and what you can do to change it.
Today Vox linked to a charming little analysis of the Manosphere by none other than Feisty Woman. Vox adequately obliterates her argument, which rests on the assumption that Roosh (of all people on the planet) is “a pent up indignant sexually frustrated buffoon.” [emphasis mine]. He also nicely sums up why men don’t like intelligent women:
So, why do we tend to downgrade the attractiveness of women who are intelligent? Because women who are intelligent are nearly as prone to lack honor, intellectual integrity, and genuinely intellectual interests as their less intelligent sisters, but due to their pride in their intelligence and their feelings of superiority, they are far more prone to foolishly challenge male intellectual authority in order to validate their self-perceptions and/or get their dominance buzz. In other words, intelligent women tend to be a massive pain in the ass without providing much to compensate for their disagreeableness.
I don’t disagree, but in the interests of presenting Her Feisty Highness with an olive branch, I’d like to explain the problem to her (and perhaps others) on a somewhat deeper level. Despite her lack of self-awareness, Feisty also writes:
I feel there are a lot of ills and injustices within the feminist movement that have had a profoundly destructive impact on society (I will be writing more about that in the coming weeks) of which other treacherous and cantankerous movements have spawned and gained momentum and notoriety.
This means there’s hope, and dammit, when i see hope, I exploit it! Yes, this is a woman who has dismissed an entire movement based on one dismissive tweet and another supportive one (solipsism anyone?), but I watched Star Wars way too much as a kid, so I’m inclined to focus on the good in others.
Vox adroitly explains why men often find intelligent women unattractive, but the fact remains that Feisty and millions of other women really really think we should. The only way they can reconcile that fact that we don’t is “[F]ear”.
So I’ll see her fear and raise her one projection. Chicks dig men who dominate them. One of the ways a man can dominate a woman is intellectually. Therefore, women find intellectually dominant men attractive (notice I said “intellectually dominant” and not “smart”; there’s a huge difference).
Because women find such men attractive, men are supposed to find such women attractive. Although Feisty doesn’t like feminism, she does buy into its premise that men and women are essentially alike. She finds it hot when a dude can stump her in an intellectual argument, so if a guy doesn’t feel it rise when a woman stumps him, there must be something wrong with him.
And as we buy the feminist lie that what turns women on should be what turns everybody on (and that what turns men on is superficial, of course), such projections multiply. Women don’t mind dating guys who are a bit older, so men should hunt cougars. Women don’t care quite as much about looks, so if we like pretty women we’re being superficial. Women want powerful men who with impressive resumes, so they devote their twenties and thirties to building their resumes and then feel cheated when none of us give a damn.
The same goes for being “feisty” (although we don’t call straight men that).
Regarding intellect specifically, there’s also another phenomenon at work. Women like to test their men, to make sure that they can measure up. A woman who prides herself on her intellect sees this as the best way to probe her man for weakness. Furthermore, because it’s her best shot at beating him, she’s likely to repeat the same intellectual fitness tests. Continually.
And eventually we just get sick of it. We don’t feel some horrid onslaught of insecurity when you best us in a political argument, eventually we just get bored with it and realize that there are other women with whom we can just relax. A woman has to be careful with her testing. Yes, she’s got to make sure we’re dominant, but just a bit too much, if it’s a worthy guy, next.
I haven’t had the same problems as other guys in this regard in that I’m so rhetorically and dialectically dominant that even the smartest of women give up on trying to best me this way almost immediately; sometimes they recognize this in the first five minutes, sometimes it takes an hour or so, but they all soon learn they’ll need to find another way to get under my skin. Before I learned Game, because this was my best way to impress women, it became a crutch.
It’s not a crutch anymore, largely because I’ve ignored the advice of people like Feisty.
Nevertheless, the point stands. I value intellectual curiosity in a woman, but I personally find intelligence itself to be neither here nor there. Intellectually curious women can help expand my own mind; merely intelligent ones find me attractive because I possess the kryptonite that neutralizes their super powers.
But I get it. They have other ways.
If Feisty’s honest with herself, she’ll admit that women aren’t turned on by “sensitive” guys who are kind and understanding but don’t have any fight. Maybe she can then also recognize that men don’t find women attractive who have lots of “fight” but aren’t particularly kind and understanding.
So Feisty, if you’re inclined to listen, I advise that you recognize that we’re different, that our differences are a good thing. Be a little more understanding of where we’re coming from. Listen, read, and ask questions that don’t come across as attacks. Really consider that as much as you may dislike feminism, you’re actually buying into a lot of it.
You’re not hopeless, seriously.
So take a deep breath, loosen up those clenched little fists, relax, and embrace your femininity.