Too long an idiot

[forsyth]

Tonight... Okay, this morning, I'm going to puncture one of the myths near and dear to the heart of many a geek guy. One which most people probably figured out long ago, but while I may be smart, my brain seems to run a bit behind the world. Sometimes five minutes, sometimes much longer.

Chicks don't dig jerks. Seriously. Oh, I'm sure there are some, generalizations are always wrong in specific. But for the most part, it's not the fact they're jerks that interests the women. It's a matter of signal jamming, and something much simpler too. I'll try and explain.

Women are attracted to alpha males. Just look at the kinds of women that hang around celebrities, CEOs, and other guys with fame, power, prestige, money, that sort of thing. It's not their fault, it's genetic and mental hardwiring, the same kind that makes them even attracted to guys in the first place, so not worth bitching about. And it's not absolute, but it's there. Power and social status are aphrodisiacs. And don't start smirking guys, we do the same thing. Though it's generally not to exactly the same kinds of stimulus, it's more visual. It's all a legacy of our East African Plains Ape ancestors, because it's best for the women to have children who share genes with the most successful males, who're best able to provide for said kids. Whereas guys tend to be more picking women for their health and ability to have kids who'll survive the upteen million stupid childhood diseases. But that's all just background.

What, you're wondering, do alpha males have to do with jerks? Jerks aren't usually alpha males, even though lots of alpha males are jerks! And what's all this talk about "alpha males", we're all unique and special flowers! I'll address the first question in a second. Third dude, I totally empathise with you, but there's still social hierarchies out there, and probably will be as long as there's people. Even if they're just as insipid as the local tiddlywinks league. And unlike MMORPGs, there's no floating name and rank over your head, no right click context menu to bring up the person's vital stats. What you see isn't what you get. But it's all you've got to go on. Besides what people say, there's a whole host of other kinds of communication, clothing, body language, etc, etc, etc. And if you're a geek like me, you're absolutely incompetent at reading all of that, which is part of the problem. But back to jerks.

Very few people think they're jerks. Maybe a few more than think they're evil, but maybe not. Evil's got some romance, being a jerk doesn't. But the other thing jerks don't realize is they're not alpha males. If it's stupidity, cockiness, acting, or whatever other reasons, they act like what they think they are, which is usually big badass alpha males. And since they act like it, that's what the women have to go on, at least until they figure out how to tell the cues that reveal jerks. Which, unfortunately, often have to be learned the hard way.

That's part of it. But it's not the main part. Most guys aren't alpha males. Everybody knows that. There's only so much subconscious fooling can do. No, the main reason jerks get the girls is much simpler. Because they act interested. Because they ask them out. Even if jerks are bad at reading women's signals, one of the defining traits that makes many jerks is they're self-absorbed. They don't wait around until they're sure if a woman's interested, they just go and hit on her. And if it doesn't work, they go after a different one. But that's not the important part. The important part is the asking. Even more than alpha males, women are interested in guys who act interested. Just like guys are more interested in women who act interested. Women have egos too. And if you don't act interested, they have no reason to figure you're not. Relationships aren't like nuclear war, the only way to win is to play the game.

Which doesn't mean be a jerk. Because like I said, women learn from experience, and jerks aren't worth it. Even if it fools them at first, they're not going to want to stay with a jerk. That's what Slick's been learning.

So, dudes, it's not that women like jerks, it's just far too often jerks are the only ones who ask women out. Fix that, and you'd be doing a service to the women. Everybody profits!

(Much of this was loosely cribbed from Sex Tips for Geeks, by Eric S. Raymond, which I saw linked off /. ages and ages ago. But knowing something and grokking it are different.)

Comments

[leticia.livejournal.com]

Amazingly, though I disagree with some points, you managed to make a post on this subject which doesn't make me want to throttle you! Congrats!

I think the genetic mate selection stuff was rather pointless and not necessarily accurate, but that's not the main point of the post, so I'll skip that. You make an excellent point about jerks and self-absorption.

And more to the point, about acting interested. Let's assume geek males are most attracted to geek females. (Or anime chicks, but that's neither here nor there.)

