Stupid Smart Women

The Sweeper

I don't dumb down my conversation for anyone.

But in a relaxed social setting, I generally find that men don't want to hear anything I have to contribute on any current affairs topic. They're not interested in my thoughts on deep and meaningful subject matter. They don't care for any parallels I would draw between current and past conflicts, current and past economic crises or current and past world leaders.

They want me to look pretty and shut up so they can stare at my tits without having to repeatedly look at my face while I try to engage them in something more than 'nice shoes, are you single'.

If I'm a stupid smart woman, it's only because I persist in trying to hold conversations of substance with disinterested men.

Nevyn

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

I don't dumb down my conversation for anyone.

Same here.

LolaLuv

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

But in a relaxed social setting, I generally find that men don't want to hear anything I have to contribute on any current affairs topic. They're not interested in my thoughts on deep and meaningful subject matter. They don't care for any parallels I would draw between current and past conflicts, current and past economic crises or current and past world leaders.

I agree with this, to a certain extent. There are some men like that, but there are plenty of women who don't want to hear what I have to say, either. In my experience, if a guy thinks I'm pretty then finding out I'm smart is almost always a bonus in his eyes. That applies to quality guys. I wouldn't waste a whole lot of time on guys who felt otherwise.

It seems like sort of an unfair generalization to say that men don't want to hear what you have to say simply because you're female, when clearly all men can't possibly be turned off by an intellectual woman. It probably has more to do with the setting.

Stheno

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

I don't dumb down my conversation for anyone.

But in a relaxed social setting, I generally find that men don't want to hear anything I have to contribute on any current affairs topic. They're not interested in my thoughts on deep and meaningful subject matter. They don't care for any parallels I would draw between current and past conflicts, current and past economic crises or current and past world leaders.

They want me to look pretty and shut up so they can stare at my tits without having to repeatedly look at my face while I try to engage them in something more than 'nice shoes, are you single'.

If I'm a stupid smart woman, it's only because I persist in trying to hold conversations of substance with disinterested men.

+1 I had the most peculiar experience at one social occasion, where my ex partners friends, not having seen him at the time, asked what he was working at, then turned to me, and asked the same.

Upon being told that I did x in company y, a look of horror came across said man, and he replied (without thinking), "but, but, don't y have a reputation for hiring bright people?"

I gave up and went back to smiling vacuously for the day, admiring the other ladies outfits, shoes, accessories, and handbags, sharing makeup and cosmetics tips, googoo gahgahing at the babies present *shudder* and discussing the merits of various hairdressers.

I also find that having finished working, I've no real interest in sitting down and engaging my brain having conversations about subjects that don't really interest me. As part of being prepared for work, and social occasions which arise from work, I do keep up with current affairs, business and technology developments, but don't try and engage me on those subjects when I'm out having a few drinks or a relaxing dinner I've done my forty plus hours, thanks very much It's not so much a dumbing down on my part, more that I know associate having that knowledge/info as part of work, and I want to spend my free time relaxing

And one small thing that I have noted on a couple of occasions, is that often those who seem to feel the need to discuss current affairs/politics/business etc in a relaxed social setting are those who for some reason feel the need to display a greater "intellectual/knowledgable" ability than many others around them.

That is just mho

fits

So which came first, the chicken or the egg?

I agree with Pillypen, I dont think I'd be interested in engaging in conversation with a person in the first place, who would discount my opinion because of my gender.

dfx-

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

I don't dumb down my conversation for anyone.

But in a relaxed social setting, I generally find that men don't want to hear anything I have to contribute on any current affairs topic. They're not interested in my thoughts on deep and meaningful subject matter. They don't care for any parallels I would draw between current and past conflicts, current and past economic crises or current and past world leaders.

They want me to look pretty and shut up so they can stare at my tits without having to repeatedly look at my face while I try to engage them in something more than 'nice shoes, are you single'.

If I'm a stupid smart woman, it's only because I persist in trying to hold conversations of substance with disinterested men.

*smile of despair*

Dimitri

cuckoo wrote: »

I think the OP does have a point....not about the 'look of despair' though.

*ducks*

No, really. It saddens me, and angers me, when i sometimes find myself doing it. Somehow i have less of a belief in my opinions and worldview than the majority of men that i know. I'll still argue my case, ask questions and hold forth, but i'm not as sure of my views as men of my acquaintance.

Maybe i'm just being drowned out by their louder, deeper voices. Or, maybe they're more comfortable with turning it into a battlefield and fighting their corner.

