Why I'll never be able to love a woman...

[Luthor Rex]

Women not being curious, and hence not having a HUNGER to learn and see new things, has been one of my biggest disapointments with their sex.

The nail known as woman has been hit on the head by a hammer that we will only ever know as "Pook"...

in, the Twilight Zone...



Seriously though, Pook's right and the ability of a woman to be an intellecutal companion for me was (is?) very important.

Oh well...

 

[blueguy]

You may never find an intellectual match, but at least you could just use her for the sex. Oh well...

The girls I've been with have all been stupider than me as well. Their entire life and highlights are all centered around the day-to-day validation they receive. Such is their nature.

 

[DJDamage]

Its a rare breed to find intellectual woman that is both hot and normal (not a feminist or a lesbian). When it comes to women I don't need to talk to her about philosophy or the meaning of life, I can discover it on my own, talk to my friends about it or watch the discovery channel. The only thing I expect her is to make me happy (not in a sense of making me complete bvllsh1t but if we get along great and she doesn't nag, she is affectionate, she keeps my stomach full and my balls dry then I am happy).

 

[KarmaSutra]

Well your alternative is to chug c0ck and bite a pillow.

How's that for reality? I don't understand why Pook is so adored? Has anyone actually seen him work the sh1t he wrote? Any fellas who have winged with him and can verify his powers please let me know.

I admire him for his skills with prose but as a god with women, that's still suspect.

 

[blueguy]

It's funny, this reminds me of a guy I roomed with. This was his #1 most important thing he looked for in a woman. I thought to myself... "good luck, buddy.... " I'd rather take the sex and have a good-looking woman for an LTR. Honestly, the things DJDamage mentioned are all you need. Stop thinking like the psychologist from eHarmony.

 

[Interceptor]

That's why it's dangerous for men to create this "ideal" woman.

If you build up this image of "her", this idealization, you set yourself up for celibacy and failure.

We all have to realize that yes, it is a noble casue to look for that perfect Girl of our dreams, but we need to think about the practical aspects too, and the reality. Does she care for you? Does she cook and clean?Is she thoughtful and considerate to you? Does she give you the sex you want? Is she loyal to you, and only you? Does she make you happy??
Do you really want to discuss Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Hawking, and Plato???
With her? Is this necessary for you? I mean NECESSARY not, "it would be cool if she did" way, but necessary in a relationship for you to be happy?

I'm not saying "aim Low", meaning, have Low Standards, not at all, but in truth, an Intellectual Companion is few and far between.
I hate for this to come out as "just settle, it'll never get better". But...it's important to not have too a high standard, you know?


I will add something, that I think is the underlying psychological, emotional, and evolutionary goal that we as Men have...

...and that is...

We are all actually looking for OUR Alpha Female.

Deep down, She is the "one". And we look to find "HER."
the "Alpha Female."

Think about it.

Then discuss.
I would like to share some ideas about this with you.

 

[Deep Dish]

A woman takes interest only in subjects that have an immediate personal usefulness to her. For example, if she reads political article in the newspaper, it is highly likely that she wants to cast a spell on some political-science student, not that she cares about the fate of the Chinese, Israelis or South Africans. If she looks up the names of some Greek philosophers in the dictionary, it does not mean she has suddenly taken an interest in Greek philosophy. It means she is trying to solve a crossword puzzle. If she is studying the advertisements for a new car, she is not doing it with a platonic interest in its technical features, but because she wants to own it.

I have been saying this forever. The thought process of women can be summed up by: "Does it affect me?" If they cannot locate a practical application to their life, forgettaboutit. (There went astronomy, evolutionary biology, physics...) It is profoundly disappointing and undoubtedly it has been my greatest disenchantment. I have almost altogether stopped talking to women because I just don't have anything to say to them. They want to talk about people and I don't.

Women are mean to be loved, not soulmated, not intellectually equalled.

 

[Drum&Bass]

When it comes to women I don't need to talk to her about philosophy or the meaning of life

I love being able to talk to women about those topics, it involves thought, compassion, CONFIDENCE and conviction to be able to discuss those things.

why wouldn't you appreciate a woman who was able to communicate with you on that level ??? what is wrong with having a woman as a lover and as a friend ?

if we get along great

how do you specifically intend to get along great ?

she doesn't nag, she is affectionate, she keeps my stomach full and my balls dry then I am happy

Unless your into LOW SELF ESTEEM SLAVES who are not educated you will be miserable when it comes to women, if you aren't already...

Honestly, the things DJDamage mentioned are all you need. Stop thinking like the psychologist from eHarmony.

maybe for some guys, but I will become frustrated or un-interested unless I can have deep conversations with women, and I absolute love their display of emotion..not the bad manipulative or illogical kind of emotion, but rather the emotion that drives conviction or the emotion of her loving me or the emotional hurt that she will show when something is wrong..justifiable human emotions.

