The Attack on Intelligent people.

reply to post by hadriana


Thats how it was in my classes too. A lot of the people with high IQs were attractive enough, and people would have dated them, but they were not as focused on it. And the idea that people with high IQs not being athletic or physical is a myth. Several of us in the gifted program were not only on sports teams, but we valuable members of the team.

Part of it is that people with higher IQs have more interests. Its not all about our bellies and our genitals like it is for some humans. Not that good food and good sex arent wonderful, but there is just so much more to life than merely the basic drives. I also think that many with high IQs get lost in thought or caught up in the meat of the conversation more often, and just miss cues. I never notice when someone flirts with me. Unless they are just totally brash about it. My friends hit me later on the way home and ask what the hell I was thinking.

Part of it is also simple math. You are in the extreme end of the curve. There are simply less people who "match" you intellectually. People with lower IQs dont often notice when they are with someone a lot more intelligent than they are. With lower IQ often comes that blissful ignorance of what you dont know. But the higher IQ person notices when they are with someone of lower IQ. How could you not? Its like a normal talking to someone who has mild retardation.

No matter how cute and nice someone is, over time, they become like a pet if the difference in intellect is too great.

Originally posted by SystemResistor
If all the intelligent people "won" then we would live in a cold, technical, automated, robotic soceity filled with gadgets but no real feeling or quality of life - which is what is occuring. Its hard to explain, but basically, emotional sensitivity and intelligence are usually inversely related (i.e autism/aspergers/sociopaths)

I dont think that this is true. Many people with very high IQ are far from emotionally stunted. The ability to restrain your emotions in order to make a fair statement, or to stick to the facts, or win an argument is very different from not having emotion. The ability to restrain and control ones impulses is actually a sign of higher EQ, not lower EQ.

And it may or may not be fair to lump people with aspergers, or autism in with just people with "high IQ." Some studies of idiot savants seem to indicate that the lack of ability in some areas of the brain can lead people to repeatedly focus and use the area of the brain that isnt damaged. So in essence, in the case of idiot savants, its not some "gift" that makes them "genius" at some things, its just that they obsessively practice it.

Sociopaths also are not just higher in IQ, there are some deficiencies as well.

I think higher IQ people with these deficiencies just attract more attention. Lower IQ people with these deficiencies just end up in jail playing booty bongo, and they have a whole other problem getting laid.

And this may be key to the whole conversation. People with lower IQs may have more sex because that is what they "obsessively practice." Getting laid. Perhaps their IQs are lower because they just dont care about thinking as much. People with higher IQs may just spend more time exercising other brain areas than the one that comes up with clever pick up lines. Maybe they get laid less because they just dont care as much about practicing the "getting laid" skills obsessively.

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
[

There is no Right to Get Laid

There is no right to a functioning society, or Electricity, or Communications equipment, or Textile manufacturing, or Home building, or teachers for your children...

None of that is a right either...

But you would probably pretend that it was, if you didn't HAVE it due to the intelligence of the people who are CAPABLE of supplying it to your life, that you are slowly breeding out of Existence.

keep tilting at windmills all you like but you will not change anything with words alone.

what is going on in the world at large is for the most part deliberate and there's no point in trying to convince someone who already knows, is there? maybe you should rephrase your posts a bit because intelligence includes more than pure capability. maybe you should come to grips with the fact that there is no viable solution, only the inevitable collapse and subsequent 'natural selection' against all of us who were somehow dependent on a society that didn't value life ... or anything for that matter, except unmitigated, aggressive chauvinism.

the bottom line is why preserve a society that you feel is unwilling to respect you to the point of treating you as undesirable? i don't get it.

PS: for the record, I won't 'breed anyone out of existence' anytime soon, which should have been obvious form my previous post.

reply to post by Long Lance

keep tilting at windmills all you like but you will not change anything with words alone.

That's what you think.

what is going on in the world at large is for the most part deliberate and there's no point in trying to convince someone who already knows, is there?

There are more people reading this than you and me.

maybe you should rephrase your posts a bit because intelligence includes more than pure capability.

Explain your position.

maybe you should come to grips with the fact that there is no viable solution

Assumption noted, and rejected due to it's inherent nihilism.

only the inevitable collapse and subsequent 'natural selection' against all of us who were somehow dependent on a society that didn't value life ... or anything for that matter, except unmitigated, aggressive chauvinism.

