• rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 minutes ago

    If “succeed in life” means significant intergenerational wealth to achieve a strong head start, great genetics for height and facial symmetry, and strong black triad traits, then sure. Let’s convert the word “luck” to “intelligence”, regardless of how bad that fit may be.

    I mean, there are exceptions among women. But the correct term is called “outliers” for a damn good reason.

  • Jankatarch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Kinda bordering a strawman here, but if I said

    why are men attracted into the airhead type?

    there would be bunch of dudes saying they are into intelligent women, and that it’s just hollywood.

    Dylan says "Why don't girls like me," sulking. "Hey," "Dylan" says the offscreen voice.
Dylan looks over to see a giant amalgamation of women, some of them are falling as it moves. The amalgamation speaks to him. "It's me, all girls. Only you understand that all women share a consciousness, Dylan. Be one with me . Link yourself to the hivemind." Dylan has stopped sulking, as he now only cowers in fear.

    (Sidenote props to the artist for drawing all those people one by one)

  • phx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I mean, that’s a fun take but realistically there are plenty of women who put a lot more stock in looks (just as men do) an immediate financial ability.

    That jock who got a job that’s physically demanding might be making more out of high school, but the IT nerd who went for they education and got a good tech job was likely on a slower burn path to self-improvement with better pay, possibly improving looks over time (or at least less of a beer belly). At least before AI started killing the tech sector again, so maybe the jocks will be coming out ahead for awhile.

    Also, there’s also nothing wrong with being a good dude with average intelligence who works hard. Just don’t pick an red-hatred idiot. And intelligent nerds who don’t learn social skills can absolutely still become nasty incels.

    • exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I wouldn’t put too much stock into the jock versus nerd stereotypes.

      Life isn’t an RPG with stats that come at the cost of other stats. Being bad at sports doesn’t make someone more likely to be good at school (if anything, the correlation might run the other way). And charisma, ambition, intelligence, physical appearance, athleticism, work ethic, are all distinct factors that sometimes feedback on each other, and feed into things like wealth, happiness, attractiveness, etc.

  • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 hours ago

    What about the women that is into pepe lore or WW2 theory?

    I cant decide if there’s more or less of them than the ones that’s into 4chan incels?

    • musubibreakfast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      They don’t exist. If women get into pepe lore or WW2 they grow male genitalia. It’s not well documented but it happens quite a lot. The body starts producing massive amounts of testosterone and the stress ages and disfigures the women and also effects their memory. Most of the male incels on 4chan are former super models who got exposed to pepe lore or WW2.

  • AeronMelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Also, this is just plain wrong.

    Some women are attracted to intellectual minds.

    Some women are attracted to physical strength, some women are attracted to maternal instincts, so on and so forth.

    The problem is this question is usually being asked by someone who thinks that responding to every factual statement with an inflammatory counterpoint qualifies as intelligence.

    • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The weird definition of intelligence they are using (how to succeed in life) does kind of cover that. The definition of what success is, and the millions of ways of achieving it covers just about all variations.

      • fizzle@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        From what I’ve observed, intelligence doesn’t count for much when it comes to “success in life”, whatever that might be.

  • root
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    8 hours ago

    women are people with choices

    they make different choices

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Impossible. If women had choices, then they’d have a diversity of off-spring with a wide spectrum of forms, traits, and behaviors.

      We know that can’t be the case, because all men are identical and perfectly interchangeable, except for a tiny variance in peak performance which they use to sort themselves from Sigma to Omega for the purpose of obtaining Da Big Sequesy to produce more Sigma clones.

  • rowrowrowyourboat@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    So success in life means actual intelligence? I disagree with that.

    Success ≠ actual intelligence.

    Plenty of very successful people who are complete morons.

    Women are attracted to success, regardless of actual intelligence.

    And of course this is a generalization. Women are not a monolith.

    • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It’s more that intelligence implies success rather than success implies intelligence.

      Actual intelligence boosts chances for success, but it is not required for success.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        The way the world is going, intelligence is playing less and less of a factor. You’re either born into it, or you’re a wage slave struggling for life.

        • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Guess that depends on where you are. Many places in the world have very high social mobility along with solid welfare and pension systems.

          Maybe somewhat less that 40 years ago, but certainly much better than the last thousand years overall.

        • HerbGrower@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Intelligence is working out that you don’t have to struggle. UK example, don’t move to London “for the jobs” if you are only finding minimum wage work.

        • moriquende@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Success looks different for different groups of people, unfortunately. A slave could be considered more successful than another, while remaining a slave.

      • iocase@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Intelligence is actually slightly negatively correlated with success by a lot of metrics (earnings, years of life, health) and the best predictors are general big 5 attributes like openness to experience, low neuroticism, high conscientiousness (hard working), and extraversion. Those characteristics are way better predictors of life success.

        • Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          “…conscientiousness (hard working)…” Yeah, surely, if you define working hard as just receiving your father’s or grandfather’s wealth (or at least, part of it) as your inheritance.

          When you actually look down at this rabbit hole, you find that the entire premise where these supposedly “predictors” rely, the meritocracy, is actually just a scam, maybe the biggest one. Because social movility is totally broken because prices, rents and taxes are going crazily up while salaries are dropping dramatically, and meanwhile some fucking bank takes your money as a monetary rescue for a fucking son of a bitch billionaire which movement caused an economic catastrophe.

        • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          Do you have any references for this? As far as I know the literature, the debate about “what matters more” is still ongoing with some research arguing in favor of personality and other research in favor of cognitive ability. Regardless of this, the relationship between cognitive ability and various life outcomes seems to be consistently positive, and I am not aware of any convincing evidence to the contrary.

          • iocase@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I guess I was referencing the original 2016 study by Borghans, Golsteyn, Heckman & Humphries that’s since been replicated and refuted. You’re right that it’s not settled academically right now so we don’t know for sure.

      • esa@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Yeah, I took it more as analysing and adjusting to one’s current situation, as opposed to going conspiracy nut.

        Neither magic crystals nor PUA courses are what someone struggling to budget 2000$ for candles needs

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah, I’d say humor is the better indicator. It boils down to the ability to connect ideas in creative ways, as well as keeping a longer context window in conversations

      It’s not a direct 1:1, but what is intelligence really? There’s many types, and they’re all a combination of domains

    • NewDark@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It’s just correct enough for the tiny quipy descriptor to get to the real takedown after.

      Also this is 4chan, grade on a curve.

    • wieson@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 hours ago

      What is success? Being surrounded by people you love and trust? Living life without regret? Sitting on hoards and hoards of money? Planting an endangered tree?

      • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        It’s not, but anyone that tells you wealth doesn’t matter, is either lying or trying to sell you something also.

    • HerbGrower@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You have already failed. Success is not measured in wealth.

      If you are having a good time with friends/family around a fire pit with a total cost of £0. You are succeeding more than the richest man on earth who can’t get anyone to genuinely like him.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Wealth for wealth’s sake, possibly, but i’m not gonna start throwing shade at someone else’s life goals.

        Wealth is , however, a good baseline to build upon to achieve other metrics, up to a point at least.

  • nitroemdash
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 hours ago

    It’s usually “how to succeed in life” intelligence, not “realization of abstract k-skeletons as k-skeletons of intersections of convex polyhedra in R^2k−1 in life” intelligence if that doesn’t make you money.

  • Malyca@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Incidentally it’s true. Granted I’m asexual but I’m only attracted to intelligence.