Geek females tend to share geek males' low self-esteem. If you show a geek female that you are interested, you will at /least/ help boost her self-esteem and affirm that she is a /satisfactory female/. I admit, I speak here as if I am a representative sample of geekfemaledom, but.

She will not be offended by your interest (common sense and courtesy applies here, guys -- telling your female friends you're imagining them naked is NOT going to win you brownie points in 99% of cases) even if she says no. In fact, unless you push the point or start acting a freak, you're not even going to damage your friendship!

(Number one thing NOT to do? Say you're interested in a girl, but 'unable' (or unwilling) for some reason to date her - then throw a jealous hissy fit when she dates someone else. Even if that someone else is a jerk. It WILL ruin the friendship. My guarantee.)

(Anyhow, Fors, considering our track record for arguments about men and women and dating and stuff, I'm really quite impressed. =P)

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

"She will not be offended by your interest (common sense and courtesy applies here, guys..."

This is an important point. And one I should put in the main post if/when I revise it. Because quite a few geek guys get the idea that yes, she will be offended. Partially from High School, where the stratification of things could mean that there's girls who'd get offended if you expressed interest. But it's also partially from listeing to our female friends, who choose to bitch to us about how all these jerks have been hitting on them, etc. It's easy to make the wrong association there, assuming the problem is the hitting on her part, rather than the jerk part. And just general geeky low self-esteem is part of the reason too. And the mate selection part is simplified, but also mostly irrelevant, so could probably be cut without any real loss.

[evilcarp.livejournal.com]

The biggest problem with geeks is the fact that they have to try to explain everything. And we're all just as bad about generalities as anyone.

You seriously need to stop blaming stuff on genetic hardwiring. When we have people who are born one gender and can become another one, we have to realize that we aren't that greatly bound to genetics. The way we act can be affected by the instincts that have been ground into our existance by evolution, but we aren't controlled by it. The "kinds of women" who hang around guys with power can be completely blamed for what they do. When the fucking CEO of my company walks by, I don't suddenly get wet and throw myself at him. He's even somewhat attractive and intelligent, but I'm not offering to bear his children.

And do you really think that men look for ideal mates based on a genetic predisposition to find someone who can have lots of babies? Bullshit. If that were the case, then women like me, with gigantic hips, huge breasts, and a fair amount of meat on my bones would have to be beating them off with sticks. Instead, it's the tiny girls who get all the attention. The current "ideal" beauty in the fashion world have every quality that gives them evolutionary disadvantages.

You are right that the thing that makes people think women like jerks is the fact that they will actually show interest and ask a girl out without fear. However, there are a million other things that can contribute. Before I continue, let me say that the basic problem with the myth that women likes jerks is that it should state that people like jerks. There's people out there who have all kinds of emotional baggage and psychological disfunctions which cause them to seek out individuals who will dominate them. Maybe it's a fear of being on their own, maybe they're masochistic, maybe they're acting out the relationship they had with their mother or father. A lot of people, including women, are just jerks themselves and are attracted to similar people. Some people fall in love with someone who's perfectly nice, and don't find out that their partner is a bastard until much later, after they've put so much time and effort into their relationship that they're afraid to get out.

Not all geeks have low self-esteem. No more than anybody else, at least. Everyone I know had low self-esteem when they were kids. Everyone felt out of place for some reason or another. Because they were geeks, because they were gay, because they suffered from depression. But most of us grow out of it. Most of the adult geeks I know now have really good self-esteem.

And bullshit that a relationship doesn't count if one of the people in it is a jerk. Bullshit that the woman isn't "worth it." Who the fuck gets to decide if someone's worth something as a human being. Love and relationships is complicated. Once you've been married to someone for a twenty years, had children with them, gone through good and hard times with them, and you come to the realization that your partner is a jackass, do you think it's that easy to say "fuck them" and take off? Do you think that the relationship just ends there? Or that everything they had is now invalidated?

You can't boil it all down to just one simple explanation, even if you try to make that explanation sound profound.

