Unlucky in love? Date a geek!

[trinityvixen]

This article is almost too painfully stupid to make fun of.

Not that I'd let a thing like that stop me, though.

Where do I even begin, though? Start to finish this is ridiculous. The first few paragraphs get the patriarchal "women are only looking for men who will make the money for them because they don't want to work and make their own" bullshit out of the way nicely by saying geeks are "great providers."

I love my geek friends, but do I know any who make huge monies? Not especially. darkling1 (Happy Birthday again, btw) and bigscary, you guys probably make the most out of anyone I know (oh, hslayer, too. Does that mean you will provide for the ditz blonde looking for teh monies when she finds out you fit the rubric of "geek"? Or, as is the case with the two of you with girlfriends, do you prefer your women geek first, stupidity dead last?

And the examples they cite are hilarious. David Arquette is neither a geek nor a nerd. He's just weird. Tiger Woods classifies as a nerd because he plays golf? Doesn't that just mean that his family was affluent enough to afford greens fees as a kid and live in an area with easy access to a pro shop and a driving range? Why is golf nerdier than, say, football? It's lamer, I grant you, and much more boring to watch (not that football's a gas, but no one would argue for golf being the more exciting sport between the two). But nerdier? Isn't golf an embodiment everything we raise our kids to think they need to be these days? It enforces a strong sense of competition between what should be peers; embraces consumerism and selling your body to corporate logos; encourages people to think they have to do everything for themselves; and rewards people for essentially doing nothing (isn't that the new American Dream?). Football is just a bunch of guys touching each other. That's, like, gay.

I love how they also confuse the character one actor plays on TV versus the man himself. Clearly, if you are a nerd on TV, you must be one in real life. And it's not like TV or movies ever purposefully ugly up obviously pretty people because the thought of hiring actually nonattractive people makes them shudder and dive into their fortresses of solitude (big stacks of money) or anything.

But how to find a geek to be your sugar daddy, ladies? They helpfully provide some suggestions--what games to search by, key words relating to a geek's schooling or nerdly proclivities--and how to shrug off the low opinions of your snobby girlfriends who wouldn't be caught dead clubbing with you and Mr. Wizard Jr. It's a lucky thing that geeks never screw around, too, because then you'd have to worry that your geeky guy might go for one of said airhead gal-pals.

And if I say one word about what evidence I have to the contrary--that proves geeks are no more faithful or faithless to their partners than "non geeks" (a.k.a. Boring People), several people on my friendslist will murder me. Just consider it said.

The physical attraction bullshit doesn't even merit a mention. Suffice to say, my many lovely guy and girl geek friends are universally considered ugly. In fact, my geek girl friends? You don't actually exist according to this article. Apparently, the only competition bubbleheaded beauties face for the attention of homely geek boys? World of Warcraft, Star Trek, and Chess.

*****

This article, on the other hand, actually is so dumb and pointless, it's only worth shaking your head over. But hey, if all conservatives were this stupid, we wouldn't have to worry about the GOP, would we?

The one and only gripe I make about it is his stupid "Well, if you're a physicist, why do you get to sound off about global warming as if you know anything about it?" Excuse me, but the ID folks screamed to the heavens that they had some two hundred scientists signing up to support them instead of evolution, they didn't make any bones about the fact that not one of their scientific experts was actually an expert in the field of biology, evolutionary biology (okay, that one makes sense), genetics, cladistics, archaeology, etc etc etc.

(note: I don't put "scientists" in quotes the way some conservative folk do when they dislike the positions that scientists take--I may dislike their politics, but if you have a PhD in Chemistry, you're a scientist.)

*****

And one last rant from Miss McRanty Pants.

Today, the fire inspectors came. My boss and I have been told countless times that we do shit wrong by these people. Three inspections ago, we had left flammable materials in a freezer not built to protect flammable stuff; our bad, we started storing it in the flammable-material-okay freezer in another lab. Then it was that we hadn't put the dates of purchased chemicals on things in the fireproof cabinet. Okay, we'll do that. Then it was that we didn't have the date that said chemicals were opened on the bottles. ::MUCH TEETH GRINDING:: Okay, now we have.