 

[Play the Game]

If you can't love em then just screw them... what's the big deal? :yawn:

 

[blueguy]

I love being able to talk to women about those topics, it involves thought, compassion, CONFIDENCE and conviction to be able to discuss those things.

Most women I know aren't intelligent enough to comprehend things beyond a certain level. I just keep these things to myself, otherwise, they see me as crazy. I keep things on a simple level. It's pointless to carry a conversation too deep with them.

They're so emotional. I'm more logical. I'm agnostic. Not too many agnostic chicks.

why wouldn't you appreciate a woman who was able to communicate with you on that level ??? what is wrong with having a woman as a lover and as a friend ?

Nothing, but a friend doesn't really need to talk about smart things. All my friends are good for doing fun things with. I don't have intellectual conversations with too many people, but this board fills that need.

how do you specifically intend to get along great ?

You can still do fun stuff together.

Unless your into LOW SELF ESTEEM SLAVES who are not educated you will be miserable when it comes to women, if you aren't already...

Funny, I don't really view them that way. And they've made me happy in the past.

 

[Roly]

Hey cheer up. An intellectual women does exist, they maybe a lot more rare nowadays but there out there. Here are some good examples throughout history:


ANDERSON, MARY
The windshield wiper was invented by Mary Anderson in 1903 to help streetcars operate safely in the rain. In 1905 she patented her invention, which allowed the car operator to control the external, swinging arm wipers from within the car. Windshield wipers became standard equipment on cars a decade later. Anderson was from Alabama, USA.
APGAR SCALE
The Apgar scale is a standardized scale that is used to determine the physical status of an infant at birth. This simple, easy-to-perform test was devised in 1953 by Dr. Virginia Apgar (1909-1974), a professor of anesthesia at the New York Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center. The Apgar scale is administered to a newborn at one minute after birth and five minutes after birth. It scores the baby's heart rate, respiration, muscle tone, reflex response, and color. This test quickly alerts medical personnel that the newborn needs assistance.
APGAR, VIRGINIA
Dr. Virginia Apgar (1909-1974), a professor of anesthesiology at the New York Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center, devised the Apgar Scale in 1953. The Apgar scale is a simple, easy-to-perform, standardized scale that is used to determine the physical status of an infant at birth. The Apgar scale is administered to a newborn at one minute after birth and five minutes after birth. It scores the baby's heart rate, respiration, muscle tone, reflex response, and color. This test quickly alerts medical personnel that the newborn baby needs assistance.
BLODGETT, KATHERINE
Kathering J. Blodgett (1898-1979) was an American physicist and inventor who invented a micro-thin barium stearate film that makes glass completely nonreflective and "invisible" (patent #2,220,660, March 16, 1938). Blodgett's invention has been used in eyeglasses, camera lenses, telescopes, microscopes, periscopes, and projector lenses. Blodgett also invented a gauge that measured the thickness of this type of coating (which can be only a few molecules thick), called a "color gauge."
COCHRAN, JOSEPHINE
The first dishwasher was patented in 1850 by Joel Houghton; his machine was a hand-turned wheel that splashed water on dishes - unfortunately, it wasn't very effective at washing dishes. The first working automatic dishwasher was invented by Mrs. Josephine Garis (W. A.) Cochran, of Shelbyville, Illinois, in 1889. Her dishwasher was a wooden tub with a wire basket in it - the dishes went in the basket, and rollers rotated the dishes. As a handle on the tub was turned, hot, soapy water was sprayed into the tub, cleaning the dishes. Cochran's machine was first shown at the 1893 World's Fair in Chicago, Illinois. At first, her machine was only bought by some restaurants and hotels. Cochran's small company was eventually associated with the KitchenAid company. The dishwasher didn't become widespread as a labor-saving machine until the 1960s.
DISHWASHER
The first dishwasher was patented in 1850 by Joel Houghton; his machine was a hand-turned wheel that splashed water on dishes - unfortunately, it wasn't very effective at washing dishes. The first working automatic dishwasher was invented by Mrs. Josephine Garis (W. A.) Cochran, of Shelbyville, Illinois, in 1889. Her dishwasher was a wooden tub with a wire basket in it - the dishes went in the basket, and rollers rotated the dishes. As a handle on the tub was turned, hot, soapy water was sprayed into the tub, cleaning the dishes. Cochran's machine was first shown at the 1893 World's Fair in Chicago, Illinois. At first, her machine was only bought by some restaurants and hotels. Cochran's small company was eventually associated with the KitchenAid company. The dishwasher didn't become widespread as a labor-saving machine until the 1960s.
DISPOSABLE DIAPER
