Voy Por Ustedes

Newspapers, magazines and the like have a tendency to append a number to people’s names when they’re first introduced into an article. Usually it’ll be their age, for example, Michael Magilacuddy 37, from Tackley etc. In tabloid newspapers and, I have heard tell, in porn magazines, they use a ladies vital statistics; Babs (34, 26, 32), from Essex and so on.

This information is in most examples, completely redundant. The exception maybe, being the porn magazine's use of vital statistics…although who cares about numbers when you’re cracking one off in the bathroom? The text is all just a blur isn’t it when you’re really going for it.

If there must be a numerical suffix, why not adopt IQ points? This to me is far more relevant, particularly if the person in question is giving an opinion on a tricky social issue, or commenting on something that requires intelligent reasoning.

You would be far more encouraged to read on if the person in question was John (IQ:134) than if it were George (IQ:58). And even in the case of the porn magazine it would be a relevant statistic. I may be in the minority here, but intelligence in a woman makes me incredibly randy. An opportunity to entertain an educated woman is in my opinion a very exciting prospect. If she’s wearing wellies and is a little bit muddy also, then these are additional bonuses.

I am in no doubt my man juices would begin flowing far more freely if the centrefold were introduced as Debbie (IQ:127) than Debbie (34, 26, 32). I’m a man after all. I don’t even know what those numbers mean anyway. If it means she has big tits and a narrow waist, well, I can see that already can’t I? I can’t tell by her hourglass figure and ocean blue eyes however, how should would fare with the Guardian cryptic crossword.

At this point I should like to remind you all that there are exceptions to every rule, and my fetish for IQ points does not encompass the Vorderman woman. Mans shoulders and mans voice. Awful, simply a dreadful creature. My sexual urges are no more aroused by her than my appetite is aroused by a plate of hospital macaroni cheese.


Anyway, I digress. Would the American electorate have been so enthusiastic about voting for George W. Bush had they listed his IQ score rather than his age? Yes granted, it was the same, 58 on both accounts, but the point is they would have stated his IQ as 58 and one would hope this would have given John Kerry (IQ: 134) a significant advantage. One would hope.

Would the concerns of 8 year old Johnny Parsons from Warwick regarding the proposed invasion of Iraq been so dismissed out of hand in 2003 had the Blue Peter website on which they were posted listed his IQ of 102 rather than his age? How many lives would have been spared if little Johnnys prophesies had been seen vicariously through the eyes of an IQ centurion rather than the eyes of an infant? Or something.

If it became common practice to list peoples IQ points, would this not encourage us all to improve our own scores? Would society not be a better place as people began to use their newfound intelligence in their day-to-day lives? Would this not in turn help us tackle tomorrow’s problems with imagination, a greater sense of purpose and optimism? Would this not mean the end of religion, tabloid journalism and the entire county of Essex? I see no flaw in this plan people. Let’s begin today.

“So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.”

--Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)