Sapiosexual is not real and why overused self-identification massively affects the advancement of humankind.

A term used by… not very smart people.

Claiming that you are only attracted to intelligent people is either nonsense or an impudent way to indirectly show you’re above others (which you aren’t).

1. The term origin: product of the internet’s word-of-mouth culture.

The Sapiosexual, with the prefix sapio- represents “wisdom”, and the suffix -sexual represents “sexually attractive”. This term means being sexually attracted to intelligence, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary [1].

Sapiosexual is a new term, the first time it was used was around 1998, by a user of LiveJournal (a Russian social network). The term gained popularity after OkCupid (an online dating platform) placed sapiosexuals as an option for sexual orientation, in addition to bisexual and heterosexual options [2]. Today, you can see it being used by the young internet generation, in their descriptions on Tinder, Instagram … and there are countless tests that can be found on Google to check if you are a sapiosexual or not.

Thus, we homo sapiens (with “sapiens” representing “wisdom”), has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years, but only until today
that some individuals realize they have a sexual orientation towards intelligence and have self-calling terminology. The word sapiosexual does not exist in history, not even any equivalent word exists regardless of a civilization that even if it has been around for 10,000 years. In modern times, sapiosexual is also not recognized by the APA (American Psychological Association) or any other official organization even though it is closely related to psychology/psychiatry. Results from Google Scholar on studies/articles that mention terms also return only about 200 results, many of which are articles introducing terms related to the digital age, the rest are disillusion to the nature of “the tendency to be sexually attracted to intelligence”.

Therefore, to conclude, it is likely that sapiosexual is not a real phenomenon or comes from a solid human biological foundation. Its value and meaning are on par with other internet terms such as “soy boy” (referring to the non-masculine guy — “soy” represents soybeans, which comes from a myth saying drinking soy milk reduces masculinity), “simp” (referring to guys who are blindly do anything for women) … even though they are interesting and used by many people, but they won’t necessarily stay around for long, be universal or have a solid foundation.

2. The attraction of intelligence.

Sapiosexual is a term associated with human sexuality, any other use without the sexual element is a misuse considering the term already clearly has the suffix “-sexual”. Therefore, we will need to learn about human sexuality.

Sex is a universal biological instinct, but human sexual activity is an instinct that has been closely attached to cultural factors. Just as eating in animals is a purely biological instinct, eating to humans is a biological instinct that accompanies by culture *.

[* Similar to staying, moving, and communicating … all activities in humans, although can exist in many other species, are different and specific because of cultural factors. When an activity is associated with “humans”, the cultural aspect must be considered. It is also important to note that cultural traces do not exist as a shell covering biological instincts and can be ignored, but they are intricately interlocked and essentially an active component of those behaviors. Therefore, when analyzing human activities, we will need to pay attention to both biological and cultural aspects].

Biologically, based on the Theory of Evolution, mammals in particular or sexually reproducing species in general, evolved to mating and mating to evolve, they aimed towards reproduction as a means to pass on genetic material (a.k.a sexual selection) [3]. Therefore, the body will develop a system of organs, psychological mechanisms, psychiatry … to serve this purpose. Sexual attraction is one of them. Organisms will target mates that exhibit genetic superiority (usually physical appearance and physical strength), in order to ensure quality for the next generation. Typically one can look at the reproductive behavior of birds, where the plumage or voice is invested heavily to attract a mate, or some mammals also have to fight for the right to mating.

Humans, as an animal, generally also tend to be attracted by physiological advantages, such as breast size, the width of the hips, physique, facial structure … or the balance composition of the body [4].

On the cultural side, things are more complicated, but in general still reveal a few common trends: social status (power), wealth potential, commitment, and permission [5 ]. In different cultures, the conception of prominent individuals will be different, but in general, the majority of them will be directed to that model, prominence is often associated with power in social structures. The commitment ensures that the parenting process will be less risky, while the permission is often closely related to traditional, ethical, and religious attitudes (these theoretical systems often induce limits and narrows the number of options, thus affecting the behavior of affected individuals).

In general, neither humans nor birds can know the true potential of a partner’s genetic code but will use phenotypic and behavioral cues (figure, feather color, dance, singing …) to indirectly increase the ability to find good genetic resources. Similarly in cultural aspects, wealth or social status is sometimes inferred based on jewelry, clothing, speaking style (or more broadly, educational attainment) … indirectly increasing the ability to find good resources. To the point that wearing designer clothing has long been seen as a so-called “self-promotion” tactic to increase partner competitiveness [6]. All these behavioral traces have been studied for many years, in many cultures. Based on intuition, we also know that when interacting, observing, talking … with others, as well as being persuaded, being attracted, in fact, is closely related to these potentialities.