That is quite a defeatist attitude, isn't it?

1. You assume that collapse is impossible to stop, not by evidence of any kind, but as a nihlistic axiom.

2. Let the society Die, which is exactly what TPTB what you to have, as far as a mindset.

You might as well just lay down and die for all the good it will do you.

the bottom line is why preserve a society that you feel is unwilling to respect you to the point of treating you as undesirable? i don't get it.

It's not about preserving a society... it's about recreating the society from what it has become, a group of deliberately socially engineered humans who follow the dictates of a group of nefarious saboteurs.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


i can see how my position might come across as nihilistic, but i prefer a POV, which happens to explain what i see happening around us rather than one based essentially on wishful thinking.

let me give you a brief overview, as i see it: history is replete with totalitarian dictatorships, even statistically, your own government is the greatest threat to your life. just take all the people Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and their respective regimes, etc, etc killed within their own countries' borders in the last 100 years alone and compare them to the number of war related deaths. the typical mode of operation included regimentation, ever radical collectivism (always surrounded by an air of righteousness, of course) and confiscation and subsequent tight control of key items (such as weapons) or supplies (such as food and fuel).

today, these lessons aren't just forgotten they are being denied. no amount of contemporary parallels will do, the majority is unwilling to even consider that there are again forces at work, whose goal is obviously the creation of the exact conditions required for mass killing. maybe i'm wrong and people understand but will just keep quiet, which is, tbh, more than doubtful. if there's no sizable audience for matters of more immediate, personal survival, don't expect them to care about the genetic makeup of the species, even if affects who they can or can't marry.

case in point: the Ottoman empire, locking a large part of the female population up in harems, where they subject to rape only (not so good for genetics, i'd expect) leaving many men single (thereby eliminating them from the vaunted 'gene pool') while typically only a couple received the rapist-in-chief's attention, so many women, too were barred from procreation. the rest were probably subject to inbreeding and without frequent kidnappings from healthier regions, we might not be having any troubles with people of ME origin today... but i digress.

summary: people have been proven to accept -*anything*- under the right (wrong?) circumstances. note that i'm not at all happy with the state of affairs, but you've got to have a realistic impression, before you can expect to have any effect. imho, the first notion that must be dispelled is that you need any form of consent, because it seldom exists and if it does it's more often than not wrong.


==============

maybe you should rephrase your posts a bit because intelligence includes more than pure capability.

Explain your position.

no matter how good you are at something, you should know when to apply your skill, no?

only the inevitable collapse and subsequent 'natural selection' against all of us who were somehow dependent on a society that didn't value life ... or anything for that matter, except unmitigated, aggressive chauvinism.

That is quite a defeatist attitude, isn't it?

1. You assume that collapse is impossible to stop, not by evidence of any kind, but as a nihlistic axiom.

2. Let the society Die, which is exactly what TPTB what you to have, as far as a mindset.

You might as well just lay down and die for all the good it will do you.

do you believe this is some exercise in probabilistic analysis? we have people here in this thread who proclaim that taking will always be preferable to creating, a notion which must lead to a situation where creative elements are either eliminated by exhaustion or choose to abandon their roles.


i think the path is set barring unforeseen events of course, one can hope for more but shouldn't expect anything other than oblivion under the given circumstances. iow, the evidence is all around you, even following you into this thread. heck, you'll probably view this very post as another sign.

wrt letting society die, well, chances are few if any of us will survive, but those who do will be facing a more open-ended environment. i don't know how TPTB could realistically profit in the material sense from SHTF (unless they live on Mars) but i'll have to confess that my primary focus isn't on spoiling TPTB's game but escaping from it. sure, abolition will do the trick nicely, and must be pursued at some point, it might not be the most immediate step, though.

It's not about preserving a society... it's about recreating the society from what it has become, a group of deliberately socially engineered humans who follow the dictates of a group of nefarious saboteurs.

it's quite easy to attribute everything to manipulation, but they've made their choice, afaics. unless mating choice becomes regimented, this type of attack will remain legit, i mean what can you do about being rejected by the vast majority?

reply to post by Long Lance

i can see how my position might come across as nihilistic, but i prefer a POV, which happens to explain what i see happening around us rather than one based essentially on wishful thinking.

