Intellectualism & Depth: A Turn Off?

[aviet]

In my life, I almost always talk about subjects such as history, economics, philosophy, human behavior etc. I don't talk about much other than this and I struggle to see how average people are able to stretch out a lifetime of conversations about what was on TV, indulgence, etc.

For whatever reason, I have found little problem when talking to men. There is usually something that I am able to get them going on that has some sort of depth. However, it is a different case with women and it does not seem I am alone in this; I have heard multiple people on FDR phone-ins say that they've always had trouble being able to talk to girl[friend]s about, for example, "anything that is on this show [FDR]".

I work in a sub-field of history, genealogy, that I think people tend to have a fuddy-duddy/old timer image of. Most of the people who are involved in the industry are 40+ and maybe most are even 60+. I generally find when I mention it to women that their response is a very odd type of fear-avoidance that you may get when trying to talk about something like philosophy. But in the case of genealogy it is on steroids and from my observation it is not do with their perception of me, but something internal to them. They will typically get visibly uncomfortable and their ensuing words are as if they are vocally reeling backwards. I'd describe it as a similar response as you might expect if said something casually racist.

I've had similar experiences when it comes to other topics. For example, I managed to get a few political sentiments out of an Texan women, but when I asked them if they knew Ron Paul they became visibly distressed and obviously wanted to change the topic ASAP. They still wanted to talk to me, just not about that.

I do understand that there are some women who are interested in such topics and I have come across them and I know it is probably a 'turn on' for them. it just seems to be a smaller minority than men.

As a generalisation, I find that women tend to find the things I (and I assume everyone here) want to talk about are: odd, to be avoided and as a result of being interested in them I am to be disregarded.

If anyone else has experienced this apparent fear and discomfort when discussing intellectual topics. Why do you think that is? And why do you think women can disregard men who are interested in such things, when they are probably a fairly good hallmark of resources or potential to obtain resources.

[dsayers]

Why do you think that is?

You can have lots of free stuff or you can take responsibility for your actions, stand against the grain, and work hard for the things you want in life. This is the paradigm in the west for women. Translation: They have much more to lose by adhering to integrity. So it's harder for them to resist. Plus, various equal rights programs gone too far have turned towards coddling women, which will only weaken them. Either one of these should present in the way you describe, but combined...

[Jot]

Generally, women are trying to avoid conflicts and are more influenced by what people in their family and social circle think of them. They are also less risk averse.

[A4E]

Imagine this. You meet and start talking to a lady. You tell her that you just ate lunch. Then she asks you if you know the correct way to make bread. You know there is such a thing as making bread, but you do not know the procedure of it. What do you do?

[aviet]

Imagine this. You meet and start talking to a lady. You tell her that you just ate lunch. Then she asks you if you know the correct way to make bread. You know there is such a thing as making bread, but you do not know the procedure of it. What do you do?

I am not sure what the direction of thought is here. But I would ask about the correct way of making bread and question if there is really a correct way to make it. I wouldn't mind talking about bead.

[A4E]

I am not sure what the direction of thought is here. But I would ask about the correct way of making bread and question if there is really a correct way to make it. I wouldn't mind talking about bead.

Just trying to make you see it from their perspective. Maybe it was a poor example. My first thought was to use the example of knitting. I guess that might have gotten some point across better because it should be sufficiently uninteresting for men.

 

Perhaps you would be curious about the procedure of making bread after she fairly unexpectedly asked you about it, but how many men do you think would continue the conversation in that path? I can remake the example with knitting:

 

Imagine this. You meet and start talking to a lady. You tell her that you just bought a nice sweater. Then she asks you if you know the procedure of which to knit a sweater. You know there is such a thing as knitting, but you do not know the procedure of it. What do you do?

 

I don't know how you try to bring up the subjects you like, to ladies, and my examples are probably a bit extreme, but I would think that they get a bit overwhelmed and want to escape the uncomfortable situation, just like most men would want if a lady starts asking them about the procedure of knitting (or making bread).

 

I have come to conclude and understand that most deep conversations usually need to start out shallow for people to get comfortable of what is happening. This means that you can theoretically talk about any subject to any person, as long as you start out shallow and then incrementally go deeper, and playing on the other persons curiosity. There are of course people who will never even want to wade out more than up to their shoes or perhaps knees, for various reasons, so I am talking about fairly upstanding healthy people.

 

The reason you might have more success with men, is that men are generally more open to cut to the chase, especially when dealing with other men. (I don't know about women to women)

 

If I have misunderstood the whole setting of this thread, then you can ignore my posts.

[AccuTron]

Women are products of millions of years of evolution overall, and tens of thousands as primates.  A woman is a set of reproductive organs in a carrying case.  All females of any (vertebrate) species are just that, any current egos aside.  The top evolutionary priority is to save these organs and keep them operating.  In the natural world, anything new is dangerous:  it's a poisonous plant, a hidden predator, bad water, unsteady ground -- the correct answer in all natural cases is to "run away like a girl."  Thus, when women encounter something new, they freak.  (Not talking about a fad.)

 

Likewise, to be ostracized in nature is to die.  Starvation, exposure, predation.  (Also aggression by other women for the act of breaking rank, probably with similar roots.)  For a woman to break rank with other women is life-threatening at a genetic level.  In the natural world, this worked, but with our vast civilized capacity for fraud, this is disaster.  Women in general will not listen to anything challenging, it threatens them, and I doubt if they even know why.  At a genetic level, it would express as the feeling of "well, it's just bad, it just is."

 

I've run into what this cartoon displays approaching 100%, not to mention Dilbert is only about things that resonate widely:   Imgur: Dilbert cartoon

[aviet]

If I have misunderstood the whole setting of this thread, then you can ignore my posts.

No that makes sense.

[Tony Crowe]

@aviet64, I appreciate what you're trying to do and I have some experience that I can pass along. I've been engaging in conversations with men and women a lot and there are some differences. Men are more willing to immediately have conversations on abstract topics. Women will do that but not usually right away. A good way to go that will hold their attention is to talk about what is going on for you and for them in real life and to do it with some flare. Some bravado and boldness helps too.

 

That doesn't mean they will go along or care anything about you in the long run but it will be more fun for all.

 

Please try it and report back!

[dsayers]

Women will do that but not usually right away. A good way to go that will hold their attention is to talk about what is going on for you and for them in real life and to do it with some flare. Some bravado and boldness helps too.

 

That doesn't mean they will go along or care anything about you in the long run but it will be more fun for all.

 

Please try it and report back!

What irony. I actually just had some success along this vein yesterday. A girl at work who normally behaves as if they are somebody who wouldn't hold a serious conversation had shared with me that she sees a therapist and has anxiety issues. This led to a short conversation, where I let her know that I'm available to talk about such things because I know a little about a little and enjoy such topics. Next thing I know, she's telling me all kinds of things. I was surprised.

 

As I read your post, it occurs to me that the first dozen interactions we had, I was more or less playing along with the more jovial attitude she and some of our co-workers engage in. In addition to playing along, I made my own mark in terms of standing out and demonstrating my humanity and personability. I can't help but think that she would not have been as open if I hadn't already established such value. Reading your post helped me to connect the dots and qualify this, so thank you for that.

[Tony Crowe]

@dsayers That's it. It takes some time and a different approach. Nice work earning the trust.