*Although it is certain that the tendency to choose a partner is not random, it is not as extreme as the claims of some “how to be popular with girls/guys” individuals. That is, people don’t aim for the richest, most brilliance, or most beautiful, nor do they consider them the decisive factor; but through observation, it was found that subjects with these traits would have an upper hand in competing for mates (and in contrast to birds in a natural environment, human purposes in society are not only orientated around mates competing) [7].

The fact that the term sapiosexual since its appearance has been immediately accepted by the masses (based on Google Trends), is quite understandable because being attracted to potential intellectual mates (as a sign of strong financial and social status) has existed throughout civilization. Thus, describing yourself as a “sapiosexual” is no different from describing yourself as “I like rich men”, “I only like beautiful girls” except that “sapiosexual” is a catchy term with a Latin prefix, and also except that the self-description that you like wealth can easily get you the sneering eyes of society. In essence, though, both are geared toward potential sexual partners for reproduction.

But let’s dig a little deeper about sapiosexual first, it still has many problems, we will clarify in advance why saying “sapiosexual” is no different than claiming “I only like rich men” or “I only like beautiful girls ”; after that, we will come back to the reason why society accepts the tag line saying “I like smart people” rather than “I like rich people”.

First, the definition of intelligence is not clear, exists independently, or manifests itself as a single biological factor. Systematically measured, people use a system of IQ or education degrees. A series of studies have shown that a person’s IQ or education (degrees) is closely related to the financial health of their parents and their future (and their future financial health are also closely related to that of their parents) [8].

Next, intelligence alone is not really that appealing. In a survey on the trend of choosing mates based on IQ, most choose at about 120, this is just a medium high level [90–109 is medium], not yet classified as “high intelligence”. In particular, over the 120 mark, the higher the IQ, the less attractive a person as a potential partner and very few people choose superior IQ (135+) [9]. The author also mentioned that non-intellectual factors also influenced the choice of volunteers.

Finally, intelligence is also a trait closely related to appearance, or body factor — a biologically attractive trait. Studies have shown that prettier people have higher intelligence [10]. So the inclination to like smart people can originally come from good looks, instead of intellect **.

[** Explaining the phenomenon of “beauty is correlated with intelligence”, there are two main points of view. One argues that superficial beauty helps a person gain favor, from home, school to society, and thus to be treated better, creating more opportunities for development (bias). The other viewpoint is that since both intelligence and beauty are hereditary, both help brings about a high social status, beautiful and intelligent parents (each with one trait or both) tend to the competitive direction in the journey of finding mates, from which it is easy to marry each other to create both beautiful and intelligent children].

As can be seen, the IQ factor when standing alone does not clearly show sexual attraction, according to the exact definition of sapiosexual (“the bookshelf of a person is more important than their wallet”). If so, the creation of this definition as a specific, new phenomenon is relatively meaningless, since it has always been in the trend of the majority.

But of course, I am not writing this article just to point out a meaningless phenomenon is meaningless.

3. Term used by… not very smart people.

Yes indeed, the majority of so-called intelligence based on the social scales, such as scholars, scientists, people with high degrees … do not use “sapiosexual” as a way of describing themselves before and after this term came into being. They also rarely even mention their intelligence or assessment of intelligence, based on statistics about the statements of people in the academic world. In contrast, the term “sapiosexual” is now mainly used by the youth and appears popular on online dating platforms, social networks crowded with young users. Logically, the lower the age group, the lower the proportion of scholars, scientists, and higher qualifications. And logically, if you’re looking for smart people, you should go into specialized, academic areas rather than mass online dating platforms.

Unless the public’s definition of intelligence is too loose.

Or unless the definition of intelligence has never been solid to begin with.

Or unless, this is important, the public’s definition of intelligence has always been lax, and people make claims to be a “sapiosexual” based on the very social context where loosely assessments of intelligence have always been highly thought of.

In the essay “Intelligence: a history” on AEON, the author Stephen Cave *** showed a relatively harsh perspective on the history of cultural formation that emphasizes wisdom [11].

“As I was growing up in England in the latter half of the 20th century, the concept of intelligence loomed large. It was aspired to, debated and — most important of all — measured. At the age of 11, tens of thousands of us all around the country were ushered into desk-lined halls to take an IQ test known as the 11-Plus. The results of those few short hours would determine who would go to grammar school, to be prepared for university and the professions; who was destined for technical school and thence skilled work; and who would head to secondary modern school, to be drilled in the basics then sent out to a life of low-status manual labour.” Stephen began his essay on a real event he was involved in, about half a century ago.

