Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Smarter Teens Have Less Sex

CmdrTaco posted about 7 years ago | from the still-no-excuse-for-you dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 1285

Tech.Luver writes "Gene Expression reports, "Tyler Cowen quotes from a new study testing the relationship between grades and delayed sexual activity. Last December I passed a paper along to Razib showing that high-school age adolescents with higher IQs and extremely low IQs were less likely to have had first intercourse than those with average to below average intelligence. (i.e. for males with IQs under 70, 63.3% were still virgins, for those with IQs between 70-90 only 50.2% were virgin, 58.6% were virgins with IQs between 90-110, and 70.3% with IQs over 110 were virgins) In fact, a more detailed study from 2000 is devoted strictly to this topic, and finds the same thing: Smart Teens Don't Have Sex (or Kiss Much Either). ""

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Queue Slashdot Reader Love Life Jokes (3, Funny)

idontgno (624372) | about 7 years ago | (#20070531)

in 3..2..1..

Re:Queue Slashdot Reader Love Life Jokes (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070573)

Why "it's funny, laugh" when it's real???

Re:Queue Slashdot Reader Love Life Jokes (1)

ozmanjusri (601766) | about 7 years ago | (#20070643)

That's a clever observation. You must be very smart.

Smarter Teens Have Less Sex (1)

Brad1138 (590148) | about 7 years ago | (#20070535)

I am not really sure how to take that.

Re: Smarter Teens Have Less Sex (3, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | about 7 years ago | (#20070877)

We've long known that birth rate is inversely correlated with education. So this result really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

Re: Smarter Teens Have Less Sex (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070893)

Just try to relax, and it will hurt less and be over before you know it.

ohh (5, Funny)

SuperDre (982372) | about 7 years ago | (#20070541)

Well, then I must have been ultrasmart... :(

In other news: (1)

holmedog (1130941) | about 7 years ago | (#20070543)

Kids with higher IQs are more likely to have underwear wedged in their ass. I mean, come on people, haven't we seen this sterotype our whole lives? Who cares.

Re:In other news: (1)

samkass (174571) | about 7 years ago | (#20070577)

Nerds get less sex? But... but... I saw "Revenge of the Nerds" and "Real Genius"... you're telling me that's not how things really are???

That's 'cause... (3, Funny)

Landshark17 (807664) | about 7 years ago | (#20070551)

The smarter you are the more likely you are to be on /. and if you're on /. well... we all know what that does to your sex life.

Re:That's 'cause... (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 7 years ago | (#20070691)

No I wouldn't say that. Slashdot is filled with some smart people and a lot of people who want to be smart... Just because you can use Linux doesn't mean you are smart, just becasue you can't doesn't mean you are stupid. I know some people who use Slashdot and run linux with actual below average IQ's. I would say while the average IQ on shashdot is above average is just because it is a convient source of news (or at least use to be it has been getting dumbed down over the years) of Science/Technical Information so experts in such fields use it to get some information... But just because you are a geek or a nerd it doesn't mean you are smart, just a social outcast.

Re:That's 'cause... (5, Insightful)

vfrex (866606) | about 7 years ago | (#20070717)

Now I am conflicted. Half of my inner geek wants to laugh and take the joke, and the other wants to rail on you for creating causation from correlation. But either way, I'm posting on /.

Re:That's 'cause... (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 7 years ago | (#20070903)

Since I've started reading /., my sex life has never been better!

Not me (5, Funny)

My name is Bucket (1020933) | about 7 years ago | (#20070557)

I've got a girlfriend in Brazil. She's a model and I can go down and have sex with her whenever I want.

Re:Not me (3, Funny)

ParaShoot (992496) | about 7 years ago | (#20070715)

And I've got a girlfriend in Thailand! We'll be married as soon as she can get a visa and I can scramble together enough money for her plane ticket.

Re:Not me (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070743)

Yes, and in the make-believe land, i fuck whatever i want too.

I Believe... (0, Troll)

Armored Ear (1107521) | about 7 years ago | (#20070569)

I believe these are what we call nerds.

