Christopher Hitchens wrote an article (profanity warning) in Vanity Fair that raises an interesting theory. It goes something like this:
“Why are men, taken on average and as a whole, funnier than women? Well, for one thing, they had damn well better be. The chief task in life that a man has to perform is that of impressing the opposite sex, and Mother Nature (as we laughingly call her) is not so kind to men. In fact, she equips many fellows with very little armament for the struggle. An average man has just one, outside chance: he had better be able to make the lady laugh… Women have no corresponding need to appeal to men in this way. They already appeal to men, if you catch my drift.”
An interesting idea is it not?
I’m curious how far you could take that theory on an anthropological, biological, and social historical level.
And thus we are all brought back to the main fact that women are indeed overpowered and corresponding nerfs are needed.
That is an interesting theory but it’s only taking one aspect of it and running with it. It could be expanded upon and improved. Hmm…
It really depends on the spec that a woman is looking for. Generally Men are speced “Humorous”, “Serious”, “Romantic”, or “Mysterious” or some combo of each. It just happens that most women (at one point or another) like humor, so the “Humorous” spec is a successful one, assume you are geared and trained correctly.
And no, I do not play too much games.
Srsrly.