So... you are saying that I am wishfully thinking about the destruction of intelligence?

Are you for real?

summary: people have been proven to accept -*anything*- under the right (wrong?) circumstances. note that i'm not at all happy with the state of affairs, but you've got to have a realistic impression, before you can expect to have any effect. imho, the first notion that must be dispelled is that you need any form of consent, because it seldom exists and if it does it's more often than not wrong.

If I am to understand you correctly.... you are saying that my METHODS of attempting to counter this are... wishful thinking?

if that is the case, why even bother responding?

I am encouraging genuine discourse on the subject, and while that may not be enough for YOUR tastes... it *IS* something, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

The pen, is mightier than the sword... because the sword must be wielded by a hand, that is directed by a mind, and the mind is swayed by words.

Regardless of any "Logistics" of countering the plan, This discussion is in regards to the existence of a plan to destroy the intelligence of a section of the population of humans, through directed social engineering.

So, in that idiom. Please.

maybe you should rephrase your posts a bit because intelligence includes more than pure capability.

Explain your position.

no matter how good you are at something, you should know when to apply your skill, no?

I was asking what you mean about your statement "because intelligence includes more than pure capability" I was asking you to clarify and explain your position.

do you believe this is some exercise in probabilistic analysis?

The plan that I am referring to is actually an exercise in practical probabilistic analysis, yes.

i think the path is set barring unforeseen events of course, one can hope for more but shouldn't expect anything other than oblivion under the given circumstances.

Unless someone brings the cause of the oblivion to the attention of others, encourages discussion, and seeks to develop a plan that will counter it, sure.

iow, the evidence is all around you, even following you into this thread. heck, you'll probably view this very post as another sign.

You are just a nihilist... you see everything as too big to change, and you have given up completely, and the NERVE of it is, that you want ME to adopt YOUR perspective....

And it's NOT going to happen.

wrt letting society die, well, chances are few if any of us will survive, but those who do will be facing a more open-ended environment.

You are completely missing the logistics of the situation.

We are not talking about the death of humanity, we are talking about the death of a specific portion of human society, and the balance of power that goes with it.

You must carefully consider the delicate balance of power on the planet, before you just throw your hands up in the air and decide that collapse will be best.

Back in the days of bronze tools, and the chariot... yeah, sure... could be a good thing.

But we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the entire biosphere... I don't know if you know this or not.... but that is a very real threat to the survival of all life on the planet, minus some bacteria and cockroaches.

it's quite easy to attribute everything to manipulation, but they've made their choice, afaics. unless mating choice becomes regimented, this type of attack will remain legit, i mean what can you do about being rejected by the vast majority?

It's not a choice, when they are mandated into ignorance.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


if you really want change, maybe you shouldn't be so scared about nuclear weapons, after all... because the question in essence is what would you be willing to do if you found out that a strategy based on 'informing' people is/was more of a distraction put in place by the same people who must expect countermeasures at some point? how far would you be willing to go if you actually found out you were 100%right?

Regardless of any "Logistics" of countering the plan, This discussion is in regards to the existence of a plan to destroy the intelligence of a section of the population of humans, through directed social engineering.

So, in that idiom. Please.

...

I was asking what you mean about your statement "because intelligence includes more than pure capability" I was asking you to clarify and explain your position.

if what you describe in this thread is truly a planned and concerted effort, the reason behind it must surely be a fear of losing control, wouldn't you agree?

'TPTB' certainly have no qualms about using the fruits of ingenuity, but must certainly fear the 'side effects' such as independent thinking. iow, it's probably the awareness that's undesired not the skills, which is why i wanted to make that distinction. sorry for any confusion.

My iq has been tested, and is quite high. i dislike publishing the actual number because it always leads to a pissing contest. Its high.

an earlier post mentioned something along the lines of, "Anyone with a hobby involving abstraction or rigor is deemed a nerd"

i was said nerd growing up. I was a chubby nerdy bookworm. As high school approached i leaned out, and started going to parties.I drank and acted like a fool to cover up my lack of social skills. this made me somewhat popular. And i was noticed by girls. I liked the physical affection, but it was always lacking something. i couldnt talk about anything remotely intelligent. i always wanted the physical attraction, and a girl to be a mind mate. never found it.

