Yesterday's Letter (Education)

  1. This post has been removed.

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    Lilz (this isnt directed at you, but more in general to your post)- I am all for filtering if that is what you need to do to weed some people out. There is nothing wrong with that. There is something wrong with using that filter because you think you are better than someone that doesnt have a college degree. That you would "prefer" to have someone that intellectually stimulates you or whatever other nonsensical dribble people use to justify that.

    Fact- the fisherman I dated, who didnt finish HS, is probably one of the smartest (aside from relationships) guys I ever dated. Far surpassing azzznut with his dual major and MBA. You know why? Because he read. A lot. And he would research the beejesus out of any subject that interested him. He could quote poets, literature. He understood the complexities of the all the various financial markets, he could change an engine in a boat, he knew what movies every director made, etc....It was insane the amount of things he could spew off the top of his head. And I know for a fact, he isnt one of the few.

    People learn in all kinds of way, some in college, some in the real world. People shouldnt be chastised or overlooked because they dont have some piece of paper from some college/university confirming they have spent tens of thousands of dollars to continue their "education", well unless you want to be a doctor. You go to college, great, good for you. You didnt, that is just as great. It doesnt make you any less of a person.

    That is what bugs me. People acting like because you dont have a degree, it makes you less "intellectual". That is a load of horse manure.

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from cb156. Show cb156's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    Jeeps--What's the difference here and any other kind of filter?  That's what I don't get.  Why is filtering on education any less fair than any other filter?
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Butterflyz. Show Butterflyz's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    Most people are lazy. Most people don't do more than they need to to succeed to whatever standard they have for that success. Therefore, most people who weren't forced to read books outside of their interests, won't. This goes for the college educated and those who do not attend universities. I like history, and choose to read books about history. I'm not interested in theater, and therefore don't choose to read about theater. Except, I had to take an Intro to Theater class in college and therefore had to read some books about theater. Therefore, I'm willing to bet, if your interest in a college degree is the intellectual conversation, and comparing books read etc., that filtering that way is for the best, because most people will not read that which they don't have to or which doesn't directly and strongly interest them. (To be clear, I said most, I'm sure everyone here knows exceptions.) I think about my brother, who didn't finish high school, with whom you could not have even the beginnings of an intellectual conversation, but is still a very nice, sweet guy. That being said, I think it's been amply demonstrated here that the concern with a college degree is not about intellectualism by and large. I agree with whoever said it earlier that I don't think most people consider those with a B.A. or B.S. to be "intellectuals." I think for the most part it's about class, job potential, a cultural touchstone, or a general value for higher education. Anyone who went to college would, or perhaps I should say, should, know that a college degree is no guarantee of intellectualism. And once again, I think it's really being overlooked that there is a HUGE difference between the filters one might use on a dating site and those one uses when meeting in real life. I mean if you meet someone in real life and they're obviously intelligent, well spoken, well read, hard working, I think the vast majority of people would not care about the "piece of paper" but when you're working online, such filters take on greater importance for some online daters. As was discussed earlier, people look for mates that are like themselves, or perhaps how they see themselves, not twins, but enough alike that there's mutual understanding.
  5. This post has been removed.

  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    CB, I was trying to explain that its the REASON you are using the filter. If you use it on a dating site to kind of weed through people you are interested in. I can understand that. Using it because you are a snob and think that anyone that didnt go to college isnt worth your time, is not ok to me.

    Using Lily as an example (Sorry Lilz). I am sure if she was on a dating site she would use it because from what I understand there are hundreds of people on there and you will otherwise be bombarded by gazzilions of people. But I know IRL, like at a bar (ha!) Lilz wouldnt turn down a guy because he didnt graduate college.

    Its like not dating a particular race because you think you are above them. I happen to date a lot of Italians, not because a prerequisite, but because that is what I am drawn to. But I have also been drawn to Irish, Czech, and Asians, I have dated guys shorter than me and guys much taller, heavier than me and skinnier than me. I am drawn to a person, their personality and what they have to offer. I am not superficial enough to only date a particular "type" of person. I always give people a chance.

    I am not saying, that you should dumb yourself down, or date someone that cant put two sentences together (if you are looking for someone that you can conversate with), I am saying just because someone didnt graduate college, doesnt mean you should automatically write them off. Give them a chance. You may find that maybe they cant go into a deep discussion about Aristotle, but maybe they can still have interesting and intellectual conversations  about Jack Kerouac. Maybe there are things they could teach you about other topics.
  7. This post has been removed.

  8. This post has been removed.

  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    For the record, I do read a lot of Mafioso books. Mario Puzo being one of my favs. And it is because I used to dream of being a mafia princess. Well I still dream.
    I would have made an amazing "Princess".
    This also might be another reason I "bully" on the blog. I am in training.

    hmmmm lots to think about now......
  10. This post has been removed.

  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from wizen. Show wizen's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    One of my favorite boyfriends was very heavy.  And he dumped me. 

