Letters to the Editor
-
When "playing dumb" becomes "being dumb".
Look, I'm a bright guy, an "outlier", or whatever. I share doppelganger's frustration with the fairer sex (if not his affinity for the "guess which school I went to" game), but I'll admit most of my attention is focused on the really pretty girls, and that's bound to reduce the odds that I'll spend my time in the company of brilliant women. At any rate, my frustration stems from a perceived general lack of curiosity and an aversity to risk.
Here's a question for the feminists out there: Where is the distinction between "playing dumb" and "being dumb"? I'm generally pretty cynical, and I expect people to do only as much as they have to. I tend to believe that women more than men are rewarded for staying in the fold, so to speak, by playing dumb. I should clarify. When I say "playing dumb" I don't intend the act as pretense, but rather as a strategy. Taking this tack involves investing a lot of time following trends (i.e. style magazines, celebrity gossip, etc.) rather than blazing trails.
Furthermore, I wouldn't consider it a betrayal or pseudo-science, if feminists took seriously potential biological differences between men and women when evaluating whether women are more inclined to choose, for instance, the security of the group over the sort of self-actualization that characterizes genius. Even if these differences are socially-constructed, those constructions will bear out biologically as tendencies over generations.
-
Are Women Stupid?
At least Charlotte Allen is. The rest of us, not so much.
-
In the spirit of
"those who know, don't speak, and those who speak, don't know.." how about we ask women if they are stupid.
If they say "no", then we know they are lying.
If they say "yes", then we know they are humble.
-
@scarab
I have a problem with the male bashing humor too. I prefer that people are built up, rather than torn down. I didn't specifically mention male/female bashing in my post for a reason.
Sometimes people must be confronted with their follies in order to be able to grow. These types of jokes do not do that. They say "because you are in this group, you will always be that way." Completely counter productive.
My particular sore spot is Polish "jokes". I've had to hear way too many of those, from family even. Not helpful.
-
Outliers
I'm an outlier myself, female variety, but I don't bother much with a certain type of intelligent man for one simple reason:
"At any rate, my frustration stems from a perceived general lack of curiosity and an aversity to risk."
I don't have a general lack of curiosity or aversity to risk, I just express those attributes in ways that aren't traditionally male. I'm deeply curious and take all manner of risks, but odds of me ending up being the first woman anything are darned slim.
I don't mind. Given that the population is about half male, there's no reason for me to ape men in my aptitudes or my interests.
What bothers me is the assumption that women have never gone anywhere and that the feminine can't possibly amount to anything. When I prove to be inadequately informed on, say, the subject of quantum mechanics, a certain type of intelligent men seem to become immediately obsessed with how stupid they think women really are. The fact that my IQ scores would blow most of theirs out of the water and they'd have no hope of keeping up with me in my own field is beside the point. I'm reduced to the status of an exceptionally well-trained dog, merely because my intelligence isn't applied in a masculine way.
I used to waste time when I was young by competing with men on their own ground. It got boring fast. It also raised some interesting questions. Why should visuospatial skills be considered superior to language skills? Both are useful, and excelling at either allows one to explore all kinds of possibilities.
I don't put much effort into my looks, which would render me invisible to anyone with an eye for exceptional beauty, and yes, that's a strategy. You could even say it's a pack-following strategy, since I'm hardly alone in this, but personally I think the whole sports-following, Men's Health/Maxim-reading, motorcycle-buying, hottie-chasing thing is at least as much a group security phenomenon as watching Oprah. The professional sports thing is especially tribal.
I don't know all that much about quantum mechanics because I studied something else, that's all. I picked a subject I enjoyed and was good at, something that allowed me to explore and take risks in a way that pays off for me, not something that would allow me to prove that I was just as smart as men.
-
Well, I did compete with men on their own ground...
And did quite well, thank you very much. Got a Master's degree in mechanical engineering from a prestigious university. Worked as an engineer for a few years. Got one patent (out of the 5 applications I've filed). Worked in a Silicon Valley startup for a while. Had my own consulting business for a while, and did quite well.
Do I have good visuospatial skills? No. Not at all. It was hard for me to visualize moving mechanisms - my coworkers used to laugh at me because I would make gestures to illustrate what I was talking about, rather than draw pictures on the whiteboard. But despite the laughter, when anyone in the office had a design problem to solve that required creativity, they came to me. I was the designated creative type.
So I'm really not sure that "poor visuospatial skills" translate to "so dumb it hurts". There are always alternative ways of getting to the same point. And it really doesn't require relegating the entire world of engineering to men.
Also, I'm not sure that "risk aversion" translates to "so dumb it hurts", either. I've always been very risk averse. This means that I do not stick firecrackers in my mouth and light them on fire; it means that I do not zoom down a busy city street on a skateboard; it means that I do not juggle chainsaws while riding a unicycle. A lot of risk-taking is not an indicator of intelligence; rather, the opposite.