Now Im in my 30's and like being fat. Im not noticed, and i can read anything and do anything I want. i have had a few long term relationships, but I always find them so limiting. So i pretty much oscillate between being fat and not having the affection, and getting in shape, and not having the abstraction and intellectual rigor.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


If you have seen the movie "Idiocracy" I think that explains my theory on the subject.

The only sci-fi movie I believe is prophetic

IT seems to me that society has been set up to completely halt the reproductive success of intelligent males, as every intelligent male that I have met has trouble getting into relationships, and having sexual lives. I was wondering WHY this could be, and maybe you all have some theories as to why this is?

The kind of intelligence you have in mind, the whole high IQ thing, is not the be all and end all of everything. You can even say that it's just another thing having it's time in the sun, in fact you can say it to, is in the long run about as important as the shows on MTV are now, to the people watching them.

But to answer your question, everybody looks to mate with people that are more alike in themselves, that are in the same wavelength to sort of say. In anything from interests, to what they talk about, to what they like to do with there time, to what they want, to what they fear and love, and hate, and so on. If you have witnessed any long lasting couple you would have noticed that they are similar in a lot of things and ways, after all if they were not then they would not last long as a couple, fights and disputes would break out way to ofter for sustainability in the long run. But there is a balance in that to, in that you don't want to be to alike, because then there is nothing to surprise you or look forward to, hence there is nothing really to interest you in being there.

Ultimately it's not really the "person" that defines attractiveness to the opposite sex from there individual perspectives, but what about that person they can gauge and represent in themselves, all love and the whole mating game is based on conditions and having conditions, and passing certain condition's, basically a form of integration onto the ego, and the self, and your persona and off course "conditioning" to a certain lifestyle and form or form of thought. And intelligent people really are good in some contexts, but really suck in others, like everything and everyone they have there strengths and weaknesses, but they are definitely not the end of the line and the pinnacle of existence, like you seem to think, and I know because I to sometime am one of the smart'y and brainy folk, and sometime not.

All in all really it's not all that complicated what the mating game comes down to, and what it's all about. Just think of any discovery channel show you watched about animals in the wild and there mating rituals, then take that and apply it to humans in a more complicated scenario and habitat, and form, and bam, you would have your answer. Though some would tell you differently, especially females, and that there is "more" to it, and yes sure there is, but the thing is. That it's all in there head, thats were the "more" part comes in. So as you can see there really is no big mystery about it.

And as you no doubt know from your own experiences op, mother nature has a wicked sense of humor and all of little critters crawling and creeping back in forth on this planet and existence unfortunately we are the butt of every joke. If like you say intelligent people are not mating which is true that they are not on the fornicating like rabbits side, at least when compared to some. Well what if the Idiocricy movie is correct, like the vid woodwardjnr posted on page 3 displays, and that is were we will be heading.

Well then here is a joke for you op, who is really the intelligent ones if that were to happen? After all the less intelligent ones survived and multiplied and came out on top, so wouldn't that make them the real intelligent ones in the end? Since in this society and world, is that not how we judge who is intelligent, he who has the big cars, and houses, and is popular, and gets the chicks, and is fruitful and rich and all that, sure knowing some maths and figuring how to solve some puzzles is cool and all, but ultimately isn't that what the whole education and intelligence part comes down to as well, to a lot of people, you know getting the bling, and big house. It is funny I got to admit, in a step on a rake and get hit in the nuts, kind of way, but definitely funny.

Social Proofing plays a large role in the attack on intellect and the ability of the intelligent to attract a mate, but I suspect this has always been the case. Historically the 'Alpha Male' supposition has roots going back to tribal days prior to extraneous media influence. I imagine the strongest and fastest spear chucker always fared best in attracting similarily physically attractive mates. Whether such male fancied women with the largest breasts, widest hips, best nose piercing or whatever, he probably had pick of the litter. Mind you those of similar intelligences probably were drawn to each other as well. I'm sure all smart young men dream of the captain of the cheerleading squad and females vice versa (quarterback, etc), but is this really a greater part of social engineering or has this social dynamic always existed? I agree that there is a major attack on higher education, intellectualism, and the dumbing down of society at all levels. Proof is in the pudding with statements directly questioning the existence of intelligence at all lol. This type of social indoctrination is now permeating the highest levels of academia, where any true sense of debate and free thinking is nearly as dead as it is in the public school systems.

