When everythings made to be broken...
I just want you to hold my hand.
Well sticking with the strange reference/analogy thing.... Should I play another round? Or try a different game...
Although I still wish I could speak to Gemma so I suppose it wouldnt be fair either way. I just don't know how I'm supposed to meet people. I know I complain about it all the time but there are no bloody chicks in my course at all. As much as we like to fool ourselves; chicks don't dig physics. I just don't think there is anyone else out there like me. I don't think that they'd understand.
Well sticking with the strange reference/analogy thing.... Should I play another round? Or try a different game...
Although I still wish I could speak to Gemma so I suppose it wouldnt be fair either way. I just don't know how I'm supposed to meet people. I know I complain about it all the time but there are no bloody chicks in my course at all. As much as we like to fool ourselves; chicks don't dig physics. I just don't think there is anyone else out there like me. I don't think that they'd understand.
posted by Steve at 10:13 PM
17 Comments:
Personally - to stick with the analogy - I think you should probably fold with the current hand, maybe you'll have better luck with the next deal.
You'd still have to actually approach any chicks that were in your class, all it'd really give you is a bit of an ice-breaker.
Perhaps see if you can come up with a way of ensuring that you're forced to talk to Gemma somehow?
Steve, u know damn well that even if there were chicks interested in physics, or in your course, you wouldn't go talk to them anyway.
I know what u mean about the "no one is like me/gonna understand me", i pretty much feel the same way... but maybe you dont need people to be like you or to understand u completely.
You need similar interests etc so u can enjoy spending time with each other, and u need to understand each other as far as basic and not so basic human interaction etc goes, but i think all the little wierdnesses about people that you dont entirely understand is part of what makes u love someone.
What im saying in a rambly way is you'll find someone who may not dig physics, and may not understand how you do dig physics, but they'll love you for it and they'll be interested enuf in you and your interests that they could hold a convo with you about it.
Either that or you save ur physics talks for ur mates n talk about better things :P with ur girl.
As Fudge said someone may not like/know physics but they'll appreciate and understand the fact that you do and love you for it.
Im sure soon enough that you'll find someone with interests that are similar to yours. (You'll probably laugh at this) But most women can hold an intelligent conversation. Just because she may not have a clue about any form of science or math doesnt mean that she's dumb or not suited to you.
I know you want someone who will understand you, everyone does, but maybe your search is too specific? Or maybe you're looking to hard?
If you still like this Gemma chick then go speak to her. I know its not easy but you finish uni at 2 one day yes? You used to go to subway with Sean at 3ish sometimes, so you could talk to her without her being busy. Keep at it if you like her enough. She too could also be interested...
If someone has all the same interests and whatnot, you'd probably run out of new and interesting things to discover, I think that part of what draws us to others is often parts of them that are different to us, or that we can discover something new most times we have a decent conversation.
Anyways... still gotta actually talk to 'em before anything can happen...
If there were chicks in my class i would talk to them, i talk to the majority of my class atm, now that the classes are much smaller its like school again but with even smaller groups so you are kind of forced to talk to them. But anyway I think I obviously gave the wrong impression, I'm not saying I need to find a girl that likes physics. It's more like finding a girl that doesnt regard me as a geek so-to-speak. Who doesn't nod and smile and say yes dear when I try to explain something that interests me to them.
I don't think I will ever end up saying anything to Gemma, it's too hard and it's too late and i'm too feeble and I honestly don't think she is interested at all.
I think it's more about logic than about physics or mathematics specifically. Ie, how many females do you know who could beat steve or I at say chess or pente or something? There are some, but not a lot.
yeh there is that as well... though then chess and logic are two different things also. I'm sure there are many that if they could be bothered learning how to play chess they could beat us at chess... equally as many as men. It's just that we can't find them.
"it's too hard"
Lots of things are hard. Start getting over it. You have to eventually.
"it's too late"
Its never too late.
"i'm too feeble"
Yes, ur being feeble. But ur not feeble. All you need to do is push urself into something for once.
"I honestly don't think she is interested at all."
You just tell urself that becos u need an excuse not to do anything. You have no real idea if shes interested and never will unless u say something.
"I just want you to hold my hand"
Is completely wrong :P its not even the right amount of sylables... its "i want you to know who i am"
And do you really want to base a relationship on whether a woman has enough logic to be able to play chess and what not and maybe be able to beat you several times? I think not. There's so much more to understand about individuals than how high their IQ is, or whether they have enough logic to understand things. I haven't a clue about what you guys do at uni, but im interested enough to listen and to ask questions. ie, how i asked you about topogly the other night ben.
