All of you shouldn’t hit on the hot chick

(Mr. Thoughtful is on a short leave of absence, and wrote this for me to publish after he left. This post is entirely his creation)

I came across an interesting bit from the movie about the great mathematician and game theorist John Nash. He gives a carefully thought-out solution to the problem of what to do when you and your friends go into a bar and see one beautiful woman and several less attractive women:

…the famous example used in the original Beautiful Mind movie about Nash’s life:
“Given that you are in a bar, would you prefer to pursue the most attractive person in the bar, or would your efforts focus on someone less attractive?”

This seemingly superficial question gets at the following dilemma: if a group of young men are sitting in a bar and a group of women walk in, where one of them is particularly attractive — is it an optimal strategy for all of the young men to pursue the most beautiful woman? As Nash’s character reasons in the movie:

“If we all go after the blond we block each other. Not a single one of us is going to get her. So then we go for her friends. They will all give us the cold shoulder because nobody likes to be second choice. What if no one goes for the blond and we don’t insult the other girls? That’s the only way we win.”

Hat tip: John List at http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/vote-now-on-the-prisoners-dilemma-contest/

And don’t pretend that 1) you’re such a superstud that the beautiful woman would choose you over the other guys hitting on her, or 2) you wouldn’t go for the less-than-beautiful woman but would hold out for a beautiful woman (bc you date only beautiful women).

An example of number one above is found in Neill Strauss’s “The Game”, when he is in a bar hitting on a hot chick and a minor TV celebrity comes in and tries to get her attention. Neill reportedly had first-class game, but the celebrity had, well, celebrity. In Southern California that counts for a lot. Neill reported that he won out after a fierce pickup duel.

Be careful when naming your child

I came across an interesting article discussing a study that concludes kids with unpopular names are more likely to be deliquent:

What’s in a name? Possibly a life of crime.

An unpopular name - like Alec, Ernest, Ivan, or Malcolm - is more likely to spell trouble than favourites Michael, Matthew or Christopher, according to research presented Saturday at the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences at the University of B.C.

“There is a positive correlation between unpopular first names and juvenile delinquency,” said Daniel Lee, an economics professor at Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania…

Lee has a word of advice: “It’s all right to give unique names to your children, but make sure you become a good parent.”

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=ff841028-6389-44e9-8609-93ddbef6e4a5

I didn’t read the full text of the study, and it may conflict with research done by the economist Steven Levitt in his excellent book, “Freakonomics” (http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/

I have long thought that naming kids certain off-beat names may give them a subtle handicap in life.  Some kids manage just fine even with odd names.  Bruce Willis and Demi Moore’s kids will get along just fine being named Scout or Ryder (or whatever their names are).  But most kids don’t have the built-in advantage of celebrity and wealth.  Why take the chance if your kids won’t have such built-in advantages? 

And on a more mundane note, do you want your kids to go through the aggravation (admittedly slight) of having to spell, and respell their names to ever restaurant hostess and every other person who takes down their names?  You might think this is a trivial thing, but it adds up over the years.

More than one in four New Yorkers has herpes

I was amazed to read that more than one in four people in New York City have herpes:

NEW YORK (AP) - A city Health Department study finds that more than a fourth of adult New Yorkers are infected with the virus that causes genital herpes. The study, released Monday, says about 26 percent of New York City adults have genital herpes, compared to about 19 percent nationwide.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D916M4QO0&show_article=1

NYC Health Dept: http://www.nyc.gov/health

Should Airlines Charge More To Fly Fat People?

Airlines are getting hit hard by huge increases in fuel costs.  They have tried to make some additional money by charging more for heavier suitcases, and limited checked bags to one bag.  Now a surcharge for fat people is being discussed:

With soaring fuel prices, airlines have been trying to cut costs where ever they can. On Thursday, Continental Airlines announced around 3,000 layoffs.

But as CBS 2’s Dana Kozlov reports, there’s another way airlines can make up the money by easing their load on gas. 

… it’s an idea floating around in cyberspace and aviation expert Aaron Gellman said he understands one airline pitched the plan for a Far East route. So instead of just baggage on the scale, passengers would stand on it, too, and would be charged based on their weight.

http://cbs2chicago.com/consumer/airline.weight.fee.2.741830.html

Interesting idea.  I read that Southwest charged a fat guy for two seats because he took up two seats.  I don’t see any major objection to airlines charging more to really heavy people.  It takes more fuel to fly them places.  I’m not sure it is fair to charge the same price to fly a 50 pound six year old as a 300 pound passenger. 