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
IT seems to me that society has been set up to completely halt the reproductive success of intelligent males, as every intelligent male that I have met has trouble getting into relationships, and having sexual lives.

I was wondering WHY this could be, and maybe you all have some theories as to why this is?

I have come across some interesting information, mainly studies that cite specifically that High IQ people have difficulty in this aspect of their lives.

blogs.discovermagazine.com...

Last December I passed a paper along to Razib showing that high-school age adolescents with higher IQs and extremely low IQs were less likely to have had first intercourse than those with average to below average intelligence. (i.e. for males with IQs under 70, 63.3% were still virgins, for those with IQs between 70-90 only 50.2% were virgin, 58.6% were virgins with IQs between 90-110, and 70.3% with IQs over 110 were virgins)

The team looked at 1000s of representative teens grades 7-12 in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health and The Biosocial Factors in Adolescent Development datasets, both of which include an IQ test, and include detailed sexual experience questions ranging from hand-holding to intercourse. As with the other study there was a curvilinear relationship: students with IQs above 100 and below 70 were significantly less likely to have had intercourse than those in between. Also like the other study, they found teens with IQs ranging from 75 to 90 had the lowest probability of virginity (the authors note this is also the same IQ range where propensity towards crime peaks).

Depending on the specific age and gender, an adolescent with an IQ of 100 was 1.5 to 5 times more likely to have had intercourse than a teen with a score of 120 or 130. Each additional point of IQ increased the odds of virginity by 2.7% for males and 1.7% for females. But higher IQ had a similar relationship across the entire range of romantic/sexual interactions, decreasing the odds that teens had ever kissed or even held hands with a member of the opposite sex at each age.

The student surveys at MIT and Wellesley also compared virginity by academic major. The chart for Wellesley displayed below shows that 0% of studio art majors were virgins, but 72% of biology majors were virgins, and 83% of biochem and math majors were virgins! Similarly, at MIT 20% of 'humanities' majors were virgins, but 73% of biology majors. (Apparently those most likely to read Darwin are also the least Darwinian!)

www.gnxp.com...

So, yes, Intelligence is INVERSELY correlated to sexual experience.....

Now, I have some theories of my own, but I want to see some other theories first! (Interested parties only,

)

box o' rocks here.

not happy i'm stupid and broke, tho.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Its difficult to explain accuratley, but intelligence should be balanced between technical skill and creative skill, this requires both a grasp of emotions and of reason. I remember in school, the classical "nerd" types would get near the top marks, however, the top 1 and 2 students were popular kids that were good in both maths and english, had vibrant social lives, and were also not jerks to the other kids. I think its the final step, a balance between purley rational, and also creative thought.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia

I'm 25 and my IQ tests at an earlier age was at 132. Thank you, this explains my deep disinterest in "playing the game."

Originally posted by Beyond Creation
Massive generalisation here but most women are unspeakably shallow.

At a guess I'd say that on ATS, 2-3% of males feel the need to include a picture of themselves, whereas with the female members its more like 80-90%. What does this tell you?

I have no wheels, no TV, no facebook profile and not much money. Women rarely appreciate the qualities that I have as they won't even offer any consideration based on what I (choose to) lack.

Conversely, at weekends I take to a stage and the female attention I receive is amazing, although in all honesty, their lack of depth is very unappealing.

Most women do not care for intelligent males as they like to be the clever one in the relationship, probably so they can second guess when they suspect cheating.

I'm not even sure if there is a degree of intelligence obtainable to understand women, or are they really that simple?

Sorry if this offends any females but if they're being honest with themselves, they'll probably agree.

I think I see your problem with women.

How's that for shallow?

This thread is SAD.

Grown men equating their lack of success with women to their great superiority.

The study applies to teenagers.

That you are a grown man who has a lack of capacity is NOT the same thing.

Don't bother with the insults. The picture isn't me. I have a high IQ. I'm attractive. I didn't choose to have sex until I was over 18. I don't have problems with men. I am happily married...so is my husband. I have children. Oh...and again, I fit the parameters of the story, and understand that they were not talking about over twenties.

People have needs. Those needs don't go away because you find them inconvenient. If you don't want sex, why are you so damn snotty about not getting it?