/pulls on Hat of Generalisation

When current affairs are being discussed my experience has been that men are more likely to use the phrase "no, you're wrong", and women are more likely to attack the opinion, eg, "no, that's the wrong way of looking at it".

I have to note that this would be far more in line with what i experience, now this is generalisation on a massive scale but when i've been involved in a current affairs/political/religious discussion and a wmoen or women are also involved they tend not to put forward their own views or opinions. On the occasions that they do it tends to be more of a point/counter arguement phrased as a question rather than phrased outright. I've never taken this to be ignorance i just assumed that the people who didn't speak either had no interest or little knowledge on the subject and were content to listen as i am on certain topics, however those who ventured a point raised as a question i always took to be politeness, raising their point without belittleing your point of view. I feel the op's post is a bit random is assuming women are shutting up because he is there!

Dimitri

But in a relaxed social setting, I generally find that men don't want to hear anything I have to contribute on any current affairs topic. They're not interested in my thoughts on deep and meaningful subject matter. They don't care for any parallels I would draw between current and past conflicts, current and past economic crises or current and past world leaders.

I wouldn't say its because your a woman thats saying it but because whenever anyone links a current affairs problem with a parrallel historical problem properly it becomes pretty obvious we should've seen it coming. People like to convince themselves that they were completely blindsided by something (especially when its an economic problem) when in fact they just ignored the warning signs at their peril. I reckon their dismissing your opinion not because your a womwn but because your right.

Blush_01

There are varying degrees of the "stupid smart woman" phenomenon. Smart women often dumb themselves down pretty substantially for other women too.

Stheno

Blush_01 wrote: »

There are varying degrees of the "stupid smart woman" phenomenon. Smart women often dumb themselves down pretty substantially for other women too.

Hmm I work with a few incredibly smart women, depends on what you mean by dumbing down I suppose, but I respect them as colleagues and people with sharp minds.

Doesn't stop any of them from enjoying things like shoes/clothes/a giggle about male colleagues/whatever.

Doesn't stop me from respecting them either

Blush_01

Ah no, I don't mean that unless you're having a particularly meaningful debate with someone you're dumbing things down.

I respect a sharp mind and the ability to grasp concepts more than knowledge limited to one specific subject and an inability to understand everything else - that's regurgitation rather than intelligence. You don't have to be highly educated to be very smart. I'd consider my dad one of the most naturally intelligent (if obstinate) people I've ever met, and he left school at 16.

I have as much if not more respect for the intelligence of people I know from work who have little or no formal qualifications than I do for others who have pieces of paper proving how "clever" they are coming out their asses. That doesn't mean that there aren't women I meet in my daily life, be it in the workplace or not, that I have to modify things for. I'm sure people dumb things down for me in certain situations too.

All I was saying was that as much as women dumb themselves down where men are concerned, they do it for women too.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Stheno

Blush_01 wrote: »

Ah no, I don't mean that unless you're having a particularly meaningful debate with someone you're dumbing things down.

I respect a sharp mind and the ability to grasp concepts more than knowledge limited to one specific subject and an inability to understand everything else - that's regurgitation rather than intelligence. You don't have to be highly educated to be very smart. I'd consider my dad one of the most naturally intelligent (if obstinate) people I've ever met, and he left school at 16.

I have as much if not more respect for the intelligence of people I know from work who have little or no formal qualifications than I do for others who have pieces of paper proving how "clever" they are coming out their asses. That doesn't mean that there aren't women I meet in my daily life, be it in the workplace or not, that I have to modify things for. I'm sure people dumb things down for me in certain situations too.

All I was saying was that as much as women dumb themselves down where men are concerned, they do it for women too.

Apologies, I misunderstood you, I completely understand what you are saying

And as for the "I'm so educated" vs the "I've learned what I know from the job/experience" I agree with you, I'd be slow now to discriminate on the basis of education

Isn't it fun tho, when those intelligent people that you admire are human and have interests in trivial things? Regardless of whether they are male or female?

Nevyn

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Fúck that!

Stheno

Thaedydal wrote: »

Fúck that!

No offense Thaed, but it's kinda like keeping up with the rugger/soccer/golf results to have something to chat with the lads about at teabreak on a Monday.

Thankfully I'm into rugger and golf but by god soccer bores me stupid and it's complicated

I suppose there's a whole argument here as to why you'd want to fit in, or feel you had to
That aside, if you are managing people, that small interaction imo, can lead to people feeling that there is some small bond/common interest there, and help with the work relationship.