    I think filters is just a shortcut, like prejudices.  Everyone has them, the key is to recognize them and decide if they're worth keeping, or not.
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from cb156. Show cb156's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    I get that.
    It's just that a lot of what is said here about filtering on education being snobbish is presented just that way.  It seems to be assumed that if you are filtering on education, you're a snob and it's a bad thing.
    Basically, you can't know why anyone filters in any way.  What we are all really left with is how we perceive it.  I get the feeling here that a lot of folks perceive filtering on education as bad, but have nothing to say on other filters (like you mentioned, height, weight, race, ethnicity, etc).
    So, I'm asking why filtering on education is any less fair than any other filter?
  13. This post has been removed.

  14. This post has been removed.

  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from wizen. Show wizen's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    ... and monkeys.
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    Ahhh but it kind of is being presented that way CB. That was my sticking point. Why limit yourself?

    Listen, if you only want to date size 2 super models, great good for you. But to say you are only going to date size 2 super models because anyone over a size 4 basically isnt good enough? Is wrong. if you are attracted to a particular type, that is what you are attracted to. But dont assume that any other type isnt good enough. And what was being presented was a very snobbish attitude about dating someone that doesnt have a 4 year+ degree, claiming that what was wanted was an "intellectual". And for the record, this isnt the first time this topic has been discussed. So my comments are based on past comments as well as ones now.

    I dont know, maybe I am not explaining myself correctly. Where the heck is PC to translate for me.
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    In Response to Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education):
    In Response to Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education) : OH, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, JEEPS, YOU'RE NOT A BULLY. YOU NEVER HAVE BEEN. But I do agree you'd make a fabulous Princess, and not the Cinderalla Fancy Lacy Dress kind. The kind that keeps 9 MM in her purse and breaks the china when she's upset.
    Posted by Sally-

    crap, I guess I have to work on that then ;)

    This is why Alice was my idol. Knives/9MM in small clutches.....*swoon*
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    In Response to Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education):
    I don't have a filter. I mean, that's pretty obvious, no? I mean I know what you mean about filters, I'm being silly. I don't think I had filters when I dated as much as I had "gut instincts" when I knew guy wasn't going to be right for me. I need to be wooed by humor. I guess that's my filter. And I'm attracted to tattoos and long hair.
    Posted by Sally-

    I sooooo wish I listened to my gut 13+ years ago.
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from two-sheds. Show two-sheds's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    This is an interesting thread.  One of the things I really like about LL is that there are people here from so many backgrounds.  Most of my other local friends, I've met through work (or my wife's work) and work in similar fields and have similar backgrounds (at least education-wise) to myself.  That's fine, but I'm glad to have met so many people here who aren't the same.

    It's not always so easy to make friends with people outside of your little world.  As I said before, the snobbery cuts both ways, and I have to admit I'm a little hurt by the people who commented how Ph.D's often lack skills in other areas.  I used to hate meeting new people and getting asked what I do. I never knew how to react to the "you must be smart" comment that was pretty much the standard reply.  (How I wish I could say "Yes, I'm a freakin' genius!".  Actually, in my field, I'm probably not even average).  Really, I just do what I enjoy and I'm reasonably good at, just like most people. 
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonGuy3076. Show BostonGuy3076's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    Education is a big and emotional topic for me.  I killed myself in high school to prove my worth, and was accepted to a competitive college where I concentrated on developing social skills and learning about things that interested me not grades.  Leaving college I found out, to the extent education impacted my job or grad school prospects, that grades were more important than the prestige of the college I had attended. 


    I also found at the competitive college that there was a high socio-economic group there which was hard to join if you weren’t already well off. 


    In high school and college I was also not interested romantically in others who didn’t achieve as highly as I did.  I think this was part of an overall pattern of being attracted to those who I admired, instead of those who I connected with.  As others have said, my current theory of relationships is that level of connection and enjoyment of each other is paramount.  This focus has made the idea of many empirical criteria/filters seem completely misplaced.  (Life experience has also changed who I admire, before anyone reads too much into that too.) 


    Getting back to the original theme of this thread, I’d say that filtering for education, body type, age, etc. is understandable for all the reasons people have mentioned, but will cut off many potentially great partners.  If I were looking online, I’d cast a wide net, focus on meeting people because the connection that matters in a relationship is the one you have in real life, and filter based on likelihood of meeting in real life (distance, etc.).  For those of you who do filter based on empirical criteria, has it ever felt deadening to exclude so many?  I’d love to hear how LMB does during her trial period.  I’d like to think that excluding less options would help those looking for a relationship feel more free to experience the possibilities of life, and avoid following a trail of false rational decisions based on placeholder criteria that don’t reflect their real values. 

  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    That is awesome Two-Sheds.

    Most of my family went to Ivy League, so in the grand scheme that is my family, I am the dumb rock. But, I have a lot more "common sense" to offer in my family than those Hahvahd/Yalies. And the only time I ever step out of a when they start talking about surgeries and other blood/guts things because it skeeves me out.

    I am a genius in my field for the record.
  22. This post has been removed.

  23. This post has been removed.

  24. This post has been removed.

  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from JeepersCripes. Show JeepersCripes's posts

    Re: Yesterday's Letter (Education)

    well if I told you Sally- then you would be sleeping with said fishes.