Originally posted by devilishlyangelic23

Originally posted by Mr. D
You won't take this wrong if you mean what you say about sex being an interesting
topic of discussion. I think you have never found a guy that can give you multiple orgasms
all night long or else you might think differently about sex. You'll never know until you've
experienced that.

its an interesting topic of discussion because i dont know why people do it...i dont know why people "fall for it" so to speak. i just want to understand why everyone goes nuts over love and lose their ability for rational thought or self control. its like people become no more consciously evolved than animals when hormones take over...and it doesnt make sense to me. so i like to discuss it to better understand

If your IQ is as high as you say it is, then surely you can think of a reason why people "do it" or "fall for it". It feels GOOD to love and to be loved. It also makes life easier for you when you have a partner to help you cope with difficult situations. The physical and emotional support is important. That's why people team up, so that they can accomplish something that a single person would not have been able to do (either at all, or as easily).

Although everything we humans do can be attributed to chemical reactions in our bodies and brains, you can't go through life interpreting everything like a machine. No wonder the "intelligent" ones miss out of the beautiful things in life. They're too busy analyzing the pi$$ out of it.

reply to post by Vicky32


I have never had this experience.

I would suggest that your high intelligence female friends are very stupid about human relations, and unwilling to challenge it. Or they have very bad mate parameters which they are unwilling to change.

Good men are everywhere. But if the good men aren't good enough for you because they don't have the right height, or the right weight, or the right degree, or a degree, or are bald, or don't make the money you like .... that's a CHOICE. A bad choice.

They suffer the consequences of being picky to the point of selecting themselves out of the gene pool in their high fertility years. That's dumb on a variety of levels, personal just being the most obvious.

There is a difference between seeing a man for "what he could be" (the old dumb stand-by), and NOT SEEING THEM AT ALL. Choosing to not see men for who they are, and seeing the values which make them a good partner is a crippling defect.

reply to post by Aeons

This thread is SAD.

Grown men equating their lack of success with women to their great superiority.

Are you saying that a Germ-line warfare procedure to eliminate the intelligent portion of a populous is not a good strategy?

Because I happen to think it would be an excellent strategy.

That you are a grown man who has a lack of capacity is NOT the same thing.

Lack of Capacity?

What are you talking about?

Don't bother with the insults. The picture isn't me.

Well, we can see that you don't have a High opinion of yourself at all.. Madam President of the Human Species.

I have a high IQ. I'm attractive. I didn't choose to have sex until I was over 18. I don't have problems with men. I am happily married...so is my husband. I have children. Oh...and again, I fit the parameters of the story, and understand that they were not talking about over twenties.

No, you are absolutely Right... women have difficulties all the time getting laid.

Why just the other day, A female coworker was complaining to me that no matter how pretty she looked, no men would ever approach her with the intentions of having sex.

It's weird, no?

People have needs. Those needs don't go away because you find them inconvenient. If you don't want sex, why are you so damn snotty about not getting it?

What are you talking about?

Who are you talking to?

You are hurling insults, apparently at the board ITSELF, or maybe the website?

Is there an actual TARGET for that hatred?

Or are you just venting?

We are trying to have a discussion about something here, I would appreciate it if you didn't jump in the thread trying to make everyone feel bad just because they are having a discussion.

Please keep the emotional attacks, and Ad Homenims to a minimum Aeons... Thank you for your cooperation.

Does it hurt your head to be that disingenuous? Or does it come naturally?

If it makes you feel better, I am distantly related to the woman in the picture. I'd prefer to be related to the character.

That smart teenage boys may not loose their virginity until they get a bit older is not the same thing as adult men who can't get laid because they are arrogant women-hating jackasses and it shows.
Therefore, those men's commentary on how this study explains their inability to get laid is just ridiculous and sad.

That clearer for you? Logic - it is grand.


sidebar:
Such a great cycle -These guys logic in a nutshell:
I hate women, and they notice. Those women then don't want to be around me. I then get frustrated because I want sex and can't get it. I hate the women even more. It shows more. I claim to not need or want sex, while at the same time denigrating the women won't give it to me. Women notice and avoid me like a plague. I become more frustrated with "not wanting" sex, and become even more hateful towards women. They continue to notice. I make up stories for myself that people are intimidated by my too-worthy self and claim to continue to not want sex with those horrible things with vaginas. Those horrible people with vaginas continue to notice I hate them, and still avoid my ever-so-amazing self.