more likely to be informed about or understand proper use of birth control methods.
L
That's pretty much right, except a fuller translation would of course flesh out those words so they don't seem as clipped (unless the German seems just as clipped to a German speaker--I don't have a good enough feel for the language to tell).
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
Welcome to the internet.
Homonyms are fun!
You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
To my count all of the 1000+ answers so far have circled around the following theories (and their inverses for less smart people):
1. Smart people understand the dangers of sex, hence don't do it
2. Smart people have less possible partners with desirable qualities
3. Smart people have less time for sex
4. Smart people have less interest for sex because of their "higher state of mind"
I find it interesting that none of the high-modded posts dared to suggest that perhaps smart teens just are not always that popular with teen girls? Is it too frightening explanation to consider that smart people have actually less possibilities for sex in high school?
The theories 1-4 explain the finding partially, but the truth is that quite many things you'd expect a person with high IQ to do aren't that hot within teenage girls. To my experience those sporty and outgoing types (activities which, while not excluding intelligence, do not explicitly require it) were wildly more popular with girls than those who got consistently good grades, shined in maths, computers etc.
It could be that some smart people actually are less interested in sex because of their intelligence, but I think the majority is just less inclined to do things the "average teen" would do (hang out at the mall or whatever you Americans do), thus getting less exposure to opposite sex, and therefore not getting the opportunity to get laid, even if they wanted to (because that's what the media tells them a normal teenage would do, and no-one wants to be freak, right?).
http://codeandlife.com
Actually HIV itself is not fatal. A lot of FUD is spread about HIV AIDS, and they are generally lumped together, in such a way that the general public thinks that they are one and the same thing.
The truth is that HIV is a virus, that can be contracted in several ways including sex. And AIDS is a syndrom that can be contracted in several ways including lupis, and when there is too much HIV virus in your bloodstream.
The HIV virus can be controlled, and it is possbile to go from having full blown AIDS to no AIDS, while still having HIV
You can also have the HIV virus while it remains virtually undetectable, and in this state, if you have unprotected sex with someone whose immune system is healthy, they will probably not contract the virus.
A real world example is a friend of mine, who has been infected with the HIV virus for at least 10 years. He recently got re-married, and has since had a child with his new wife. Neither his wife or his new daughter have the HIV virus.
These facts are why we often hear about cures for AIDS, because thery do exist (because strengthening the immune system is not all that hard to do). But they are generally translated (and manipulated by the pharmaceutical companies and the mass media) as a cure for HIV becuase HIV and AIDS are generally lumped together in the same sentance, and a medical cure for HIV has not been made public yet.
Participatory Governance : The only feasible option for a real democracy, where everyone really does have a say.
...people with an above average IQ are going to be labeled as "nerds".You should go to the next Mensa recruitment drive in your area. You will find your "nerds" among stevedores, felons, writers, carpenters, etc.
Mensa membership requires only that your scores on an accepted test be in the top 2%. (Along with an application fee and annual dues.)
First of all, if you were standing in front of me, I'd punch you in the teeth for calling my beautiful wife a slut.
Secondly, I had no idea what the sex was going to be like when I got married...because when we married, we were both virgins. (I know...*gasp*, right??) I know this is conceptually unfathomable to your undeveloped hormonal brain, but as much as we enjoy sex, that's not why we got married.
Some of us actually make choices in life for sophisticated, intelligent reasons. It's saddening to me that so many people here think that people like me must be lying because such a perspective isn't even possible. Feel free to be naive; it's not hurting me any.
But it is pathetically humorous to me that you want to pass yourself off as smarter than I am. Oh, and way to post as a coward. Clearly the term is apt.
And by the way...trust me, my wife was far from the first person who was interested in me. In fact, we spent two years as good friends while we were dating other people before we fell in love with each other. I chose her, and she chose me. Has it been perfect? Nah. But it gets better every day.
"But casual sex is ok - even though we know indisputably it leads to unwanted children and the spread of STDs"
I've had plenty of casual sex and I've had neither of those, so consider your "undisputed" fact to be disputed (i.e wrong)
"because it happens only 2% of the time (assuming the condom is used correctly by the usually inebriated youths involved), and anyone who argues with you is clearly unqualified to breed."
NO, the condom fails 2% of the time, and since pregnancy/STD transmission after a failure is nowhere near 100%, this point is wrong too.
And it's just you that shouldn't breed, as evidenced by your inability to get a joke, but also because your ability to reason is crap.
Stop telling people what is best for them, no one cares about your opinion.
And seriously, you need to get laid.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
"The people who deny it are the ones like you who need to justify the fact that they're promiscuous."
