[quote=@Dynamo Frokane] Well I refer to my original point that outside of johns and sexpats, most people incorporate intelligence into their expectations for a partner. Intelligence is extremely broad, way past the academic. Charisma, Wit and Talent are all forms of intelligence, and you would be very hard pressed to find someone who isn't attracted to those things (along with their other requirements). I mean this is very hard to unpack, because we are speculating but 'plain-looking' is one of those terms that seems to change based on who you ask. Plain can mean ordinary and blank slate like, nothing particularly striking about them but perfectly fine looking, in other words, somewhere on the average scale, which is what I think you are trying to say. But I would argue that id a sapiosexual didn't find someone attractive 'enough' or significantly less than average they would disregard the supposed intelligence because they wouldn't be giving them a chance to demonstrate that in the first place. My main argument is that it seems to be fairly pointless term, damn near everyone finds some sort of intelligence attractive in one way or another, and damn near nobody would only take intelligence into account while completely disregarding physicality/attitude/status etc. If the only observable difference is that they allegedly prioritise intelligence more than non-sapios we would need a way to determine how much non-sapios value intelligence on average and where the line gets drawn. [/quote] I disagree. Most of my guy friends IRL only want some bimbo, and at best they really don't give a shit. Like my best friend and roommate right now. I love him like a brother, and he's with a very educated girl who's pretty nice. I forgot her degree, but it's quite elaborate. When he describes her to people, he calls her 'quiet.' Like... c'mon dude. I understood your point. My point was that the term Sapiosexual isn't really a clinical term for as far as I could tell, and its usage is meant to be that intelligence is valued first, and enhances every other aspect of the person. I don't use the term myself, but I've got nothing against it either.