But the veneration of intelligence and the idea that one’s intelligence is what determines one place in society has been around for a long time, which, according to Stephen, like a red thread through Western thought, from the philosophy of Plato to the policies of UK prime minister Theresa May. Promoting wisdom in a society of course has many good sides, but that does not mean that it does not exist dark sides.

Throughout the history of the Western nations, those perceived as less intelligent (based on periodic metrics) have been colonized, enslaved, sterilized, genocided or even as food for animals. The logical motive of colonialism and imperialism in modern Western countries (where they always worship and place a heavy emphasis on righteousness) is the mission of “enlightening barbaric people” or “bring the light of civilization to lesser nations”.

Under Plato, he declared (through Socrates) that intelligence and reason should be exalted, in both love, politics, and morality, that the most intelligent should rule over those who remain, and that is a natural, logical order (in The Republic). As a result, Athens actually experimented with democracy, the male citizens of the city inherited more privileges than everyone else, and this favor helped them become increasingly dominant in society, indirectly increasing the legitimacy of their position. Plato even advised that the elites should use “noble lie” to rule because the majority are not smart enough to see the truth, only the nobility can see the whole truth.

In the dawn of Western philosophy, intelligence is identified with the male -educated, white and privileged image of domination- while others were born to be ruled, like nature.

Plato’s ideology, later reinforced with “natural reason” by Aristotle, has since become a train of thought leading the development of the European philosophical system, and has now begun to spread all over the world. Later on, Descartes and Kant continued to develop other concepts, though not directly related to wisdom, but gave wisdom a bigger and more omnipotent role than ever before, consistent with morality. With Kant, morality is closely linked with reason, the rest without reason is considered “object” and neither need nor can satisfy morality. The idea of ​​”natural owner” and “natural slave”, though expressed differently by different people, is both evident and tied to reason, or intelligence.
This idea, combined with a longstanding preference for a group of white men, has later become an indestructible form of ultimate reality when it comes to their obvious privilege. The 11-Plus test, although open to all caste, religion, ethnicity, and gender, is generally equal, but its results are inherently favoring a minority for groups while the rest is very difficult to compete with this minority group, which has inherited many advantages to develop intelligence. Their results not only do not reflect reality but also indirectly say “the fact that educated white males have high intelligence and they deserve more privileges than others in society, If you do not believe, then look at the results of the tests”.

***[Stephen Cave is executive director and senior research fellow of the Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence at the University of Cambridge, while also a philosopher, diplomat, and author].

In Asian society, the similarities can include feudal ideology, where the scholar class is put above the rest, and education is the way for anyone to become a privileged group in society. And although this competition is open to everyone, as is statistically obvious, the farmer’s child has a far less competitive advantage over the offspring of a bureaucratic or capital family, and therefore, the winning representatives of both sides always have a very skewed ratio. In modern times, statistics also show that high indicators of academic achievement are highly concentrated in big cities; on a world scale, the focus will be on developed countries with long academic backgrounds [12]. So are the rest less intelligent, as a matter of fact?

But Stephen’s essay has an important idea that makes it more valuable and fresher than other class struggles thesis, that is, the emergence of artificial intelligence is making humanity gradually realize their reason is contradictory. He argued that human beings (more specifically, Western societies) have always seen reason and rational thought as intelligent and that intelligent people deserve the privileges of the ruling class, so should humans be ruled by AI, for they are the most rational and (therefore) the smartest?

Stephen says, as scholar and tech expert Kate Crawford puts it, fears of AI dominance and the reluctance to demand the development of science and technology come mainly from Western countries, especially from the highly educated and conservative white male class. Because this group is feeling that their monopoly position is threatened, when all they have is their reason, is also being overtaken by artificial intelligence. The rest, which has been subjected to intellectual oppression for a long time, don’t seem to have much emotion with the idea that artificial intelligence will make things worse.

Indeed, in a society where wisdom is always highly valued, the group that is not really within it seldom complains, instead constantly look at it and find ways to show that they also carry the desired qualities, those highly valued by society. Showing off books, education, degrees … basically not much different from showing off money and wealth. And the description “sapiosexual” is also one of the ways to indirectly show that you are involved in a form that society considers superior.

4. Why “sapiosexuals” are hindering radical movements.

The existence of sapiosexuals itself is controversial in the internet generation. An article on Medium by blogger Joe Duncan makes a comparison that describing self as “I am a sapiosexual” is fundamentally the same as “I don’t date fools” [13]. But you cannot write the latter line without being subject to criticism, while the first brings trendy and quintessence.