Re:I Believe... (5, Insightful)

Mayhem178 (920970) | about 7 years ago | (#20070607)

Uh huh. And later in life, they're called "Yes sir, right away, sir!"

Re:I Believe... (1)

Carewolf (581105) | about 7 years ago | (#20070855)

The low chances were already at 110. That is ~40% of all males.

Bad news for slashdotters (5, Funny)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 7 years ago | (#20070579)

Since slashdotters have typically IQ in the range of 160 to 220, the will remain virgins till age 72 or so by my extrapolation.

I hope... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070639)

...that statement was somewhat sarcastic. I can't quite tell. But, if you think that the typical slashdot IQs are that high, you are an idiot...perhaps an idiot savant with a high IQ...and no fucking sense.

Re:I hope... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070701)

someone needs a uhh... hug...

Re:Bad news for slashdotters (1, Informative)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | about 7 years ago | (#20070747)

And in another study, highly intelligent teens were found to be constantly frustrated and horny.

Re:Bad news for slashdotters (5, Funny)

BitterOak (537666) | about 7 years ago | (#20070913)

Since slashdotters have typically IQ in the range of 160 to 220, the will remain virgins till age 72 or so by my extrapolation.

So you're saying that based on the average Slashdot post, you would assign an IQ of 160 to 220 to the general Slashdot population. I assume you're joking. (People with Mod points, however, are actually extremely intelligent and discerning.)

Idiocracy (5, Insightful)

bunratty (545641) | about 7 years ago | (#20070587)

Idiocracy [] , here we come!

Converse not true (5, Funny)

Trivial_Zeros (1058508) | about 7 years ago | (#20070591)

I know this is Slashdot, so the majority of users have not had sex. But if you think this article is implying that means you're smart.. you have just committed a common logical fallacy. Sorry to burst your bubble.

already well known ... (0, Redundant)

ianare (1132971) | about 7 years ago | (#20070597)

... before [] this study.

But... (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 7 years ago | (#20070605)

Isn't the definition of a "smart teen", one that DOES have sex? You gotta admit; the teens that have sex must be doing something smart.

Because they know how to get porn sooner (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070613)

Well I'm just saying.

Evolution in Action (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070619)

Just more proof that intelligence is seen as a "defect" and generally gets selected out.

Seriously, even among Slashdot readers, I doubt many of you guys would marry someone smarter than you. You think of yourselves as smart, and you don't want to spend your life with someone who proves that wrong by her very existence.

Re:Evolution in Action (1)

spun (1352) | about 7 years ago | (#20070771)

What?!? Someone smarter than me that would marry me does in fact prove I'm smart. They are smart enough to see through my bullshit, and they still want me. If I'm smarter than my mate, maybe I'm not that smart. Maybe I'm just fooling myself, and her. I'd rather know the truth about my intelligence than believe some unchallenged fantasy.

That explains... (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | about 7 years ago | (#20070625)

That explains the mouth-breathing 14 year olds pushing their babies in strollers and carrying another in their belly I see lumbering around downtown Winnipeg at lunch. They should coat welfare cheques with birth control hormones.

Re:That explains... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070809)

> They should coat welfare cheques with birth control hormones.

I'm all for social welfare but not to subsidize the breeding habits of idiots. We should abort children unless the parents or some Christian charity can support it.

For a second there... (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 7 years ago | (#20070857)

I misread "downtown Winnipeg" as "down to WalMart".

Re:For a second there... (2, Funny)

garcia (6573) | about 7 years ago | (#20070895)

I misread "downtown Winnipeg" as "down to WalMart".

No worries, they're are both equally awful.

Er... (1)

XanC (644172) | about 7 years ago | (#20070891)

What exactly do you expect them to be doing with these cheques?

