>>13289117lol, lmao
women want to be protected and dominated, not humbled by a pathetic beta. They value common sense and ability above book smarts.
Imagine, if you will, two suitors.
>A: Owns his own construction company. Understands math well enough, makes 200k a year. Is formidable, handy, self-sufficient, makes good business decisions, can fix things, gives orders. Brute/chad, could protect woman and child. Let's say an IQ of 110-115.>B: Is a researcher, professor type. Spent 10+ years in school, following orders. Makes 100k a year. Has made close to 0 business decisions. MAYBE has a home, can't fix shit. In charge of asian grad students. Weak, unhealthy brainwashed liberal (thanks academia) that couldn't protect themselves, let alone a family. IQ of 125-130.The choice here is obvious. Even if we take B and make him healthy, attractive, etc, he is still fundamentally less attractive to a hormonally normal woman. The only time the balance is truly skewed is if B instead makes 300k+ a year. It's not simply the obvious that women care about your wallet, but also a demonstration of a different kind of intelligence that makes good financial decisions and has either sought out the right positions, or is exceptional at their given subject. Of course, one must also consider the IQ of the woman and their potential mate. No one, man or woman, wants someone too far from their own IQ. In my experience, people above 130, *especially* women, want someone dumber because they like to be in control and unrestricted by the narcissism, musings, or informed opinions, of someone else. It isn't humbling, it is annoying.