Some might see it as a cop out, or not being true to yourself, imo tell that to the bloke who felt he can talk about his wife having severe psychological issues to his female manager who sits down and talks rugger with the lads on a Monday?

Imo it's all about a bit of balance, investing a bit of time that might be a waste to you in people (in a work environment) can often be worthwhile as it can be outside, just outside of work I focus on my interests, in work and due to work, I focus on what's relevant to work as DF's partner did

Red Hand

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You're not serious! Jesus...that's shocking. When lads when on about soccor at my lunchtable in the last place I worked in, I just zoned out. Feigning an inerest in muck you're not interested in is hard going.

Nevyn

nouggatti wrote: »

No offense Thaed, but it's kinda like keeping up with the rugger/soccer/golf results to have something to chat with the lads about at teabreak on a Monday.

And I would say "Fúck that!" to doing that too.

nouggatti wrote: »

Imo it's all about a bit of balance, investing a bit of time that might be a waste to you in people (in a work environment) can often be worthwhile as it can be outside, just outside of work I focus on my interests, in work and due to work, I focus on what's relevant to work as DF's partner did

I am and have always been well able to form social bonds with co workers and managers with needing to descend to deception on that level.

My interests are wide and varied enough and I am well read enough to have conversations with anyone with out feigning such interests.

Stheno

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

Feigning an inerest in muck you're not interested in is hard going.

But sometimes in work/social situations having some knowledge/info about them helps.

Personally I've no interest in kids, but being the oldest of ten helps when I've colleagues/team members who are expecting and hope/want that all female colleagues will be as interested as they are

Ditto to the sports analogy above, how much easier is it to take to someone you see as having/feigning an interest in something you like than to someone you see as aloof and inpersonal?

My interests are wide and varied enough and I am well read enough to have conversations with anyone with out feigning such interests.

Fair point, it's something I do, as I've little in common with my colleagues and it helps, it's not a huge effort, and imo (might be very wrong) it adds a little to the relationship.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

LolaLuv

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Agree. I think it's a wise move on your partner's part. Afaik things like that are routinely done in the business world because networking works better if people feel like you're on their level. Being a novelty doesn't go as far in the office as it does in the pub.

Red Hand

nouggatti wrote: »

Ditto to the sports analogy above, how much easier is it to take to someone you see as having/feigning an interest in something you like than to someone you see as aloof and inpersonal?

I don't know about that...I've never gone through the sports section of a paper just to keep up with workplace chatter. Maybe I am impersonal?

Stheno

PillyPen wrote: »

Agree. I think it's a wise move on your partner's part. Afaik things like that are routinely done in the business world because networking works better if people feel like you're on their level. Being a novelty doesn't go as far in the office as it does in the pub.

My own point above, but so much more succinctly put, thanks

Nevyn

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

I don't know about that...I've never gone through the sports section of a paper just to keep up with workplace chatter. Maybe I am impersonal?

Only if you don't talk to people and show an interest in them and their life are you that and all of that can be done with out the need to pretend you have an interest to take part in innane chatter.

Stheno

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

I don't know about that...I've never gone through the sports section of a paper just to keep up with workplace chatter. Maybe I am impersonal?

I'm into sport and tend to turn to the sports pages first of all the bits of a paper

The fact I take in the soccer results whilst really reading what I am interested in (rugger/horseriding/tennis/golf) and that it takes about five/ten mins and means a bit more intereaction with my colleagues is imo a bit different than reading the sports section just to keep up with workplace chatter

If I did that, I might know quicker who's shagging who/been done for drink driving/promoted

Black Swan

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

But in a relaxed social setting, I generally find that men don't want to hear anything I have to contribute on any current affairs topic.

Have you taken a position completely opposed to their core beliefs or perceptions, backing it up with what you know and have experienced? Did they feel threatened or get angry, or just pat you on the head and discount what you had to contribute?

SeekUp

fits wrote: »

I'm probably guilty of that to an extent myself. I'll only enter a debate/argument if I'm reasonably well versed in the ins and outs of it, and can back up my point of view. (caution vs risk takers?)

CeilingCat wrote: »

Very valid point. I'd be the kind to keep my mouth shut if I wasn't 100% sure I had my facts straight.... damn sure I'd go home and google it, but I wouldn't just wade in there uninformed - and that's because women tend to get slated for daring to enter a conversation about something they know *nothing* about.