What are your thoughts?

Male hosts with Rod Stewart hair, tight suits and jewelry

I read about a fairly new phenomenon in Tokyo called male host clubs, where women buy expensive drinks so they can talk to young men.  It seems sort of comparable to guys going to strip clubs and buying the dancers expensive drinks for the privilege of chatting with the dancers at their tables:

… male host clubs, the newly booming pleasure dens where women buy expensive drinks for the privilege of chatting with young men. The men are unmistakable in Kabukicho with their Rod Stewart hair, tight suits and jewelry. “The surprising thing is that the top earners are not the guys you’d expect,” Arias says. “They’re not the best-looking guys. They’re the best talkers.”

http://www.latimes.com/features/printedition/magazine/la-tm-tokyo06-2008jun01,0,5903053.story?page=2

It’s interesting that the guys who make the most money at these clubs are not the best looking guys but the guys who can talk well (assuming this guy’s observation is correct).  I kind of doubt the same earning dynamic works for (female) strippers.  But then again, guys are highly visual. 

Complaint about the women’s restroom

Why is this guy famous?Because she is not a guy but a woman and she was asked to leave the women’s restroom in a restaurant.  Another female patron of the restaurant complained to the restaurant management that a guy was in the women’s restroom, and the bouncer, understandably believing to be a woman, asked her to leave.

Hat tip: http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/i-would-have-made-the-same-mistake/

News story: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/06/30/2007-06-30_lesbian_riled_by_boot_from_ladies_room-2.html

 It was an unfortunate, but understandable, mistake.  It should all have been settled with an apology and a free meal on the restaurant.  But several high profile lawyers volunteered to represent the woman at no cost to her.  They filed suit.  The restaurant had to pay lawyers to defend it and eventually settled the case by paying the woman $35,000 and her attorneys $15,000.

http://overlawyered.com/tag/sued-if-you-do/

 

The old red pepper up the anus trick

I was scanning an interesting piece by an anthropologist on cockfighting in Bali and the following jumped out at me.  Wow, that’s gotta hurt:

Red pepper is stuffed down their beaks and up

their anuses to give them spirit.

http://www.si.umich.edu/~rfrost/courses/MatCult/content/Geertz.pdf

 

 

Really, Truly, Totally Single

I like to claim that I’ve been single for like five years now, but that is not entirely true. In fact, since my last exclusive relationship ended 60 months ago, I’ve basically almost always had someone I could either call or hang out with, and most likely have sex with as well.

That is certainly not the case right now. The last of my female friends to which I had kept up some form of communication had tired of waiting for me and got herself a boyfriend. It sucks and it doesn’t. Part of me is pissed and jealous and, I’ll admit it, hurt. But another more logical part of me remembers that, hey, I wasn’t all that into her in the first place.

I’m beginning to wonder if I could ever be into anyone anymore. Or if I ever could in the first place. I don’t remember being head-over-heels since high school, and I imagine that really doesn’t count. So does this mean I lack the capability of falling in love? Will I never ever feel “gaga” over a chick?

I tell you, I was feeling a little gaga a few weeks ago when I saw a stunning girl in the bookstore. Dark blonde, nice tan, and a tight body…all a man could want. Problem: she couldn’t have been more than 19 or 20 years old. I hate that. I hate it because I could never have it. Really. I mean, I’m a good-looking guy with a lot to offer, but I am past 35 now. Even if all the planets aligned and she was attracted to older guys and we somehow decided to give a relationship a try…then what? What would we talk about? Britney Spears?

You are probably reading this and saying, “People don’t talk about Britney anymore, you dumb ass. They talk about blah blah blah…” And that is just my point. I have no idea what young people talk about anymore. Talking to a 21-year old girl for any length of time would cause me to put my head in an oven.

So, that leaves me looking for a girl in her late twenties or early thirties that is still attractive, still in good physical shape, still is fun-loving, is not jaded by a bad marriage or bad relationship, of reasonable intelligence, and has good morals and a great sense of humor.

Wish me luck on that.

I’m shocked that this painting sold for $33.6 Million

I am astounded that this painting sold for 33.6 Million dollars.

Benefits Supervisor Sleeping, Christie’s Images Ltd., 2008

Hat tip: Annika at http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/what-does-336-million-mean-in-the-art-world/#more-2644

Why are there so many Vietnamese manicurists in the US?