Where exactly did I discuss being promiscuous? I never said I was promiscuous, so who the fuck are you to assume something that isn't discussed anywhere by me?
"Lots of people are sick of jumping from one sack to the next. Gets really old, really quick."
So, it's do as I say, not as I do then? You get to be promiscuous, but no one else? Or are you going to say that you were never promiscuous, at which point I'll ask how the fuck you know it gets old?
Sorry buddy, you're the typical got-no-ass-so-no-one-else-can-get-any-either loser, who wants other people to live the way he thinks is best, so he doesn't feel like he missed out because he's socially inept while lying to himself and claiming it's a choice.
Save your opinion about my sex life, I truly don't give a fuck what people like you who think they know best for me think, especially when it's clear you're either a hypocrite or a liar.
You go on telling yourself you chose your life. The rest of us will avoid bursting your bubble, but we all know the truth, so save the denials, you just sound that much more pathetic.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
"I'd say the great things in life are not dying from some STD you picked up from the chick at the bar."
You can be afraid of statistically tiny risks if you want, the rest of us aren't possessed by profound cowardice.
(Cue explanation that everyone sees through immediately of why your obvious cowardice isn't cowardice)
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
"You keep telling yourself whatever you need to make yourself feel good about your "choice".
No one believes it but you, though, and I don't think you do either."
It's true now just like it was the first time you pretended it was a choice.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
You laugh, but I have always said the secret to a happy relationship is finding someone smarter than you who is dumb enough to go out with you. It seems to have worked for me. My wife and I have been married 25 years as of this last June. She earns more than I do too, although that is not too hard since I teach high school math and do some network admin contract stuff on the side.
Instead, I'm going to see if this brain of mine can construct and realise a job with high pay, minimal hours, and no interaction with stupid people. I think that'd be a much better use of IQ points than simply being able to do Robbie the Retard's job three times more efficiently.
"Since I've considered the pros and cons to make an informed choice and not have random sex, it must somehow mean I haven't had ample opportunity to do so?"
Yeah pretty much.
"Of course, you'd be wrong."
You can say that, but we both know the truth, so save it.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
for members of MENSA?
Grammar Nazi
Seriously, what is that? Some kind of Victorian theory like phrenology assigning intelligence to Correct Breathing Technique?
And have you ever tried breathing without using your mouth at all? It can be done, but it's pretty tough, even more so if you're exerting yourself. The mouth and nose are a system, they work together.
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
Of course, to have any significant opinion in the area, I should read research around it...
Eivind.
Doubting the existence of evolution is like doubting the existence of China: It just shows that you're uninformed.
"Neither did I. I got my point across without any of that,"
That was in reply to your statement
"But I'm not the one that's had to resort to name calling, personal attacks and baseless assumptions to get their point across"
Now, think about what you wrote, and what I wrote, and how you admitted you understood my point BEFORE I called you any names, and you'll realize that I did NOT HAVE TO resort to name calling, as you had already gotten my point without it and you admitted as much.
I'll patiently await your apology, and next time, make sure you have someone smarter than you to read things for you so you don't jump to moronic conclusions based on your own gross lack of reading comprehension.
I won.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
Oh SIIHP, it's okay.
I understand why you have to lie. I understand why you feel the need to attack and call me names and then lie about it. Your actions surely help reinforce the careful illusion you've built to keep from feeling the pain you *must* be feeling.
Had I understood the pain you were going through, I would never have confronted your lie and personal attacks so harshly. I would have continued to you let you maintain your protective fantasy of being a respectful, truthful individual.
I am truly sorry if I have made you confront painful memories you would rather not have to remember right now.
"I understand why you feel the need to attack and call me names and then lie about it. "
Please post the quote where I lied.
You attempted to, and after I explained why you were wrong, you repeated the same wrong accusation that I had just destroyed.
So post the quote or STFU. Just saying "you lied" is a lie on your part, and you know it.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
"What I will do is offer my sincere and humble apologies for not being the angry uncivil person you *need* me to be."
Too late, you already accused me of lying with no evidence. Then you did it again, after you were told why you were wrong.
I would call deliberately lying about me in the face of definitive proof to be quite uncivil.
I like the "sensitve to your pain" thing you're trying, it's a nice way to deflect attention from the fact that I destroyed you.
But it doesn't change that I destroyed you, or that you blamed your lack of reading ability on me.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
You clearly admit you lied.
Quote or admission liar, I've stopped reading the garbage you put in you justify why you can't post a quote.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
Or admit you lied.
Save the stupid philosophizing for someone who will bother to read it.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.