When, in the context of this website, I talk about intellectually advanced women, I have, by definition, a very narrow understanding of what constitutes intellectual advancement.
Women, whether by genetic encoding or on the basis of their socialisation, tend to be more romantic than men. Women are more susceptible to the idea of lifelong love and marital bliss with just one partner than are many men. Furthermore, the idea of genuine love (the exclusive attraction to one person) plays a larger role in the sexual arousal of women than in that of men.
Nevertheless, the more sexually sophisticated men are, the more they will understand the magic of romantic feelings. I do believe that, even though I have not slept with many women, or maybe because of it, I am, indeed, sexually sophisticated myself. I am sophisticated to the point that I am not, and never have been, interested in sexual relationships without the element of love.
I do, in fact, believe that it would pollute my emotional landscape if I were to sleep with prostitutes, or even just with women of low sexual market value.
As can be observed from men and women who indisriminately have sex with a multitude of partners, this practice easily results, not in sophistication but in learned emotional incompetence: the progressive inability to get the greatest possible joy from a sexual relationship. And rightfully, people who indiscriminately have sex with a large number of partners have a reduce sexual market value.
But while I understand the magic of sexual experience that rides on a wave of genuine love, as most women instinctively do from the onset of their love lives, I am also a man and have the (most probably genetically encoded) reduced sexual attention span that differentiates men from women.
Because what men, even primitive men, know better than most women is this: that lifelong marital bliss with just one partner is probably not possible (unless one of the partner cuts this 'lifelong' short by a premature death).
This doesn't mean that lifelong partnerships would not be possible. I just assess that these lifelong partnerships will not be accompanied by unending marital bliss, and (this is the hard part) not by lifelong exclusive sexual attraction.
Now, this awareness (and not just the theoretical knowledge of it) is what determines, in the context of this website, the first level of intellectual advancement.
The second level of intellectual advancement is achieved when a woman understands that, despite the impossibility of lifelong marital bliss, and in spite of the fact that sexual attraction will stray, this isn't reason for disillusionment.
Life does not proceed in a linear, but in a dialectical mode. When our first love relationship declines, and there is pain, it is plain silliness to swear to oneself never to fall in love again.
For, in order to live a life full of optimal sexual joy, it is neccessary that we emotionally fall in love again, even if intellectually, we know that this subsequent love, again, will have its phase of ascent and its phase of descent.
These, however, are cycles that are too important to play games with, or to wear them out mindlessly. This is one important reason why I myself, unlike other men, am careful not to enter sexual relationships indiscriminately.
Neither will those women who are intellectually advanced enough to know that lifelong exclusive sexual attraction is unlikely, and nevertheless enter sexual relationships under the pretext that it were.
Whether a woman will achieve this particular intellectual advancement does not depend on her other intellectual advancement, the formal education she acquires. It doesn't even depend on her age, as some women achieve this kind of awareness, and draw the correct conclusions, at the age of 17, while others do so only at the age of 30, and still others never get it.
If there is one condition that, however, will facilitate this understanding, then it is a bisexual orientation.
