Yes, there’s always a certain threshold of acceptability. But once a women passes the “doesn’t constantly embarrass herself” and “doesn’t do stupid things that will bring the attention of C.P.S.”, there aren’t really that many points for going to the “can perform complex calculus in her head” level. There’s far more important things.
Yes. Well, not this silly wording exactly, but yes. Closer to what monstro said. I’ve gone through something similar more than once, that is wanting to like someone more because he’s cute and sweet, but being ultimately incapable of doing so because he’s just not bright. Apparently this isn’t the case for you, but I just can’t get it up (figuratively) for someone who doesn’t get it. It’s not fun, and I tend to avoid things that aren’t fun.
Fortunately for me and mankind, here on planet Earth, we essentially never have to choose between nice and smart, so I can rest easy about what I’ll have to do when it’s time to pick sides.
If football is the most important thing in his life, it doesn’t sound like he has a need for deep conversation at all. So maybe he’s not sexist; maybe he’s just a moron.
Tony, sexism and low emotional intelligence correlate with one another, I strongly suspect.
Where intelligence is important to me is basic communication. If I use the word “insidious” in a conversation, I dont need my mate to know the word right off the bat. But I do need them to have the cognitive ability to grasp the meaning through context. I also need them to have the sense not to derail the conversation by pointing out my use of a “big word”.
I don’t need them to do trigonometry, but I will cringe if they can’t figure out what to tip the waiter.
If my future child has questions about how the world works, I would like to know my husband can answer them without leading them to believe the sun revolves around the earth or that people rode bareback on dinosaurs and shit like that. I would like to know they can help the kid with their homework past the 5th grade.
When most people say they want someone who is smart, they aren’t saying they are looking for Einstein. They are saying they are looking for someone whose mental abilities they trust as well if not better than their own. This seems like something most sane and reasonable people would want.
Well, that’s just crazy - everyone knows that you have to saddle dinosaurs, with that rough, scaly lizard skin.
I can’t speak for my gender as a whole, but personally, I prefer for all of the people I associate with to be intelligent.
OK, but what does that mean in practice?
That you refuse to hang out with anyone with an average or below IQ? That those people who you know who are of average intelligence, you resent being around?
I’m genuinely asking these questions and not being obtuse. 
Speak for yourself. I give a lot of points for a good conversation and bonus credit for making me rethink things.
A smart partner is likely to keep you sharp into old age.
There are limits of course. The intellectual relationship needs to be reasonably competitive. Think of it as mental isometrics.
“Refuse” is kind of going overboard, but “avoidance” would be about right.
There are a lot of variables to consider. Am I going to be hanging out with one dumb person, a whole lot of them, or a mixed bag of average and dumb people? Are they dumb when it comes to general knowledge stuff, but only because of lack of opportunity rather than lack of inquisitiveness? Are they comfortable with themselves, or am I going to have to put up with an inferiority complex? Do they have other stuff going on that compensates for their slowness? Or are they as dull as dishwater?
I generally avoid anyone who exhibit signs that they will work my nerves.
Ok. I was just trying to clarify because I think most of the people here agree that all else being equal intelligence is better, but are disagreeing on its relative importance (in a social context).
Chronos’ post implied to me that to associate socially with him/her, intelligence is a prerequisite. Which is quite a harsh/elitist position when you think about it. In many social situations there’s very little opportunity for deep conversation, so why should intelligence be of primary importance?
On second reading perhaps Chronos just means intelligence is a very important consideration. That’s fair enough, but I’d be interested to know whether that means (s)he considers intelligence more important than “niceness”.
I like my human interaction to take place in small circles of people, preferably one-on-one. Therefore I would treasure a wife/girlfriend with whom I could have intelligent conversation with, and who could give me advice and counsel when needed. On the other hand, if this person was condescending and always putting me down or making me feel idiotic, then they could be the smartest or “sexiest” female in the world, and I would be repulsed. Naturally, physical attraction is important, but some brains and a sense of humor from my significant other would also be paramount.
What’s with the frequent dichotomization between intelligence and niceness in this thread? I find it interesting that people keep selecting niceness as the variable that they use as the reference variable and not some other trait.
Like, why not ask if Chronos considers intelligence more important than grooming and hygiene? Or sense of humor? Or physical attractiveness?
I would be surprised if anyone would prefer the company of rude genius bitches to someone who is polite and easy-going but of average or below intelligence. Unless your use of “nice” is different than mine, anyone who is not nice is going to be considered mean and I know of no one who voluntarily puts themselves in contact with mean people.
“Niceness” is just as meaningful as “intelligence” in casual social settings. Just as you aren’t likely to engage in deep intellectual conversations at a cocktail party, you probably aren’t going to need your emotions validated either. Really, our first impressions are based on a person’s social skills. If one values niceness, they are going key in on social skills that are associated with “niceness”. If one values intelligence, they will look for those things that are correlated with brains. But there are plenty of socially savvy people who are both mean and dumb.
I dated a gorgeous woman for a couple of weeks who was as interesting as a bag of hammers. It was painfull and boring. It didn’t last long.
Well I did weigh intelligence against other traits such as ambition, charisma and sense of humour upthread. But because we were just talking about niceness I was wondering what Chronos’ position was on that.
Two thoughts:
For me, intelligence and humor are closely linked. My sense of humor is rooted pretty deeply in knowing things about the world, and rarely are dumb people quick with a retort. The absolute minimum for me would be a man who gets my jokes and appreciates clever wordplay and can respond in kind. There’s no way I could make it work without that.
Second, I think it’s awfully easy to start feeling contemptuous toward someone less intelligent than yourself, and that is death to a relationship. Every time you didn’t explain something that mattered to you because what was the point? They couldn’t understand it anyway, that contempt would grow. Soon, you’d expect less and less–as every failed explanation frustrated you–and explain less and less and feel more and more contempt, which would cycle endlessly. Eventually, you start thinking of your lover as a child who can’t be trusted or relied on, and that’s not a marriage.
The first line (combined with title) of your OP:
You started (or I suppose he did) the dichotomy. The entire point of the thread is whether nice is enough, or should/do men look for intelligence as well.
That is the point of the thread, but you are the one who decided to claim that being smart is a bad thing. You’re the one who assumed that an intelligent person can’t be nice, and that’s the false dichotomy. We’re not trying to decide whether you can go without niceness.
What you get out of an intelligent partner, BTW, is the ability to be intimate with them. Have you never tried dating someone who was nice but had no intellectual bent whatsoever? Sure, it’s nice at first, but you never really get to know each other. I can’t think the way she does, and she can’t think the way I do. We can’t understand each other.
I personally don’t want a stranger for an SO. Apparently, for some, this varies.
You fail to understand what he was saying. He wasn’t setting up a dichomoty. He wasn’t saying he’d rather be with a stupid nice person rather than an intelligent bitch.
He was saying a woman’s personality (including her intelligence) is completely irrelevant to him* in the absolute*. All he wants is a beautiful woman who keeps quiet and lets him talk at her without the expectation of reciprocity. All “nice” means is that she won’t make a fuss when he ignores her in favor of his friends or football.
Intelligence is generally overrated as a personal traits. Anything above retard level is fine with me as long as she is kind and has a nice personality and a good pair of tits.