Re:That explains... (1)

IBBoard (1128019) | about 7 years ago | (#20070907)

Winnipeg? Wow, for a minute there I thought you were talking about Bracknell or Manchester in the UK! Worrying to see that scally/pikey mothers are a world-wide problem :\

Hey! I've had sex with a girl! (1)

i_liek_turtles (1110703) | about 7 years ago | (#20070629)

...her last name was .JPG

No shit? (1)

Corporate Troll (537873) | about 7 years ago | (#20070637)

The title says it all... *sigh* *deep sigh*

Finally! Vindication! (1)

SirStanley (95545) | about 7 years ago | (#20070641)

And here I thought it was because I get all nervous when girls are around. I talk about star wars too much. My skin, where not covered in acne, is so pale it's reflective. Huh.

Somethings wrong.. (5, Funny)

GreggBz (777373) | about 7 years ago | (#20070647)

I should be a super genius.

heh (1)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | about 7 years ago | (#20070653)

I was homeschooled and had no social life. High IQ coupled with almost no social interaction with those of the opposite sex... thank God almighty for internet pr0n.

I think a more interesting study... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070657)

Would be wether or not it's intentional that the IQ endowed don't mate.

Re:I think a more interesting study... (1)

iONiUM (530420) | about 7 years ago | (#20070755)

Yes of course, because every virgin teenage male thinks "you know, I'm pretty smart. maybe I shouldn't have sex, even though there exists some good protection against pregnancy and STDs".

Don't flatter yourself.

One word (1)

Billosaur (927319) | about 7 years ago | (#20070663)


No way! (1)

pr0nbot (313417) | about 7 years ago | (#20070669)

I'm sure this news will come as a great surprise to the slashdot readership.

BREAKING NEWS: Nerds Don't Get Laid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070679)

Film at 11.

A usefull vote for a change (4, Funny)

TheSunborn (68004) | about 7 years ago | (#20070681)

This would actuelly make a really cool Slashdot vote.
How old were you, the first time you had sex:
Below 15
What is sex??

Re:A usefull vote for a change (1)

Corporate Troll (537873) | about 7 years ago | (#20070733)

17, with a girl that was 19...

Not kidding, but she completely took me by surprise!

After that I had to wait *years* for my next chance. That's fucking frustrating, having had sex and not getting any more for years. Way worse than not knowing what sex is at all...

Re:A usefull vote for a change (3, Funny)

Known Nutter (988758) | about 7 years ago | (#20070745)

Mission Option: CowboyNeal[something]

Re:A usefull vote for a change (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | about 7 years ago | (#20070765)

I'll take Below 15 for 100 Alex.

Re:A usefull vote for a change (5, Funny)

khendron (225184) | about 7 years ago | (#20070769)

That should be:

Below 15
I'm saving myself for CowboyNeal (you insensitive clod!)

Re:A usefull vote for a change (5, Funny)

Alpha830RulZ (939527) | about 7 years ago | (#20070793)

You need to add the qualification: "... with another person."

Option missing (2, Informative)

f64 (590009) | about 7 years ago | (#20070811)

CowboyNeal never puts out, darn it!

I agree... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070683)

I'm absolutely BRILLIANT!

Only proves which kids will *say* they've had sex (5, Interesting)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | about 7 years ago | (#20070685)

Maybe smarter kids generally just don't feel the need to lie about having sex. And extremely stupid ones don't think to lie about it. Just a thought.

Re:Only proves which kids will *say* they've had s (1)

juuri (7678) | about 7 years ago | (#20070739)

This was my thought exactly, of course I professed to being a virgin long after my purity was ruined by some dirty girl.

I still do these days, women think it is cute, and it allows my followup, "I have no children therefore you can not prove that I am not a virgin." Women don't really want to know what a dirty whore you've been, they would like to think they are one of your first few, no matter how old you or they are.

Re:Only proves which kids will *say* they've had s (1)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | about 7 years ago | (#20070829)

So you lie to sleep with women? Yea you're a real catch, right up there with Hannibal Lector on the trust worthy scale.

Hint hint : If you're fucking someone you risk having kids with them (not all protection works) if you have to lie to her to get her into bed you two sure as hell aren't suitable to raise kids together and shouldn't be fucking each other.