I'd have to agree. I'd be the kind to keep my mouth shut as well if I'm not 100% sure of myself, but not because I'm afraid of being slated, it's because I generally don't like to run my mouth off without knowing what I'm talking about. And that doesn't just apply to current affairs and politics; I don't like voicing an opinion on products/industries/practices/etc. unless it is solidly based in fact (note that I said 'voicing', not 'having').

I keep abreast of world affairs via my rss feeds and the occasional news/radio segment. But in my opinion, this just counts as a cursory overview of topics, not any kind of in-depth knowledge. And I don't talk to hear my own voice; I usually only like to discuss something if I feel that I have something of importance to add.

Much like boards . . . you get a lot of lurkers and much fewer posters . . . and even then, a lot of the posts don't really count as adding anything of note to a conversation . . . :rolleyes:

Red Hand

nouggatti wrote: »

I'm into sport and tend to turn to the sports pages first of all the bits of a paper

The fact I take in the soccer results whilst really reading what I am interested in (rugger/horseriding/tennis/golf) and that it takes about five/ten mins and means a bit more intereaction with my colleagues is imo a bit different than reading the sports section just to keep up with workplace chatter

If I did that, I might know quicker who's shagging who/been done for drink driving/promoted

Well, can't say I'll be especially reading the soccor results just to feign interest. Like, if you do that, then the conversation could easily sway towards further soccor talk (where so and so is in the league, what matches are next etc)...people will soon realise that I'd be bullsh*tting.

Plus, you could have the mad situation of a bunch of people sitting talking about soccor during lunch, and nobody actually has any interest in it. They are just talking about it cause they think it's the done thing to do, and that it's a way of "bonding" and possible advancement. Which shows how sh*tty office politics are.

I hear that some people actually take up smoking cause the manager does...again, trying to establish a common bond. An extreme example, I know, but in the same vein as other examples.

MJOR

Nuravictus wrote: »

I really should of said things going on in the world in general. Thats what I meant. I don't have a major in history or politics, I read a few websites for news in the morning & thats about it.



If your not willing to add anything of value to the thread why post, The Smile of Dispair comes from a girl I turned down because even thou she was a Statistican for a major irish bank she acted really dumb & all she cared about was her shoes & how she looked.

At the moment the news isn't exactly cheerful nor are a lot of current affairs.Personally I would consider myself to be of average intelligence. I have a good knowlege of current affairs, but equally have an interest in girly stuff. To be honest on a night out I don't really want to discuss the war in Gaza or the right to life. Those are things that potentially can cause quite volatile reactions from people. I'd rather talk about more light hearted matters when i am in company especially in a large group.

shellyboo

CeilingCat wrote: »

+1 again... have you found that men don't take as kindly to a woman actually being well informed as they do to a man being well informed? This has been my experience. So, they don't like it when you do know what you're talking about and they'll slate you if you don't. No pleasing them at all at all... :P

Honestly, I never have... I may have seen a few looks of surprise when I do open my mouth to participate, but I've never felt that my opinion was being written off because I'm a woman, or that they didn't value what I was saying.

CeilingCat wrote: »

I don't know about the Look Of Despair - maybe the Look Of 'ah jaysus tell me he's not going to start a ranty discussion about politics on my night off from my very demanding and intellectually challenging job when all I want to do is talk about ordinary stuff....' :eek:

I know that look! I have a habit of refusing to discuss topics of that nature socially, and I had one particular friend who will continute to goad me until I did debate with him... much to his despair, I always knew more about the topic than he does, and much to his delight, I always disagreed with his point of view. Note I said 'had' a particular friend... I completely phased the guy out because all he ever spoke to me about was news. It was like he had nothing else to say for himself, no personality of his own, no... life! It was just utterly boring, not to mention antagonistic since we didn't have the same views on anything and he was only doing it because he knew he'd get a rise out of me.

nouggatti wrote: »

Upon being told that I did x in company y, a look of horror came across said man, and he replied (without thinking), "but, but, don't y have a reputation for hiring bright people?"

/facepalm

nouggatti wrote: »

And one small thing that I have noted on a couple of occasions, is that often those who seem to feel the need to discuss current affairs/politics/business etc in a relaxed social setting are those who for some reason feel the need to display a greater "intellectual/knowledgable" ability than many others around them.

DEFINITELY. Without a doubt. I'd go so far as to say some people actually steer the conversation towards news/current affairs because they're out of their depth in whatever conversation is actually occuring.

Nevyn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMb8Csll9Ws