I can play chess. Ive never been able to play against you or steve though. Ive known how to play it since i was little. Dad taught me on his huge chess set and i used to beat him and my brother often enough. Im not saying i could beat either one of you but i would hope id come close having known how to play it for several years.
Would you have ever considered to ask if we knew how to play it? Its not that you can't find women who can play chess, its the fact that you dont know if they can play it or not.
Regarding Erin's point, I actually know a number of females who are in fact quite good at chess. I've also noted as a result that this isn't a particularly good metric for logic in other cases, the simple ability to think logically and play a strategic game bears no relation to whether or not logic will actually be applied in any other situations.
Most girls seem to be quite capable of logical thought, but in general seem to be far less inclined (than males) to ever apply that.
I know what your saying erin, and thats not a sole requirement. But to be intelligent in a world of fools is worse than being a fool in a world of intellectuals.
I'd like someone who would be able to understand what im talking about to a degree. Like when i talk about something funny that we did with liquid nitrogen for example and not just get a nod a smile and then ignore me. It doesnt take a genious to understand something like that when the basic concept is briefly explained. It just takes someone that isn't a bimbo.
Fudgey, yes the lyrics from iris were changed to suit what i wanted to say with them. It's not the first time i've modified lyrics on my blog. I havent seen her for 5 or so weeks i'm not game to go there and try to make conversation anyway. Maybe one day i'll bump into her somewhere and have an excuse to talk to her. For the moment i'll continue to stare at all the vn's i see.
As i said to ben, its not wether you know how to play chess or not its wether you can win it, chess is known as an intellectuals game because only smart people know how to play... its because it takes alot of concentration and plotting to win
Thats a stupid statement, that "only smart people know how to play chess".
Chess is easy to learn, the moves are relatively simple.
Strategy is what is imporant, and you can be as logical as they come but still be a terrible strategist.
I think what it comes down to is that half of us at least need to stop seeing ourselves as above everyone.
Yes, you may be able to work out some huge equation that takes several blackboards worth of space, but can you paint a picture? A good one?
Intelligence is not just maths and science.
If you see urself as perfect then no one will ever be good enuf for you.
Judging from the context of the paragraph, I'd say that Steve meant that chess isn't actually a 'smart' game, it's just thought of that way because intellectuals tend to be both good at it and enjoy playing.
yeh i dont know how i wrote what i did jason got it right though. It was meant to say that you don't need to be smart to play chess.. just that smart people are usually good at it. You need to be able to plan your moves ahead and try to figure out what the other person is trying to do.
I know im coming across as insulting but im not trying to. I'm just not good with getting my point out as most of you probably realise by now. The whole chess thing was just in regards to what ben said about chess. I don't see myself as perfect. In fact I really don't like alot about myself and i have a habit for settling for anyone as opposed to nobody because im scared thats all i can have. The thing about saying intelligent people play chess is right though. Its something commonly accepted.
I have to disagree with the idea that intelligence comes in many forms though. There are other qualities that can be good things. But they are different still. Being able to paint a good picture has nothing to do with intelligence. I'm sure if it did many of us would be better artists and many artists wouldnt be.
It depends what you define intelligence as really. It's a highly flexible concept these days. I mean Bach for instance was considered to be a genius, but I doubt he could solve any equations. (Interestingly though my various music teachers have all noticed a correlation between musical and mathematical talent)
As for topology, hah, I don't even know what the crap is going on with that topic :p.
I think steve is emphasising a particular branch of intelligence that he values, it doesn't in any way devalue the other branches.
Yeah there arent other branches of intelligence though, i think it's other traits, and alot of people consider shakespeare a genius too, i'm sure many people like shakespeare Bach and Da Vinci were extremely intelligent people. I'm sure saying just because someone is good at one thing doesnt make them intelligent. It means they are better at that than other people. It doesnt make them any less intelligent though.
Well, true. Personally I tend to define intelligence as "ability to learn". Over a given period of time given appropriate stimulus this can lead to all kinds of different talents and abilities or simply knowledge, but I wouldn't say that someone was unintelligent just because they havn't had the appropriate stimulus. Some people might even have had the appropriate stimulus but not actually paid any attention to it and therefore appear to be unintelligent when in fact they could be highly intelligent. The complication comes in when some people have a better ability to learn some things than others, though I wouldn't neccesarily rescrict those things to purely mental activities.
Post a Comment
<< Home