Re:Only proves which kids will *say* they've had s (1)

superbus1929 (1069292) | about 7 years ago | (#20070881)

Conversely, I've noticed that if a woman does know what my past was, they get this competetive streak within them that makes them think they can "change" me, and make me settle down. That makes them try HARDER, but I'm guessing this leads to problems upon actual marriage, once they "have" you.

Re:Only proves which kids will *say* they've had s (1)

spleen_blender (949762) | about 7 years ago | (#20070763)

I would like to think that intelligence is highly correlated with conscience and integrity. Time keeps reinforcing this belief for me. So my solution? KILL EVERYONE WITH A LOW IQ! It is the only logical answer.

Re:Only proves which kids will *say* they've had s (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 7 years ago | (#20070889)

Simpler then that...
Teenagers with low IQ normally are not left alone to do what they will. Because parents don't trust them to do the smart thing because they arn't, combined with the fact they get usually get extra adult help means less exposure with other kids, and the oposit sex feels guilty about sexual activity with that group, so combined that will make a lower rate.

High IQ teens stop and think and realize that risks of Sex as a teenager (STD, Pregnacny) will get in away with their life plans being with higher IQ society expects more from them with their life plans so they stay away from such risks. Basicly I am not going to let a Baby get in my way to become a doctor. After I get my degree and a steady job then I may focus on having a family, Logical reasoning by people with higher IQ.

Teens in the middle are not pressured to become a Doctor or whatever so they have less ambitions for life and figure it may be worth the risk. Combined with the fact they may not think things fully out and let biological pressures take over what people say they should do.

No regrets. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070689)

I had opportunities to get my freak on back in the high school days. Had I been smoother or said the right thing (translation: been less of a nervous shit) or whatever I could've got in somebody's pants. However, I have no regrets whatsoever about not getting a girl pregnant and fucking up my life like many of my other classmates. In fact, thank $GOD that didn't happen, and if I could go back and do it all over again, I wouldn't change anything.

Idiocracy (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070695)

Oh no..... this just proves it.... STUPID PEOPLE ARE BREEDING MORE!!!!


Re:Idiocracy (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070839)

This is unfortunately NOT funny. Dysgenics is real and is happening NOW in every Zionist controlled white country. (That would be all of them, then). The scum of the earth are breeding like rabbits, criminals aren't being locked up for more than a few months (in the U.K.) and they ALWAYS manage to have more children than the decent, intelligent people, who are PAYING taxes to keep the criminals' sorry asses alive.

We need to incarcerate these losers for DECADES at a time, so they can't reproduce. And so they can't abuse their children, which is how they became criminals in the first place. Fucking losers.

quotes of quotes of quotes (5, Funny)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | about 7 years ago | (#20070699)

You gotta love how far-removed this quotation gets:

Cmdr Taco posts that:
Tech_Luver writes that:
Gene Expression reports that:
Tyler Cowen quotes from a:
Razib paper showing that:
A survey found that:


I'm worried that if I tell someone that I read about this on slashdot, the universe might implode.

you write like a fag, + this shit is all retarded (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070709)

you need to just, like, you know?

dont worry my ex wife was retarded. shes a pilot now.

Worse than it used to be (4, Interesting)

pzs (857406) | about 7 years ago | (#20070711)

In the Victorian era, the celebrities of the time were engineers and scientists - the people who shaped the world, rather than the vapid, talentless bimbos we celebrate today. We can only hope that at some point in the future, it will once again be cool to be smart.

Man, I wish I was born in the Victorian era. Sigh.


Re:Worse than it used to be (1)

thanksforthecrabs (1037698) | about 7 years ago | (#20070791)

Big butts and missing teeth were also common for that era. The entire world was like a big Kentucky. You can have 'em! ;)

Re:Worse than it used to be (1)

pzs (857406) | about 7 years ago | (#20070887)

Big butts and missing teeth were also common for that era.

Isn't it great how we can rue the fact that nobody wants to have sex with us geeks even though we're ever-so-smart yet at the same time get hung up on whether women have big butts or missing teeth?