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

Okay. "Genetic hardwiring" is probably a bad phrase, because it makes genes seem a lot more important than they are. They don't control people like puppetmasters, genes just set up broad inclinations and the general range for what people are going to be like. The specifics come from your environment and choices. Power and alpha status are just one of the many things that can make somebody more or less attractive. Which is generally more attractive, a guy dressed up neatly and nicely, or a guy dressed in ragged mismatched clothes? Which is more attractive, self-assurance and confidence, or doubt and deference? It's not the only thing that matters, but it's one of the factors that makes somebody attractive.

The same with women. One of the things guys look for are outward signs of health (in teeth, eyes, hair, skin, gait, etc...) but that's hardly the only thing that makes women attractive. Especially when since the time you're born the same kind of women are pictured everywhere as the ideal of beauty. Other cultures past and present have different ideals of beauty, most of which don't match the current American style.

Yes, there's a whole swarm of reasons for people who actually DO like jerks. But most people don't. And that's the point I was addressing, that most women don't like jerks because they're jerks, they end up with jerks because the jerks have other qualities that are more obvious or outweigh their jerk-ness. Which was my point. Because the "women like jerks" meme is pretty widespread.

This isn't aimed at adult, well-adjusted geeks. Though at this point online, most of the people I know are close-ish to my age, so they're adults, and varyingly well adjusted. So it's blindingly obvious, yes. But I remember being a younger geek, and this was something that never even occurred to me. So if there's any real target audience, it's one I can't reach, the younger me.

And, carp, there's no need to get so hostile to Kal.

[kalifla.livejournal.com]

I withdraw. Carp wins.

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

Kal, it's not about winning. Even if we are arguing on the Internets.

[evilcarp.livejournal.com]

The hostility is not directed at Kal, it is directed at what Kal said. And is probably not as hostile as you all think it is. I use profanity a lot. But it definately isn't without any anger either. Kal, what you wrote, the way it was worded, you basically called my mother a worthless person. You didn't know you were doing it, but even if what you wrote hadn't offended me for a deeply personal reason, I don't believe it's OK to pass judgement on other people like that, even in a generalized way that isn't directed to any particular person. I do not think you're pitiful, even if you do, I just think that you're wrong. I think you've had some truly terrible experiences and they've soured your outlook about a few things. Responding harshly to the beliefs and opinions you have that are born out of experiences that didn't allow for any other way of thinking isn't the best way to present my opinion. I've gotten used to talking to people who are accostumed to my way of talking, people who know I mean no harm and who are thick-skinned enough to take anything I say without offense, so I forget that I come off as a jackass to a lot of other people. I apologize it, but I don't retract anything I said.

Romance certainly isn't a myth. It's just not what people might expect if their understanding of romance comes from books and movies.

As for the stuff you said in reply to me, Fors, I'm just happy as long as people keep away from generalities. Often, people think "the point" is the most important thing. But how it's presented, what kinds of things you say in illustrating the point, are just as important.

[kalifla.livejournal.com]

I was also fighting very bad urges that were really more or less unrelated.

If it helps, it's the same thing my mother (and to some extent my aunt) used to be, which is how I know. It wounded her, for a very long time, and convinced me.

I do have a bitter stab at love. All my personal experience with love is familial, it's a dynamic I understand deeply and appreciate. As unconditional as my mother's love for me and mine for her, we both know as adult roommates now that we have faults, certain big faults, big mistakes in our past that we didn't know at the time. That love is still unconditional but it's been sorely tested as roomies now. The love I thought was unconditional from a man I greatly admired and knew far better than my own father, my grandfather, was not only completely snatched away from me, but proven utterly false. That itself is harsh. Knowing what it did to my mother, his dear dear daughter, is harsh.
So what I've seen, all growing up, is men saying they loved someone and then leaving altogether. I trust romantic love about as far as I can throw Forsyth (no offense, tube rat).

We have to make a certain amount of generalities, carp, but do understand that we understand that it's still a case by case basis. Generalities are for statistics, and those don't become people until and unless we know each and every story. Cut us a little slack? Or me, at least, I shouldn't keep speaking for Fors.

We cool?