From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 29 Sep 92 01:06:20 GMT
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

In article 717693983@convex.convex.com, ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <1992Sep28.051700.3163@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik) writes:
>
>> An engineering degree is only as attractive as the one who holds
>>it. When you take that degree and flaunt it, it becomes a form of intel-
>>lectual snobbery. 
>
>Well, that's not quite true.  Charlie and company are forever parroting
>the standard spiel that says people who exercise are superior, not only
>physically, but intellectually, spiritually, morally, and in every other
>way as well.  I keep say that no, they are not.  They have simply chosen
>to concentrate their abilities in one particular area.  People who choose
>to concentrate on things other than exercise may not achieve as much
>physically, but this may be compensated for by the things they achieve
>in the areas that are important to them.  Charlie and company, however,
>will not admit this.  They deny that anyone who concentrates on artist
>or intellectual or spiritual development could possibly achieve more in
>those fields than someone who spends much, or most, or all of his time
>in the gym.  They insist that spending time on athletics does not leave
>a person less time to spend on other things and that, furthermore, exercise
>heightens a person's other abilities and makes it possible to achieve more
>than a nonexerciser possibly could in other fields anyway.

Allow me to agree with you on some points. Yes, I agree that people who
do not exercise to any great degree are not inferior people. I do not
exercise very much because I have an injury that requires surgery. I can
still think and be creative with the best of them, and lead a more or
less normal life, but not engage in many athletic pursuits.

   I am relatively new to this group, and I perceive that there is a big
word war going on. I don't know if my mind is as evasive as yours is, but
I have read most of the other postings in this thread. If you remember,
this whole thing started as a question. The question was a simple one. 
Why can't some men over thirty get a date? (yes, it's misquoted, but that's
how I understood it.) Many including myself have come along with helpful
suggestions and impromptu sollicited words of advice, only to have our
advice regurgitated back to us in misquoted forms. Some of us were really
trying to help, including myself. I personally have reasonable dating success,
and I thought that what works for me might be useful to this other guy
who's having a rough time.
 
   This was not begun as a debate on whether or not fit people are inherently
superior to unfit people in intellectual ability. The intellectual snobbery
that I was referring to is a PERCEIVED and not a real one. I.e. The women get
turned off by guys who may be very smart, but in the way of WISDOM they
lack something. They feel that they have to impress women with their intel-
lectual accomplishments, and the women are not impressed because the guy's
ego is so inflated that he has forgotten or likely never learned to listen.
In my humble opinion, people who have the most success with the opposite
sex exchange views instead of imposing their egos on others. This is known
as the art of conversation. You are indeed as eloquent as the finest 
debaters I have seen, and so you are never at a loss for words. I am not
at present attacking you and I implore you not to take it as such: Just
listen to what we are saying. You missed the point of my posting. You are
one of those who picks at supporting details instead of debating the real
point. You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect them, but I may
disagree. If you can respect that, then you can respect Charlie's belief
even if you don't agree. That is the art of conversation without getting
personal.
   
>This is athletic snobbery, pure and simple.  Yet you do not attack them
>for saying it.  Instead, you attack me.  Why?  Because I dare to say
>that people who spend less time on physical fitness and more time on
>other fields of endeavor tend to achieve more in those fields and therefore
>are not inferior to athletes.  For this you attack me as an "intellectual
>snob."

   See what I mean? You just got personal and misquoted me. I meant that
people who flaunt a degree at every opportunity are perceived as intel-
lectual snobs. You missed the nuances of my prose, and instantly came
to the erroneous conclusion that I was attacking you. I do not attack
Charlie et al. because these net colleagues of mine appear to have 
respect for the opinions of others, including yours, but they do not
subscribe to your philosophy. I was not attacking you, just making a 
point. I hope you laughed at my facetious article that attacked you
because I have only seen one mention of it and that was the word Uzi.
That article was an example of SATIRE, and never intended to be serious.
Had you E-mailed me, I would have had cause for worry. I am glad you didn't.
Charlie just wants you to acknowledge his viewpoint without necessarily
agreeing, but your stubborn delusions of persecution do, indeed, make 
fascinating reading.

>My question for you is this.  I have never denied that people who
>spend large amounts of time working on their bodies are *physically*
>superior.  Why do you find it so painful to admit that people who
>spend more time working on their minds could have their own areas
>of superiority?  Why is it that when Charlie says that exercise
>makes the people who do it superior to me in every way -- physically,
>mentally, morally, and spiritually -- he's "making a sincere effort
>to help" while, when I concede the physical part but contest the others,
>I'm a braggart?  

  You missed the semantic nuance again, and I knew you'd bite! Naturally,
I made some assumptions about you, as you did of me. I, too, use my mind
more than my body. I missed a few days because some idiot destroyed all 
the news files for three days before I could get to them. I don't find 
it painful to admit that those who do not exercise can achieve a great 
deal with their minds. In fact the greatest thinkers of all time were
far from being athletes (did Albert Einstein ever look like an athlete?)

  I agree with you that athletes are not necessarily better people but
their opinions should at least be respected, if not agreed with. Why can
you not respect our opinions? You can't change ours and we can't change
yours, so why bother trying? What we can all do is exchange ideas. Because
I disagreed with you I was immediately one of THEM. Since your opinions are
the only ones that apparently mean anything to you, I referred to that as
a form of intellectual snobbery. That was an allusion to your apparent
net attitude, not to you as an individual and most certainly not to your
views on the exercise/intellectual achievement debate.

   Have you ever heard of the word HUMILITY? It is apparently not included
in your vocabulary. You have succeeded in choking us by ramming your
opinions, misconceptions, misquotes down our throats and all we did was
puke it back like a baby who's force fed. We tried to help a friend at first,
we thought him a bit *naif* but some of us, in fact I will take the liberty
of speaking for the group, most of us were were trying to help. Some thought
the postings laughable and poked a bit of fun, but this is harmless. You
claim to be thick-skinned enough to handle our attacks, so this posting
should bounce right off you. Some of us were poking fun, some of us were
posting constructive criticism ( I was at first, but found your replies
ludicrous.)
 
   Now I appeal to your sense of logic. You may consider yourself a
renaissance man, a brilliant engineer, and so on. You likely consider
yourself rather exceptional reading by your intellectual pursuits and
the lofty standards you place upon prospective mates. Any woman would
run for cover because nobody can live up to your implied expectations
of them. Doesn't it take a great effort to be so amazingly wonderful?
Wouldn't it just be easier to just lower your standards and join this
thing we call humanity? You will find that it's much easier and a heap
more fun.

Andy.

DISCLAIMER: The above is not intended to be a personal attack.
            It is to be regarded as constructive criticism.

PLEASE EXCUSE MY OBVIOUS IGNORANCE.
Newsgroups: soc.singles