I'm not having a go at you particularly - I think most geeks think like this.


This is a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070721)

I lost my virginity in my twenties and it was a good thing. I was mildly nerdy (much more so in my own mind), but I had a few opportunities that I was either too clueless or scared to take advantage of. I'm glad I didn't. Hitting my twenties gave me an acceptance of myself and some verbal skills that made it much easier to hook up as needed. Avoiding the whole teen sex thing has many advantages beyond some biblical reason some might have you believe. There is plenty of time for sex and sex when you think you know so much when you actually know very little is much more likely to lead to complications.

Cool, geeky girls... (1)

Vexler (127353) | about 7 years ago | (#20070731)

This ought to splash some cold water of reality on those of us who think that geek girls with a cute face and a hot bod are somehow "do-able" or "marry-able". Look, she probably sees you as just another exiled program bound for deletion - it's nothing personal.

Re:Cool, geeky girls... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 years ago | (#20070827)

Worse than that, a girl could seem incredibly interested in you, 'til you found out that she really meant it when she said she loves your brains. ...and wished it was in another body...

News flash: Geeks and dorks can't get laid (1)

MythoBeast (54294) | about 7 years ago | (#20070735)

I'm glad they posted this one in the humor department. I'd actually like to see a study that measures the mean time to divorce based on intelligence.

My personal suspicion is that, above a certain intelligence threshold, the world in general has a lot to offer people before the hormones kick in. We spend a lot of time and effort seeking out and examining all of the cool stuff and build up momentum that makes a mess of us when the hormones kick in. Below that threshold, people spend their younger years trying to figure out the aesthetics without bothering to wonder what's under the hood. It's just convenient for them that aesthetics tend to be what get people laid, especially early in life.

Unlikely bedfellows (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 years ago | (#20070737)

Could this be the first (and probably forever only) survey funded equally by the religious right and the geeks of the world?

The question (1, Redundant)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | about 7 years ago | (#20070741)

The thing I want to know is why. I mean I'm 21 and never slept with any one, but I made a choice to wait for someone who mattered. So I've waited for it rather than not had the chance to do it. So how many smart kids decide "I'd rather sleep with someone I care for" instead of just never had the chance?

Re:The question (2, Insightful)

east coast (590680) | about 7 years ago | (#20070879)

I think it has to do more with smarter kids understanding what they have to lose if they have an "accident".

I'm sure other studies have shown that smarter kids, on average, come from better off parents, financially speaking. Being that these kids aren't dumb they see the downfall of parenthood at the time that they should be headed off to further education and career building.

Coming from a school district where we have the haves and have nots pretty well represented it never surprised me to find the lower class students being the ones getting knocked up.

What does strike me as odd as that the lower class either doesn't seem to have made this connection or they just plainly don't care. We certainly didn't need a study to see this in action.

Re:The question (5, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 years ago | (#20070899)

I doubt it's less chance for sex. More that there's a lot else to do that's more fun. Like, writing a beautiful piece of code, surely beats wasting a night on hot sex.

I'll go cry now.

Wonder what the really dumb kids do now... (2, Funny)

bomanbot (980297) | about 7 years ago | (#20070751)

at least we have /. to bitch about not getting laid ;-)

142 and 16, baby ;) (0)

deander2 (26173) | about 7 years ago | (#20070761)

oh, the study compared GRADES, not intelligence. never mind... i guess i was right in the middle of the pack then.

(not that IQ scores mean much either, but it makes for a funny tag line)

Nerds (1)

Lumbergh (1053438) | about 7 years ago | (#20070773)

So...nerds don't get laid much. Who'd'a thunk it?

Causation? (1)

debrain (29228) | about 7 years ago | (#20070777)

Maybe the teens are smarter precisely because they're not having sex, and as such they spend more time with intellectual pursuits.

Then again, maybe spending time with intellectual pursuits reduces interest (and competence) in sexual endeavours.

As a matter of accuracy, perhaps middle-IQ teens are more prone to be dishonest about their virginity than the really smart and the really not-so smart.

