<p>Okay, UCLA has hotter girls than Stanford does. I accepted this fact a while ago. I heard Stanford girls are ugly often enough to give me no other choice, though why Stanford guys thought this appropriate to say in my presence is another question.
Ive never thought Stanford women were particularly unattractive. I look around my classes and all I see is a group of tanned, toned, highlighted blondes in flip-flops and pajama pants. Its not that the raw material were working with is of inferior quality compared to what all the acronym-happy universities are working with, its that we dont package as well. </p>
<p>Stanford women arent unattractive because of their looks, but because of their brains. Smart women are not attractive. </p>
<p>Why? Is it because we dont fawn over you like the girls in high school did? Does it make you feel like less of a man when we are as capable, intelligent and independent as you are? Is it because we wont feel intellectually fulfilled by ironing your boxers and baking cookies for the PTA meetings?</p>
<p>Maureen Dowd reported in the New York Times last week on a British study that found that a high I.Q. hampers a womans chance to get married, while it is a plus for men. The prospect for marriage increased by 35 percent for guys for each 16-point increase in I.Q.; for women, there is a 40 percent drop for each 16-point rise.</p>
<p>women have been the most oppressed group forever. we have come a long way and we're still far from equal, our pay is not even getting close to equal! i believe it's averaging around $0.75/male dollar for most high end jobs.</p>
<p>the truth is, a lot of men are so used to being in charge, in patriarchal societies. their egos are getting spliced and cut down b/c of this seemingly radical notion that women can be equal.</p>
<p>one thing my history teacher pointed out, ever notice that when men get uppity or whatever, they are usually referred to as "arrogant" and when women do so, they are referred to as "b!tchy".</p>
<p>bleh, i don't think i'm making progress so enough of my annoying rants. haha</p>
<p>as for me, brains are very important. beauty and brains!</p>
<p>That is one of the biggest fallacies in the world...it's what self-proclaimed smart women tell themselves at night to help them sleep and not cry in their pillow because no guys want to be with them.</p>
<p>I am soooooo sick of girls with big mouths saying, "oh you're just intimidated by me." HA HA. Don't confuse irritation with intimidation ladies.</p>
<p>I love a women that is intelligent, it bothers me in no way...I don't know too many guys that it does bother. </p>
<p>awakendream,
there are so many errors in your posting I don't know where to begin...that line 75 cents for ever dollar a man makes is pure crap perpetuated by females that just want to cry "We're oppressed!". Crap. A study, done by Harvard grad students, FEMALE grad students, said the 75 cents/dollar line is not because of discrimination but because of job choice, time off of work and other FEMALE related decisions not having to do with oppression.</p>
<p>Here's a tip ladies. Be respectful. Quit trying to have your cake and eat it too. Quit playing games. You want love? You want respect? You want your what-what? Than earn it. Men are not here to be your whipping boys. I am tired of the guilt trip laid upon males in American society.</p>
<p>By the way Coto, regarding IQ and dating, the same holds true for men with high IQ's...the logic goes that people with high IQ's tend to have immature social skills and thus date less. People are just looking to lay blame as easily as possible instead of applying critical, non-biased thinking.</p>
<p>Women are oppressed?! Ha ha! Try being a white male in America.</p>
<p>Yeah, women aren't oppressed here. Try living in the Middle East or Africa or Asia or pretty much anywhere else. If anything, women are treated better than men. They might get looks or cat calls or their male boss might ignore them or not listen to them, but at least they can't get drafted. And how many times do you see a beautiful woman carrying anything heavier than a pound?</p>
<p>exilio: i got that $0.75 figure off the top of my head somewhere, yes there are many factors contributing to that salary inadequacy... but nonetheless it's still not completely "equal". i had this article in mind when i said pay wasn't equal for "high end jobs":
[quote]
How Corporate America is Betraying Women: Forty years after sex discrimination became illegal, a huge gap in pay and promotions still yawns. Now angry women are suing their employersand winning. How afraid should you be?.... <a href="http://www.fortune.com/fortune/careers/articles/0,15114,1011645,00.html%5B/url%5D%5B/quote%5D">http://www.fortune.com/fortune/careers/articles/0,15114,1011645,00.html
[/quote]
</a></p>
<hr>
<p>i found a similar article though in, a study at University of Michigan, Ann-Arbor:</p>
<p>anyways i don't want to start a fight or something, lol, and i'm not trying to come across as some belligerent femi-nazi, i'm just making a statement that yes women have made great strides, but nothing is completely equal yet.</p>
<p>Stanford girls are ugly cause they are ugly, nothing having to do with their brains at all. If you've ever been around that campus you know what I mean. However, this is unique to Stanford. On the campuses of many other top academic schools I saw many attractive girls. I will never forget the article the Stanford Daily once ran where the entire freshman male class signed a petition saying that Stanford girls were ugly.</p>
<p>a lot of people have said/opinion that ucsd girls were ugly. i don't think it's true because i didn't think so. i think even the princeton review book provided a student comment something like "it is said that 9 out of 10 girls in cali are pretty, and the 10th one goes to ucsd"</p>
<p>the article said even ucsd girls were prettier and i haven't really heard that much about stanford girls being that ugly in comparison to what i heard about ucsd girls.</p>
<p>Yeah, I don't like talking about the attractiveness of a student population. It changes every year, it's subjective, and it's pretty uncouth to discuss. And the author's description of Stanford girls is just contributing to the problem. Tanned, toned, and blonde. Like that's somehow a positive. Add a 4 inch nose and a pepperoni pizza face, and suddenly the tanned blonde part doesn't sweeten the deal. And good looking guys don't wear make-up or primp themselves up, so why should girls have to do that in order to be attractive. I've seen plenty of beautiful girls without make-up. The point - it's stupid to discuss.</p>