The disposable diaper was invented in 1950 by Marion Donovan. Her first leak-proof diaper was a plastic-lined cloth diaper. Donovan then developed a disposable diaper. She was unsuccessful at selling her invention to established manufacturers, so she started her own company.
DONOVAN, MARION
Marion Donovan (1917-1998) was an American mother, inventor, and architect who invented the disposable diaper in 1950. Her first leak-proof diaper were fast-selling "Boaters," plastic-lined cloth diapers (diapers lined with pieces cut from a shower curtain, and later with surplus parachute nylon). Donovan then developed a completely disposable diaper. She was unsuccessful at selling this invention to established manufacturers, so she started her own company, which she later sold. Donovan produced many other consumer-based inventions and held more than a dozen patents
ELION, GERTRUDE
Gertrude Belle Elion (January 23, 1918 - February 21, 1999) was a Nobel Prize winning biochemist who invented many life-saving drugs, including 6-mercaptopurine (Purinethol) and 6-thioguanine (which fight leukemia), Imuran, Zovirax, and many others. Elion worked at Burroughs-Wellcome (now called Glaxo Wellcome) for decades (beginning in 1944) with George Hitchings and Sir James Black, with whom she shared the Nobel Prize. She is named on 45 patents for drugs and her work has saved the lives of thousands of people.
GOODE, SARAH S.
Sarah E. Goode was a businesswoman and inventor. Goode invented the folding cabinet bed, a space-saver that folded up against the wall into a cabinet. When folded up, it could be used as a desk, complete with compartments for stationery and writing supplies. Goode owned a furniture store in Chicago, Illinois, and invented the bed for people living in small apartments. Goode's patent was the first one obtained by an African-American woman inventor (patent #322,177, approved on July 14, 1885).
HOPPER, GRACE M.
Rear Admiral Grace Murray Hopper (1906 - 1992) was a US naval officer and mathematician who invented the computer compiler (called the A-O) in 1952. Her compiler revolutionized computer programming, automatically translating high-level instructions (easier to understand by people) into machine code (the cryptic, native language of the central processing unit). Hopper and a team developed the first user-friendly business programming language, COBOL (COmmon Business-Oriented Language). There is an unconfirmed story that Hopper determined than an error in the early Mark II computer was caused by a moth that was trapped in it; she then coined the term "computer bug."
HYDE, IDA HENRIETTA
Ida Henrietta Hyde (1857-1945) was an American physiologist who invented the microelectrode in the 1930's. The microelectrode is a small device that electrically (or chemically) stimulates a living cell and records the electrical activity within that cell. Hyde was the first woman to graduate from the University of Heidelberg, to do research at the Harvard Medical School and to be elected to the American Physiological Society.
KARLE, ISABELLA L.
Isabella Helen Lugoski Karle (1921- ) is a American physical chemist who invented new methods of X-ray Crystallography. She used electron diffraction and then x-ray diffraction to study the structure of molecules. Karle developed a three-dimensional modeling process, enabling her to identify and show the structures of hundreds of complex and important molecules (including alkaloids, ionophores, steroids, toxins, and peptides [amino acid compounds]). Because of Karle's process, the number of published molecular analyses has jumped from about 150 to over 10,000 per year. Karle received the National Medal of Science in 1995. Karle is a senior scientist and head of the Naval Research Laboratory's (NRL) x-ray diffraction section in the Laboratory for the Structure of Matter. Karle's husband, Jerome Karle, is a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry.
KEVLAR
Kevlar (poly[p-phenyleneterephtalamide]) is a polymer fiber that is five times stronger than the same weight of steel. Kevlar is used in bullet-proof vests, helmets, trampolines, tennis rackets, and many other commonly-used objects. Kevlar was invented by Stephanie Louise Kwolek and was first marketed by DuPont in 1971.
KWOLEK, STEPHANIE LOUISE
Stephanie Louise Kwolek (1923- ) is an American chemist who discovered kevlar and many other para-aramid fibers. Kevlar (poly[p-phenyleneterephtalamide]) is a polymer fiber that is five times stronger than the same weight of steel. Kevlar is used in bullet-proof vests, helmets, trampolines, tennis rackets, and many other commonly-used objects.

 

[Roly]

edit

 

[Serialized3]

I don't understand the Pook worship either.

Sure he's obviously quite intelligent, and we all know come up with some good ideas and posts. But, he reminds me too much of my friend that reads waaaay too much philosophy. Pook's blog makes him seem like he has lost touch with reality, or at least pragmatism, and is lost in his his own cerebral world of sociological and philosophical theories. He certainly doesn't sound like a positive or happy person, and I'm not quite sure why you would all want to emulate him.