Maybe it's a little from columns A, B and C.

So THATS why I couldn't get any! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070787)

My IQ has been measured 3 times and ranged from 147 to 154. This explains why I was 22 before, well, you know. :-)

Nerds (1)

charlieo88 (658362) | about 7 years ago | (#20070795)

Nerds don't get much play? Shocking, truly shocking.

Correlation between IQ and Grades? (1)

bziman (223162) | about 7 years ago | (#20070797)

Um, in my experience, higher IQ led to plenty of sex... but chasing skirts led to lower grades. I could only wish that a higher IQ led to good grades. I've found that excessive subservience and high tolerance to BS lead to good grades a lot more than being smart... something I didn't figure out until I was an adult. And being an adult definitely led to a drop off in sex.

Um problem (1)

edizzles (1029108) | about 7 years ago | (#20070803)

An iq of 110 is still considered normal, so useing the range of 110+ is kinda poinless and ruins the data imo Also is high school smart people have less sex because they are less atractive. Go to a collage and get number and you might end up with better results, also where did they get a good sample size of under 70 IQ people. new ranges 110 normal range 110145 is giffetd i beleave 145 + uber nerd

Causality and Statistics (1)

Valacosa (863657) | about 7 years ago | (#20070807)

Damn. I wonder which way the causality goes.

I also wonder how much this result is culturally influenced. I've seen photos of billboards down there with a smiling teenager, reading "I want to be an engineer! Sex can wait!" There's a certain kind of youngster who'll buy into that sort of thing.

Not to mention that this is a statistical phenomenon. I can see all sorts of overbearing parents misapplying the result of this study. "Don't have sex! It'll make you smarter!" or "That child couldn't possibly be very smart. He's had sex!"

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

"Smarter"? (1)

DogDude (805747) | about 7 years ago | (#20070815)

Well, of course "smarter" and IQ points are relative. I wouldn't consider somebody who couldn't get laid (but wanted to) all that smart. It's really not rocket science. Even if you want to fuck the homecoming queen, it's just a matter of figuring out what you have to do to get there. It's a pretty simple formula. If somebody can work on astrophysics or integrated circuits, but can't figure out how to bag a chick, that's kinda' sad.

Now don't get me wrong. People have different priorities. Some (strange) people may not want to throw down with somebody else. That's their prerogative. I'm talking about people who WANT to get laid and simply can't figure out how to make it happen.

The Greeks had the right term for this Malaka (1)

Tragedy4u (690579) | about 7 years ago | (#20070833)

Basic meaning, someone who jerks off so much it makes them stupid. ;)

Seriously though, (1)

lilomar (1072448) | about 7 years ago | (#20070843)

Yeah, I know, I know, "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"

But really, doesn't it make sense that the smarter you are, the more likely you are to recognize your your carnal cravings and decide not to act on them? I've been out of high school for two years, but as I recall, there were two types of teens when it came to sex:
Those who thought a first date was best spent in the back of a car going at it, and those who thought sex was a special thing to be shared after you have been dating for a long time (or even *gasp* after you are married).
Can you guess which group had more A students?

I'm not talking about just the geeks who couldn't get a date if their life depended on it, I'm talking about the smart kids who were also into sports, band (well, not so much band, but that's another story ;^) ) or other "normal" stuff.

Then again, maybe I'm just over analyzing things and it really does boil down to "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"

Girls steer clear of us... (4, Funny)

vigmeister (1112659) | about 7 years ago | (#20070845)

becasue we wear tinfoil condoms.


