Women would play crushes so as not to “scare” men on a date


A British study conducted by the Match dating site (Meetic, in France) found that 6 out of 10 women preferred to be dumber than they are during an appointment so as not to scare their potential conquest masculine. Anguish.

We have already heard a lot of amazing facts regarding male-female romantic behavior, we are once again surprised. And not in the good sense of the word. According to a study conducted by the match.com dating site (the British equivalent of our Meetic), six out of ten women interviewed would admit to adopting a very specific reflex when they go to a romantic date: to play “crushes” – or at least not to expose all their intelligence – so as not to freak out the man opposite. One in five would also confess to changing the subject when their potential partner does not seem to have mastered it – rather than continuing to discuss something that motivates them. And 82% of those questioned say they have no problem going out with someone who is “stupid” as long as they are “hot” (their terms, not ours).

If this last sentence is entirely up to everyone’s taste, the first two Infos reveal a phenomenon deeply rooted in society: a woman should appear slightly inferior to a man so that he feels safe – and ultimately, seduce him. Beyond indulging in a retrograde pattern, it also implies that a clever woman would have less luck in love than someone who would prefer to highlight her companion at the expense of her own abilities. Did you say toxic masculinity?

The situation is so common, moreover, that Psychology Today stressed, not without rejoicing, the fact that the Tinder contenders would not be put off by an intelligent partner. What generosity.

A badly placed, exhausting need for domination

The magazine cites a study during which several researchers in psychology have created 24 profiles on the application, specifying for several of them a prestigious license or master in the description. As a result, after 3600 “swipes” (and muscular thumbs, therefore), they came to the conclusion that “intelligent” women (if intelligence is measured in higher education) do not meet more difficulty than others in attracting the digital admirer. Likes, super-likes, and lack of likes rained the same way, roughly.

“The results have important and positive consequences for women in the labor market, who have been taught in the past not to adopt behaviors that could improve their careers, such as ambition, in order to better ‘flourish in love’ “. In other words, women no longer have to worry that their professional accomplishments will intimidate men. We are reassured. Except that not really.

A few lines below, the magazine still wants to clarify that this conclusion can not really be generalized outside the application. And that if men’s response has been positive online, it could change in real life. Translation: having an impressive career path may fly behind the screen, but not sure that it leads to a concrete relationship as the masculine fragility of many could be exacerbated when faced with a woman with a brain. Behavior directly linked to the way in which boys are educated: by making them understand that they must be the “head” of the family, earn more than their wife (heteronormativity, when you hold us), and dominate, in general. Patriarchy, always. From which some still manage to free themselves, fortunately for us.

In conclusion, if you too find yourself in a romantic situation where the other seems to be disturbed negatively by your spirit, your studies or your distributed, flee. The man you need will certainly not fantasize about his ideal relationship according to a model from the 50s. He will have extricated himself from these shackles and will not ask you for a job of awakening to gender equality. He will not be afraid of who you are, he will be admiring, encouraging. And your know-how will never put him in a position of insecurity. Courage, there is.