They come today, and I'm expecting no problems. I mixed some 70% EtOH, but I put the pure stuff away in the cabinet under the hood. We hadn't fixed any slides in a week, so there was no MeOH-Acetone in the wrong freezer. Every bottle has been labelled a billion times over. I peek around my desk to watch them go through the other lab benches and then get to the hood.

Where they stop and start frowning. When the fire inspectors stall, they are looking for to make trouble with you. I jump up to forestall what whirlwind I can, and ask if there is a problem. They hold up a bottle of anhydrous isopropanol with no date on it. They tell me it needs one. I tell them a) I know that from being yelled at every six months by them, and b) there are initials on that bottle that do not belong to my PI, which means the bottle is not ours.

This guy starts pulling almost a mafioso type racket, telling me that "If it was opened only a year ago, okay, but if not," then he shrugs, letting ominous words linger. I tell him again that this hood is not ours exclusively; the chemicals in it not entirely ours. This does not seem to matter. If I can't find a date on when this bottle that has nothing to do with me and that isn't in any record I have was opened, our lab gets a citation.

I finally figure out whose are the initials on the bottle and point the inspectors in the direction of another lab's technician. This technician goes back there with them and they talk, I ignore it because it is now Not My Problem. Then there is laughter and an exchance in Russian. The accent I couldn't place with the lead inspector was apparently Russian, which the technician from the other lab is. There is none of the stern "This is your fault for having your lab space docketed around the hood that's not yours" lecturing or threats. Didn't see a single thing written down, no harsh language or severe frowns.

All because they are both Russian and I and my coworkers are not. That is so fucking unfair it hurts.

Comments

[chuckro.livejournal.com]

I probably make on the high end of folks you know, and I know Jethrien only wants me for my money. Of course, I only want her because she's hot, so it all works out.

That article is a classic example of approaching each gender as a set of predetermined triggered responses, and not actually individual people.

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

Oh, totally. This is why no one's allowed to damage him until after the wedding - I want my money, dammit.

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

Objectively, it's bad, but I think it's actually above average for the New York tabloid dailies. There was a Post article I read once which approvingly mentioned a woman who stopped her date short after the guy mentioned that he enjoyed The Drew Carey Show. It made me very sad. Lousy anti-Clevelander bias...

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Don't you just love it though? Geeks are the new trend in fashionable husbands. Too bad trends don't last. I guess you geek boys better live it up while you can.

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

I'm fashionable? How did that happen?

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

Members can meet and select a perfect mate (guys with screen names like "thinkspecs" and "ivygrad") based on favorite board game and gadget instead of eye color, height and other categories the nerds might be lacking.

...nerds lack eyes?

Well, this would explain why no one wants to date them.

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

...nerds lack eyes?

No way! Usually they have extra!

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

You laugh now, but I'd much rather know a potential date's favorite board/video games than eye color. Of course, this may be why I'm still single :)

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

Oh, actually, I'd totally agree with you. I was just amused by the phrasing.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I don't think you're wrong either. For instance, I am a fan of Hearts--and not that namby-pamby version you get on the computer. I want the blood-on-the-first-trick, look-out-Mom's-got-the-Queen, hit-you-until-it-hurts-because-then-winning-will-taste-that-much-better Hearts. If I were set up on a date and found he was an Uno man, there might be blood.

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

Agree with Chuckro on this one. And I've actually used (well, that should be "actually use"--present tense) gk2gk.com, the dating website they mention. Though a few notes:

1: In 2 years, you will know a geek making big bucks--me! Unless I end up deciding to work for the prosecutor's office or something.

2: Gotta love their example of an "ordinary geek"--former jock, whose only geeky quality is that he...knows the rules of chess! And he's a schoolteacher! The term "average joe" seems more appropriate than "geek".

3: An interesting dynamic on gk2gk--it's main advantage and disadvantage is that it's self-selecting. Women I've talked to estimate that 90% of guys on the site seem to think that e-mails in l33t-speak are a turn on, and are usually the sort of geek who lives in his parent's basement playing Halo and working as a grocery store clerk by day. From my side, 90% of women on the site seem to think that not being an extrovert and not having any typical interests makes them a geek. The fact that these also don't have any geeky interests either just makes them dumb and unattractive. But the occasional hits have been better than I've seen on other sites. Two have almost gotten somewhere, but broke down over other issues (craziness and age.)

