Online now
Online now

Intelligence in s types

↑ ↓
1 month ago • 04/06/2021 8:47 pm
SageFlame • 04/06/2021 8:47 pm
Submission and Sapiosexuality:

I am submissive and also a sub. Serving and caring for others brings me deep satisfaction. As a sub, it is also intoxicating, throttle up! The sapiosexual side of me is braided in here as well.

What I have learned about myself is that ,number one, a thriving conversation is necessary for primal attraction or interest. Generally speaking, I adore getting to know people; hearing their stories etc. But if there isn't the exchange of thought it won't go beyond casual friendship. Nothing I planned, that's just how I am.

Additionally, sharing deep thoughts that open a window to the heart is an intimate expression. This is arousing to me also. When I say deep I don't mean clinical regurgitation but an authentic idea, perspective or understanding of the topic being discussed. ( bringing something to the table) How someone shares holds as much weight as the content. Intelligence with self importance is like listening to vomit; I back away.

The door to my submission is connection. The way to connection is thriving conversation, this conversation needing intelligence on both ends. Certainly not a model neccessary to follow, only my personal experience.

My submission isn't to a dominant. I submit to a person. It just so happens I respond to intelligent Doms who can also be vulnerable enough trust me with their true self.

Q. - " But Sage, haven't you been so hot n bothered you just needed a ramming it didn't matter what their intelligence?

A. - " Once, yes, but it left me wanting still. Live and learn. I need the whole shebang."
MisterAshmodai​(dom male)
1 month ago • 04/06/2021 9:24 pm
MisterAshmodai​(dom male) • 04/06/2021 9:24 pm
While it appears as the almost ubiquitous manifestation of sapiosexuality, there is much more to the concept than wanting ongoing conversation. Conversation could just as easily be a knowledge based skill as having broad knowledge allows one to keep talking.
I like Sageflame’s reference to deep, original ideas; the ability to take the general conversation further by putting the normal tropes to use in creating genuine and inspired topics.
1 month ago • 04/07/2021 2:20 am
Sasa • 04/07/2021 2:20 am
If I want a relationship, it is extremly exhausting when a partner can't follow, doesn't understand a context, never knows what I am talking about, so yes intelligence is important, but there is a difference between knowledge and intelligence. I don't know everything and I don't expect it from others, but I expect that a person learns or it is frustrating for both. I prefer a slidly equal level. The difference in intelligence between two people should not correspond to the powerexchange. I am a human and a woman first who is also kinky.
1 month ago • 04/07/2021 2:12 pm
Sasa • 04/07/2021 2:12 pm
ElizaEmma wrote:
I have also heard from the D types I interacted with that it is an ego boost to have a "trophy sub", i.e. one who is intelligent, powerful and successful in vanilla life but completely submits to them.

I hope it is not true. Shouldn’t we add something to other's. Both sides of the slash. What you describe sounds immature and ridiculous. In case we think we need this kind of boost, we are simply not enough for the other.
Taramafor​(sub male)
1 month ago • 04/09/2021 2:44 am
Taramafor​(sub male) • 04/09/2021 2:44 am
I think I pinpointed the appeal of it.

Been watching this SCP vid about how this interviewer challenges the doctor (049). It's an hour long but if you're curious you can watch it in the link.

What basically happens is that the two find the common ground. the interview challenges 049 (the doctor). Who actually avoids answering some questions at first. The interviewer makes some very good points. Yet 049 also makes some valid ones. There's a lot of talk about "the pestilence", which quite possibly is fear or/and ignorance.

If that is indeed the case (that is if we take into account how harmful fear is) then it only makes sense that those that ask questions and challenge us would come across as more attractive and useful.

Let's be honest here. If you don't amuse your most hated enemy you run the risk of being either discarded or destroyed. Let's say you find yourself in just such a situation and there's no wiggling out of it. If you didn't use your brain before then you're in real trouble now. Put two people in a room long enough without outside interference and they'll find a way to exist sooner or later. It's either that or wallow in the negatives. It's simply healthier to consider each other and make the best of the situation. Which is what 049 and the interviewer managed to do, even when directly opposed with each other. The vid itself is a metaphor for when people find the common ground when in conflict. Until they understand each other after challenging each other and asking enough questions.

But the turning point has always been in the challenging. Timestamp 28-32 in the vid. That's a good example. It's how you get people to start considering your viewpoint. Provided your logic adds up.

And if someone considers your viewpoint... that means they have to think about what you do. Someone can be very intelligent and lose sight of that at first until challenged. Likewise someone can also blunder in blind and fail to consider long term risk/harm. Both can be dangerous as each other. And both can be as closed minded as each other. Until pushed hard enough. Not to hold a grudge or to blame and judge. But to improve. To get them to think. And ask.

Frankly, not enough people ask. Because they're too busy judging a book by its cover.
MisterAshmodai​(dom male)
1 month ago • 04/09/2021 3:17 am
MisterAshmodai​(dom male) • 04/09/2021 3:17 am
An interesting offering for a thread about intelligence. I have actually seen this video before.
It may be a bit overdeveloped as a general explanation, but I am sure it applies in some sapiosexual scenarios.
Veejay​(dom male){StabbyWife}
1 week ago • 05/02/2021 4:25 am
Veejay​(dom male){StabbyWife} • 05/02/2021 4:25 am
Spend any amount of time in academia and you’ll quickly find that degrees are not an indicator of intelligence. Therefore, absence of them is not an indicator of otherwise.

That being said, a simple conversation with someone will usually tell you everything you need to know. If you’re listening. In the grand scheme of things, compatibility is of much greater importance than a single indicator like intelligence—because it’s entirely possible that we’re not as smart as we think we are.
1 week ago • 05/02/2021 9:50 am
Virginie{lcpw} • 05/02/2021 9:50 am
The OP's initial question seems very odd to me. Are 'intelligent' s-types preferred?
Let us drop s-type. Who would wish for a vapid, ignorant, or undereducated partner of any type?
Since the initial question seems far too simple and rhetorical; I'm going to assume the OP is just objectifying s-types= I cannot see what else would birth such a topic. If it makes this gentler- i do not think he is aware of the aforementioned objectification.
How ridiculous.
I did not comb through each response but I have a sneaking suspicion no one wrote " I prefer my s-types to be little more than a tabula rasa." (though I am aware some feel that way I also believe they'd be too self conscious to write it) now why is that? It proves my point. Objectification.
Misterasmodai​(dom male)
1 week ago • 05/02/2021 10:07 am
Misterasmodai​(dom male) • 05/02/2021 10:07 am
I actually believe very much in the concept of tabula rasa. Perhaps not to the fullest extent, but I do feel that humans left behind the vast majority of their instinct and natural awareness a long time ago in lieu of our uniquely advanced learning potential.

The original question was regarding intelligence in s types and how often it is preferred, as in a prioritized desirable trait. More people than would care to admit do not place intelligence highly on their scale of priority in partners of any sort; perhaps reading through the forum and the various definitions of intelligence (specifically, mine) would help you to better understand what it is that I am asking.
By my definition, intelligence does not exclude being vapid, ignorant, or undereducated. I have met plenty of people who are focused, knowledgeable, and very educated, but do not possess what I would consider any special intelligence.

The question is posed in a certain clinical way, which does objectify to a certain extent, but it is more for the sake of avoiding tangential discussions like where intelligence comes from or why it is different among various people. Its function has nothing to do with demeaning s types, or anyone else for that matter.