Take this data with a large grain of salt. (2, Interesting)

Geurilla (759701) | about 7 years ago | (#20070849)

The sexiest part of this article is the data from the Counterpoint survey, which is pure fiction. See, for example, Emily's comments to the original article:

When that MIT/Wellesley Counterpoint survey came out, I had recently graduated from MIT and was still around campus working as a research assistant. To put it bluntly, most everyone I knew considered that article rather funny... (And Counterpoint is often looked at as an unintentional humor publication...) First off... two words: sample size. More specifically... it said that at one of the dorms at MIT there was a 100% rate of virginity. I knew people who could vouch otherwise. Going back to sample size, it turns out the survey had only been taken by 4 freshmen at that dorm. Secondly, the wording on many of the survey questions was apparently vague and open to interpretation. Lastly, it's also good to keep in mind that students at MIT often find it amusing to deliberately mess up statistics, particularly if it's for a campus publication.
I first saw this on the mathsex livejournal community where the Counterpoint numbers were similarly dismissed.

What about by OS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20070865)

This really needs to be separated by OS usage. I'll bet that Mac users, even those with superior intelligence, have much more sex than Windows or Linux users. The basic breakdown from my own observations is Mac OS > Windows >> Linux, that is Mac OS users have more sex than Windows users, who in turn have much more sex than Linux users.

All jokes aside (1)

Gorkamecha (948294) | about 7 years ago | (#20070871)

By in large, kids that get stellar grades get them by sacrificing other elements of their lives. AKA, they study inside of watching/playing/living football.

So generally, they aren't as physically developed as their less "nerdy" peers. Young women, who are just as much a jumble of hormones as young men, don't make the connection between intelligence as a reproductive quality, so they just aren't as attracted to the nerds.

It's a primal wiring issue, good looking bodies used to mean better provider. It's older women who appreciate the stability the great mind brings (aka the dollars.)

But toss Bill Gates and Colin Farrel in a room without name tags, and see who the woman swarm towards.

meh (1)

null-sRc (593143) | about 7 years ago | (#20070875)

ppl like to talk to ppl they can relate to

avg ppl ... due to being avg have the most ppl around them in the curve... so they have more ppl to relate to therefore more likely to build up a longer relationship and therefore more likely to .. HAHA YOU KNOW

so anyone deviant from the norm would be less likely to have ... HAHA YOU KNOW

Evolution (1)

memoryhole (3233) | about 7 years ago | (#20070901)

Thus, by trivial application of evolution, we see that the human race is biased towards being stupid. Over a long enough interval, intelligence will be relegated more and more to a genetic disease that prevents reproduction (add on the fact that high IQs also correlate with autism, which lowers your chance of reproduction as well). It's no wonder the public is fascinated by stupidity!

How long before nerds are bred out of the system?

WOW (1)

HappySmileMan (1088123) | about 7 years ago | (#20070917)

I'm a frickin' GENIUS

I wonder ... (1)

Programmer_In_Traini (566499) | about 7 years ago | (#20070919)

i wonder,

in my opinion, teens living in a more difficult environment are less likely to have elevated morals about sex. and in the same pattern, teens from richer and more educated grounds are more likely to have been taught better.

but im really not sure it has anything to do with IQ at all, or if that's the case, i wonder if living in a poor environment, filled with drugs, sex and alcohol just doesnt stimulate the brain and ends up in low IQ people.

i would think its a mix of both situation. but i always find funny to see studies like that being made public about associating early sex with low IQ and trying to play on our influencable teens by telling them they're dumb to have early sex. not quite what i call education.

Dont need it (1)

COMON$ (806135) | about 7 years ago | (#20070923)

I think with a higher IQ, (being one of said people happily married now), it is just not as necessary to have sex early. The midrange IQ groups tend to use it as a sense of identity in my opinion. My wife and I were more than happy to wait until marriage to engage in intercourse. However I did not equate this to intelligence at all, more to moral and religious principles.

Now that I think about it I had many good friends who were not religious and were very intelligent that waited until later in their college years to take their relationships to that level. So one humble opinion here is that more intelligent people just put more thought into their relationships and who they have sex with than the general masses. Which is good because evolution will take over as the "average population" dies out due to STD's and angry relationships, the intelligent individuals will prosper and the population will grow more intelligent over time.

Maybe (1)

prashc (1095049) | about 7 years ago | (#20070925)

Maybe whilst smart ones were busy working on school papers, not so smart (cool) ones were busy partying/alcohol.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>