(On a side note, his writing style is fruity. Not quite purple prose, but you can tell the guy likes to hear/watch himself talk/type)

As for the OP: I would have to agree that women that have an actual love for wisdom for wisdom's sake are rare, but that is true for a majority for men, as well. However, I find that I can have meaninful, thoughtful, intelligent conversations with many women. Where are you meeting your women?

 

[Phyzzle]

Remember when you were a teenager, and had a spurt at groping for the "OMG ultimate philosophical system that explains everything!" Years later, you realized that philosophy is mainly just a bunch of circular questions without answers.

"Is everything that exists made of matter? Or is everything absolutely mental?" WTF, aren't material and mental just names? We already have a name for everything: it's "everything".

Women, from their youth, have always considered all this pie-in-the-sky metaphysical speculation to be pointless garbage. From a certain point of view, their way of thinking is really more advanced.

I love being able to talk to women about those topics.

So did I. But then I realized they were just doing it to form an emotional connection with me. I've never had a philosophical conversation with a low interest woman.

 

[Falcon]

Great thread...

A baby is born with a need to be loved - and never outgrows it. -Frank Clark

This is actually something I'm struggling with right now.

I think that is the stem of all our problems. Love conquers all. We live in a world where everyone only cares about themselves and what's in it for them. We ourselves are guilty of it. When people are not loved, bad things happen. Many bad things. Their own egos try to save them while they are headed down a path of self-destruction. They end up with the take, take, take mindset. That is not love- love is giving. I believe that all of women and even most of us are starved of love these days. We are so starved of love (not just romantic) that we are beginning to forget how to love. Yes, there is reason for us to complain about a woman's selfish mindset and lack of curiosity. But is that reason for us to stop loving? Does that really make us any better than the people we are criticizing? I believe if us men were to stop loving, it would slam the last nail into the coffin (Because most women have already been too messed up in mindset/values).

 

[Last Man Standing]

What Pook is saying is that "curiosiity" is attractive to a man because we men, as curious creatures, would like a woman to validate our interest!! This shows understanding to our likes and thus increases her value in our eyes!

 

[DJDamage]

why wouldn't you appreciate a woman who was able to communicate with you on that level ??? what is wrong with having a woman as a lover and as a friend ?

I never said I wouldn't apperciate a woman to be able to communicate with me on that level, but to find such a woman who is also extremly attractive is almost an impossible task. I would have to disqualify alot of women as a result and my d1ck would never forgive me.

If this chick wanted you to fvck her: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeGmOrs9gCU&eurl=http://dapook.blogspot.com/

would you say: oh wait a minute, she is a dumb as a doorbell I don't want to fvck her!! I need some chick who is as smart as Ayn Rand and would talk objectivism with me before having sex! If she doesn't know Atlas Shrugged I ain't fvcking her!

As for having a lover and a friend, its a fine balance. She is my friend because of the RELATIONSHIP. If her interest levels were to go down, the relationship would be over. I don't fvck my friends just like I don't expect her to be like my friends.

how do you specifically intend to get along great ??

Why would I have to talk about philosophy and life for us to be getting along great?? Most women I know have a very short attention span and if you start talking about things such as the universe or cars they will get bored rather quickly.

Unless your into LOW SELF ESTEEM SLAVES who are not educated you will be miserable when it comes to women, if you aren't already...

Are you a feminist?? you sound like one. If I place higher value on looks then intelligent so be it. Actually most women I dated do not have low self esteem and are educated and it has nothing to do with one or the other.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

That's why it's dangerous for men to create this "ideal" woman.

If you build up this image of "her", this idealization, you set yourself up for celibacy and failure.

Actually you set yourself up for ONEitis, but thank God somone gets it.

 

[Holland]

I don't understand the Pook worship either.

Sure he's obviously quite intelligent, and we all know come up with some good ideas and posts. But, he reminds me too much of my friend that reads waaaay too much philosophy. Pook's blog makes him seem like he has lost touch with reality, or at least pragmatism, and is lost in his his own cerebral world of sociological and philosophical theories. He certainly doesn't sound like a positive or happy person, and I'm not quite sure why you would all want to emulate him.

I don't like that blog either. I also doubt if it's the same Pook. If he is, it's pretty sad to see him become so bitter towards women.

As for OP, I pity you.

 

[Luthor Rex]

Its a rare breed to find intellectual woman that is both hot and normal (not a feminist or a lesbian). When it comes to women I don't need to talk to her about philosophy or the meaning of life, I can discover it on my own, talk to my friends about it or watch the discovery channel. The only thing I expect her is to make me happy (not in a sense of making me complete bvllsh1t but if we get along great and she doesn't nag, she is affectionate, she keeps my stomach full and my balls dry then I am happy).

Oh I would never want to talk to a woman about philosophy so she could tell me how I should live... rather I would want her as an intellectual companion.

But that is just one of those dreams from childhood that has to be let go of when adulthood is reached.