I think you're conflating intelligence with knowledge.No, of course the logical-mathematical is not going to be an attraction draw. It's useful in life or in business or invention, engineering, etc., but in relationships if you're stuck with one of these logic-dominant people... fuhgedaboudit. They are very unpleasant. They'll just be intolerant to the more feeling person, and will deem their emotions as flawed compared to their robotic and emotion-lacking thinking. Everyone wants someone who is kind and compassionate, at least to them (some people don't care about the world in general.)Linguistic is helpful for expression and conveying how one feels about themselves, the world, and others. So very useful.I posted that intelligence personality test, but the more I saw the answers roll in and thought about it, the more bunk I thought it was.
Perhaps EQ type over IQ? It's like those robotic programmer types we talked about before. They can accumulate knowledge very rapidly and solve some very complex puzzles of a mathematical sort. I find them extremely capable in the IQ sort of way but almost completely absent in EQ... or we might say they're skewed towards logical-mathematical forms of intelligence but perhaps significantly lacking in some others like interpersonal.How do we distinguish a "demisexual" though? I suspect I still lean further towards that way because I'm minimally interested in theoretical knowledge, more interested in applied knowledge/skill/competence, and maximally interested in the subjective -- our hopes, dreams, inspirations, childhood, how we uniquely perceive the world, etc. If I'm going to be deeply attracted to a woman beyond a basic "hubba bubba", it's going to through the idea that I can so deeply relate to how she thinks and feels... to her metaphorical "heart".It's like if you spoke to me about design:1) You could share the theoretical knowledge with me like color theory, values, composition, the communication aspects, the most visually-oriented approaches to marketing, etc.While that would fascinate me in an academic way, I wouldn't feel very drawn to you through such exchanges since you're teaching me things I can learn elsewhere from textbooks or other designers. I'd be getting to know mostly more about *design* rather than about *you*.
2) You could share the applied knowledge/experience/wisdom with me. At this point, we're largely departing the realm of right vs. wrong. You're sharing unique thoughts and ideas that you've personally developed navigating conflicting ideas among designers of how to do things. You share with me what you specifically think is most important in design, your unique methodology that works best for you, etc.This will connect me much more deeply because now I am finding a lot about *you* over design (although I might still pick up some valuable design-related ideas and inspirations from a veteran), and not just what appears to be shared at face value.In the process, you will be revealing to me a tremendous deal about how you think and not just what you think, your inner psyche, your struggles, and hopes and dreams -- what you find beautiful, what you find ugly, what you find awesome, what you find boring -- ultimately your values. There will be a tremendous amount of personal information being conveyed, especially to me, since I'm not one to just interpret these things at the bare minimum face value. I will try to project myself in your shoes and imagine how you perceive the world in the process. I can do that more now that you've revealed a tremendous amount about yourself and metaphorical "heart".3) You just directly share less about design and more specifically what inspires you about it, how you got into it, how you think about it, how you feel about it, where you disagree with other designers and clients, etc. This operates similarly to #2 but more directly.
But also not all people who excel most at the logical-mathematical are necessarily deprived in "EQ" or interpersonal department. I've met some who are so funny, so charming, so relatable, for every 2-3 ones who are robotic.Still, I wouldn't feel that connected discussing mathematical formulas or functions or algorithms with even the most charming among them since the subject is very emotionally dry, I think. It's not exactly a ripe source for humor:>> Knock-knock?>> Who's there?>> A cubic polynomial.>> ...It's not exactly a subject where we can interject that much in the way of personal experiences and how we uniquely perceive the world... there is some information there of the sort when we meet innovators in the field if they described the rationale behind their innovations, but it tends to be minimal and the type of information most divorced from the logical-mathematical.Mostly I'm interested in relating to people at the end of the day. So I tend to think I'm closer to "demisexual" than "sapiosexual". That said, I'm not really either since I can have a sexual attraction to any random women who can twerk upside-down... but I don't actually want to date her.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
Yeah it certainly can't be the only thing. There are plenty of crazy geniuses, or at least there have been in history, but I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with them.
Lolol. I like you.
Lol. I think the context is within your own sexual orientation, though.
Ay yay yay. Think you should have said that one in your inside voice. You sure you wanna make that public?
yes I had such a thought but the following one was 'damn do what you want you're anonymous'
I don’t think it’s really an orientation. It’s more a preference.
I don't know that they have to be distinct from one another. But with the presence of both - pow pow!
Yea I guess so
I agree with you.
Lol. Thanks. Funny, I woke up this morning and it was the first thing that popped into my head. I said to my hubby, "You know how sometimes I post things, ideas, at night on gag? Yeah in the morning sometimes I chuckle and think hmmmmm..." But ah well. Can't be serious all the time eh.I don't know where I heard that phrase, but I'm like a parrot with movies and such. Language can be so fun.
Seems pointless right? Like is every attraction supposed to be an entirely new sexuality?
What do you make of that?
Want to see something adorable?https://youtu.be/q3RIml05tyM
@Jamie05rhs Oh my God