Melissa bends over and wiggles her bottom, metaphorically speaking:
It’s not that yon chest-beating troglodytes are rejecting the smart women, dearies. It’s that none of us has any interest in having sex with you. We don’t care whether you’re looking for a woman who won’t challenge you, because we’re busy trying to find men who are smart, motivated, and sexy enough to keep up with us. And frankly, y’all just don’t rate.
Oh, really? And yet, it’s not the smart men who are complaining that they can’t get dates, haven’t gotten laid in years and are writing seven-part series in the New York Times about how they’ve all but given up on the notion that anyone wants to marry them. This statement is nothing but an echo of the classic Sisterhood dogma meant to provide solace for the rejected career woman.
The truth is that except for the golddigger and the desperate-for-attention, there is no one easier for an alpha male to nail on the first meeting than a self-professed smart, strong, independent woman. Her posturing, which is often done in the same dismissive tone that Melissa thoughtfully provides for us here, is primarily a contrarian invitation to conquer her. She snarls, bites and claws, always in the hope that the man is both capable of making her submit to him and interested in doing so. This is why women always focus on the challenge they offer; they are aroused by superior men capable of meeting that.
The man who understands this never lacks for women, of all levels of intelligence. Sex in the City once offered a good example of this, when Miranda complains how she is helplessly excited by an arrogant man she can’t otherwise stand. There is, after all, a reason that adult women are so much more fond of Gor novels than those telling tales of Cimmeria.
Alpha or otherwise, however, the wise man will avoid such challenging women in the interest of pursuing a harmonious relationship not subject to inherent stress and conflict. We are not all born wise, however, and some of us only come to wisdom after first experiencing a sufficient amount of foolishness.