[Ermine] A Dilbert perspective on sexiness

This was rec'd from a good net friend of mine...enjoy. -khaihman of the multispelling

>
> This is a reprint of a Scott Adams "column" pulled from the 'Net:
>
> I get about 100 e-mail messages a day from readers of my comic strip
> "Dilbert." Most are from disgruntled office workers, psychopaths, stalkers,
> comic-strip fans -- that sort of person. But a growing number are from women
> who write to say they think Dilbert is sexy. Some say they've already married
> a Dilbert and couldn't be happier.
>
> If you're not familiar with Dilbert, he's an electrical engineer who spends
> most of his time with his computer. He's a nice guy but not exactly Kevin
> Costner.
>
> Okay, Dilbert is polite, honest, employed and educated. And he stays home.
> These are good traits, but they don't exactly explain the incredible sex
> appeal. So what's the attraction?
>
> I think it's a Darwinian thing. We're attracted to the people who have the
> best ability to survive and thrive. In the old days it was important to be
> able to run down an antelope and kill it with a single blow to the forehead.
>
> But that skill is becoming less important every year.
>
> Now all that matters is if you can install your own Ethernet card without
> having to call tech support and confess your inadequacies to a stranger whose
> best career option is to work in tech support.
>
> It's obvious that the world has three distinct classes of people, each with
> its own evolutionary destiny:
>
> 1) Knowledgeable computer users who will evolve into godlike non-corporeal
> beings who rule the universe (except for those who work in tech support);
>
> 2) Computer owners who try to pass as knowledgeable but secretly use hand
> calculators to add totals to their Excel spreadsheets. This group will
> gravitate toward jobs as high school principals and operators of pet
> crematoriums. Eventually they will become extinct; and
>
> 3) Non-computer users who will grow tails, sit in zoos and fling dung at
> tourists.
>
> Obviously, if you're a woman and you're trying to decide which evolutionary
> track you want your offspring to take, you don't want to put them on the luge
> ride to the dung-flinging Olympics. You want a real man. You want a
> knowledgeable computer user with evolution potential.
>
> And women prefer men who listen. Computer users are excellent listeners
> because they can look at you for long periods of time without saying anything.
> Granted, early in a relationship it's better if the guy actually talks. But
> men use up all the stories they'll ever have after six months. If a woman
> marries a guy who's in, let's say, retail sales, she'll get repeat stories
> starting in the seventh month and lasting forever. Marry an engineer and she
> gets a great listener for the next 70 years.
>
> Plus with the ozone layer evaporating, it's a good strategy to mate with
> somebody who has an indoor hobby. Outdoorsy men are applying suntan lotion
> with SPF 10,000 and yet by the age of 30 they still look like dried chili
> peppers in pants. Compare that with the healthy glow of a man who spends 12
> hours a day in front of a video screen.
>
> If you doubt the sexiness of male PC users, consider their hair. They
> tend to have either: (1) male pattern baldness -- a sign of elevated
> testosterone -- or (2) unkempt jungle hair -- the kind you see only on people
> who just finished a frenzied bout of lovemaking. If this were a trial I think
> we could reach a verdict on the strong circumstantial evidence alone.
>
> I realize there are a lot of skeptics out there. They'll delight in pointing
> out the number of computer users who wear wrist braces and suggest it isn't
> the repetitive use of the keyboard that causes the problem. That's okay.
> Someday those skeptics will be flinging dung at tourists. Then who'll be
> laughing? (Answer to rhetorical question: everybody but the tourists.)
>
> Henry Kissinger said power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. And Bill Clinton said
> that knowledge is power. Therefore, logically, according to the U.S.
> government, knowledge of computers is the ultimate aphrodisiac. You could
> argue with me -- I'm just a cartoonist -- but it's hard to argue with the
> government. Remember, they run the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, so
> they must know a thing or two about satisfying urges.
>
> In less enlightened times, the best way to impress women was to own a hot car.
> But women wised up and realized it was better to buy their own hot cars so
> they wouldn't have to ride around with jerks.
>
> Technology has replaced hot cars as the new symbol of robust manhood. Men
> know that unless they get a digital line to the Internet no woman is going to
> look at them twice.
>
> It's getting worse. Soon anyone who's not on the World Wide Web will qualify
> for a government subsidy for the home-pageless. And nobody likes a man who
> takes money from the government, except maybe Marilyn Monroe, which is why the
> CIA killed her. And if you think that's stupid, I've got 100 words to go.
>
> Finally, there's the issue of mood lighting. Nothing looks sexier than a man
> in boxer shorts illuminated only by a 15-inch SVGA monitor. If we agree that
> this is every woman's dream scenario, then I think we can also agree that it's
> best if the guy knows how to use the computer. Otherwise, he'll just look
> like a loser sitting in front of a PC in his underwear.
>
> In summary, it's not that I think non-PC users are less attractive. It's just
> that I'm sure they won't read this article.
>
>

--+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--- From: Chad Wilson <wilson@entropy.muc.muohio.edu> --+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--- Received on Mon Jul 22 11:47:06 1996