On the Dennis Prager article, that's not what he said. The exact quote is: "The conservative is more likely to wonder why a Nobel laureate in physics has anything more meaningful to say about war than, let us say, a taxi driver." Of course we should listen to scientists about global warming. Less so about military strategy, morality, or politics in general (science politics, maybe.)

And as for the inspectors, could you report them for misconduct?

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

#3--what do you mean they "don't have usual interests"?

As for the inspectors--how could I prove it? I don't speak Russian and I can't be sure they weren't cited, only that the Russian guy was treated a helluva lot better. That's not really grounds for anything. Plus, the last thing any lab wants is to make enemies of an inspector of any stripe. Your lab will never be forgiven for it.

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

They don't go barhopping or clubbing on Friday nights, they don't shop as a hobby, etc. Which is all well and good, but when the alternatives are on the order of "Watching bad reality TV" and "Reading the Da Vinci Code", they've instantly disqualified themselves as geeks, and killed any attractiveness they might have had.

[bigscary.livejournal.com]

I only make good money in fits and starts, still. I really need a steady gig.

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

I linked this column a while back, which I think expresses the sentiment far better. Of course, it's from Smithsonian, instead of the Daily News, so that's to be expected.... (It's also a personal, rather than celebrity, account.)

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

...awww!

So incredibly cute!

My boy keeps elaborate spreadsheets of budgets, phone numbers, comments people made in passing that indicate good gifts for them...and he brings me comic books.

Geeks are the best.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Aww, I have to get an SO who brings me comic books. That's going to be a must. The spreadsheet thing would be useful for me to do because I never have ideas at the holidays because I never wrote down any ideas I did have...

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I still dislike this sentiment. "Look! I got my own personal techie for life!" That's basically the reverse sexism of getting a housefrau for a wife so a guy can replace his mother as the one who does his laundry and makes his food.

There very possibly could be a lot to that relationship, but it's being sold short when it's being sold like that. Marry a geek, never worry about computer stuff. What's up with that? Are you going to go polygamous so that you never have to pay for a plumber, driver, babysitter, etc etc etc? Stupid.

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

Dude, that's like a paragraph...

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

One thing I'm surprised you didn't rant about--ever notice how all of these "Date geeks!" articles are only about how wonderful it is for women to date male geeks? Have you ever seen an article suggesting that men should seek out and date female geeks? Of course not! All men care about is whether their mate looks good, and all women care about is how much money their men make and whether they're nice enough to buy them things! Yay sexism!

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

Thank you for striking a blow on my gender's behalf.

Yeah, what's wrong with girl geeks, hmm? We don't own the latest shoes, but we're tolerant of guys' interests, we have something to talk about besides shopping, and we can fix your appliances.

I know, I know, I'm totally preaching to the converted. Most of the guys reading this are quite appreciative of the female geek.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I figured that much bullshit was obvious. Said so in the beginning with the ranty mcranty stuff at the beginning. It's not unusual for any "new" type of means of dating to be so compartmentalized.

Also, I did say that this article fails to mention the attraction of female geeks. Mostly because, far as the article was concerned, there weren't any. Popularly, this is true, and seeing as the article cited only celebrity cases, female geekdom was ignored, denied, and obfuscated.

The sexism inherent in it I can get dime-a-dozen with any of these "solutions to the dating/mating/marriage problem." Offense on behalf of geeks being denigrated as unattractive and nerdy to the point of embarrassment among "normal people" so rarely comes along. I thought we'd made true progress with the embrace of high tech in our lives. Apparently, sexism and hatred of all things geek does still find a happy niche to occupy in the maintstream.

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

do you prefer your women geek first, stupidity dead last?

Stupidity is always dead last, but geekiness is purely optional. They should be geek friendly--open-minded and tolerant of my geeky interests--but they don't need to be geeks too.

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

Well, it helps, the way it always helps to have interests in common.

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

Sure, otherwise you could spend six years getting your girlfriend interested in anime and Star Trek and science fiction novels, only for her to decide that she'd rather be Hasidic. That's a purely hypothetical scenario, of course.