How we select
Posted by Chevalier on November 19, 2007
Talk about confirming stereotypes! A study of speed-dating, discussed here at Slate.com, found:
With the obvious qualification that we’re talking here about a four-minute version of love and dating, we found that men did put significantly more weight on their assessment of a partner’s beauty, when choosing, than women did. We also found that women got more dates when they won high marks for looks from research assistants, who were hired for the much sought-after position of hanging out in a bar to rate the dater’s level of attractiveness on a scale of one to 10.
By contrast, intelligence ratings were more than twice as important in predicting women’s choices as men’s. It isn’t exactly that smarts were a complete turnoff for men: They preferred women whom they rated as smarter—but only up to a point. In a survey we did before the speed dating began, participants rated their own intelligence levels, and it turns out that men avoided women whom they perceived to be smarter than themselves. The same held true for measures of career ambition—a woman could be ambitious, just not more ambitious than the man considering her for a date.
When women were the ones choosing, the more intelligence and ambition the men had, the better. So, yes, the stereotypes appear to be true: We males are a gender of fragile egos in search of a pretty face and are threatened by brains or success that exceeds our own. Women, on the other hand, care more about how men think and perform, and they don’t mind being outdone on those scores.
(emphasis added) And all the ladies are thinking “Did this surprise anyone? Particularly the part about the fragile egos?” 
I’m not sure about the implications for P4P. Do the ladies take pains not to appear too smart, for fear of turning off potential clients? I wonder.
High intelligence is not a requirement for my ladyfriends — but it certainly is a plus.
Chevalier said
And Maureen Dowd’s take on it here.
Tabu said
I’m probably an odd duck– I began escorting after a long and successful career in the corporate world. (I have 3 degrees, one a Master’s from an Ivy League school.)
In some of my advertising, I target the men who like a well-educated lady by labeling myself the “Ivy League Temptress.”
I knew that wouldn’t appeal to everyone, but I certainly didn’t expect to receive hate mail from those men who found it intimidating.
On the bright side, smart guys love me. So what does that say about this? Bingo.
Chevalier said
Hi Tabu,
Thanks for sharing your experience.
A shame about the hate mail. It’s one thing to be intimidated by intelligence; another thing altogether for that to reach the level where they feel justified in lashing out.
Even with clients for whom intelligence isn’t intimidating, I wonder how often it’s really seen as a positive. I’ve seen several references, e.g., in reviews, to a lady being very smart, but I wonder sometimes whether that is being said condescendingly, or against a stereotype of very low expectations. Sometimes you can almost hear the unsaid “She’s pretty damn smart . . . for a hooker!”
Outside the HDH arena, I can’t think of very many instances of ladies emphasizing intelligence — as opposed to appearance, BCD skills, personality, empathy, etc. — in their advertising. Of course, in the HDH arena, the prospective clients who can/do plunk down $20,000 for a weekend are probably themselves exceptionally successful and least likely to be intimated by accomplished women.