Until it is defined by APA as a biological phenomenon, it can be roughly agreed that sapiosexual, if exist, is merely a cultural trace as analyzed above. It emerges in a society that pursues and promotes wisdom, so it is often criticized and ironic as an expression of ableist/elitist, Eurocentrism… Those who use the term are more likely uninformed or find themselves attached to these ideologies.

But more importantly, the fact that OkCupid places sapiosexual as a sexual orientation, besides homosexual and heterosexual, is affecting the success of the LGBT community. Homosexual groups are struggling to prove that their sexual orientation is a biological fact that cannot be changed or influenced by the social environment. If homosexuality was not a biological fact, they would most likely lose their strongest foundation for fighting for themselves, the “homosexual” option would also be removed from sexual orientation options and other groups will work hard to change and find a “cure” to eliminate the phenomenon of homosexuality instead of accepting it. Recognition as a term associated with biology is one of the great victories of the LGBT community up to this point. But the emergence of a series of vague terms about sexual orientation that are not associated with biology, such as sapiosexual, will cause public opinion to begin to doubt, upset and make fun of all the terms about other sexual orientations, including gay, lesbian, bisexual… [14].

The existence of sapiosexual, if any, is only classified in the group “sexually attractive” (i.e. the same group as being attracted by beauty, attracted by finance …) instead of sexual orientation. But if that’s the case, the term sapiosexual is quite … meaningless, as I have analyzed above, and you will have to be ready to embrace a range of equivalent terms, like weedsexual (only attracted to weed smokers). ), tattoosexual (only attracted to people with tattoos) or cat-sexual (only attracted to cat owners) … Because it’s absurd to accept sapiosexual without accepting the rest. At some point, discomfort with terms will reappear.

Hopefully, the sapiosexual can read and understand this article, as they always say that they are intrigued by wisdom.

___________

References:

[1] “Sapiosexual.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sapiosexual. Accessed 1 Apr. 2021.

[2] S. Gallagher, “Is Sapiosexuality A Real Thing: Doesn’t Intelligence Matter To Everyone When Dating?,” HuffPost UK, Aug. 16, 2019. https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/.../is-sapiosexuality-a... (accessed Mar. 31, 2021).

[3] Zahavi, A. Mate selection: a selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology 53, 205–214 (1975).

[4] K. Grammer and R. Thornhill, “Human (Homo sapiens) Facial Attractiveness and Sexual Selection: The Role of Symmetry and Averageness,” ResearchGate, Oct. 1994. https://www.researchgate.net/.../15275488_Human_Homo... (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).

[5] Wikipedia Contributors, “Interpersonal attraction,” Wikipedia, Feb. 02, 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpersonal_attraction.... (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).

V. Karandashev, “A Cultural Perspective on Romantic Love,” Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, vol. 5, no. 4, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.9707/2307–0919.1135.

[6] Schmitt, D. P.; Buss, D. M. (1996–06–01). “Strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation: sex and context effects on the perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 70 (6): 1185–1204. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.387.5516. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.70.6.1185

[7] This is complicated. You need to read a lot of articles.

[8] S. von Stumm and R. Plomin, “Socioeconomic status and the growth of intelligence from infancy through adolescence,” Intelligence, vol. 48, pp. 30–36, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.10.002.

S. Scarr and R. A. Weinberg, “The Influence of ‘Family Background’ on Intellectual Attainment,” American Sociological Review, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 674–692, 1978, doi: 10.2307/2094543.

[9] G. E. Gignac, J. Darbyshire, and M. Ooi, “Some people are attracted sexually to intelligence: A psychometric evaluation of sapiosexuality,” Intelligence, vol. 66, pp. 98–111, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2017.11.009.

[10] Satoshi Kanazawa and J. L. Kovar, “Why Beautiful People Are More Intelligent,” ResearchGate, May 2004. https://www.researchgate.net/.../222436245_Why_Beautiful... (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).

[11] S. Cave, “Intelligence: a history,” Aeon, Feb. 21, 2017. https://aeon.co/.../on-the-dark-history-of-intelligence... (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).

[12] “Intelligence,” Our World in Data, 2018. https://ourworldindata.org/intelligence (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).

R. E. Dickerson, “Exponential correlation of IQ and the wealth of nations,” Intelligence, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 291–295, May 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2005.09.006.

[13] J. Duncan, “There’s No Such Thing as ‘Sapiosexual’ — Flux Magazine — Medium,” Medium, Apr. 28, 2020. https://medium.com/.../theres-no-such-thing-as... (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).

[14] O. Goldhill, “Pansexual, sapiosexual, demisexual: What’s behind the surge in sexual identities?,” Quartz, Mar. 22, 2018. https://qz.com/.../omnisexual-gynosexual-demisexual.../ (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).