Here is exactly why you SHOULD or SHOULD NOT

Colleges and Universities A-Z Georgia Institute of Technology
#1

<ol>
<li>Prepare to be constantly miserable if you are not a 'geek.'</li>
</ol>

<p>Let me make one thing clear. Being intelligent and being a geek are two completely different things. Guys at Georgia Tech tend to belong to both domains. If you are intelligent but you don't like spending your Friday nights playing World of Warcraft or other nonsense video games, then you will have a hard time finding good friends here. This is because most of the guys are so socially inept due to constant lack of what society deems as 'normal' social interaction. If you are a geek, you will truly have some of the best moments of your life leveling up with your buddies in warcraft at 6:30 am saturday morning after 5 monster energy drinks. </p>

<ol>
<li>If you have any remote interest in dating or getting a girlfriend, look somewhere else</li>
</ol>

<p>Don't get me wrong, there are some good girls here at Georgia Tech. What I mean buy 'good' is that they are attractive to you personality wise as well as physically. Most of the attractive girls here are already taken, and you are probably the 11th guy in line for any particular girl. This has to do with the horrendous ratio. Then factor in all the ugly girls, which is about approximatly 50%. After you factor that in factor in all the international girls who can only go for the international guys, because thats usually the way it works. Basically put: If you are from America good luck finding a girl that can speak english and takes care of herself, like most females at any other college would. </p>

<ol>
<li>TBS=Tech ***** Syndrome</li>
</ol>

<p>I must elucidate the matter more. TBS is where the females at Tech adopt the mentality that they are pretty much amazing because they are good looking and they are smart. You will find most of the decent looking girls afflicted with this. When you try to cordially talk to them, they treat you as a hungry wolf who wants their meat but is not alpha enough to get it. They think this gives them the perogative to talk to some guys like this. Though no good looking girl at Tech has shot me down like that(because I am a hardcore recrational athlete.) If you don't want to get shot down and want to have some respect to yourself, become athletic and go to the gym. You are going to have to be that well rounded guy who is intelligent and physically capable. </p>

<ol>
<li> You will not have time for your life.</li>
</ol>

<p>If you somehow manage to snag a girl over here, or if you make a close knit group of friends, don't expect to have much time to your life. Georgia Tech is somewhere in the top 5 in colleges that give the most workload. And not only is the workload pretty difficult, there is crap tonnes. This is what they call the 'grind'. They did a survey for freshman 2009 asking the students "How do you think you would rate yourself in terms of academic ability compared to your peers". Over 75% of the Freshman put themselves as head of the pack. They did the survey again later in the year, and that number dropped to 30 something percent. For those who think you can handle it just like you have handled everything else academically in your life, I say this: You have no idea what you are getting yourself into. </p>

<p>Dont get me wrong, managing a 3.5+ gpa is certainly possible. But prepared to be constantly making sacrafices, weather its your video game time, your sports time, your gf time, or your 'chillin' time. Also be prepared no matter what to be making sacrifices in your weekly average of sleep. Students here probably get only 60 percent of what they should be sleeping. It is very unhealthy and you tend to sleep over 12 hours a day on the weekends.</p>

<p>Grand Summary: Should NOT</p>

<p>When you start factor in the long days, sometimes impossible homework, lack of sleep, always seeking a mate, and grueling classes, and put it all together, this is when someone decides that this school is not for them. Many of them switch majors to something less time consuming, or leave the school all together. I will write a follow up post on why exactly YOU SHOULD go to this school if you want to get an insiders knowledge.</p>

#2

<p>we await the next installment!</p>

#3

<p>Post the next part soon!</p>

<p>I have heard so many conflicting accounts of Tech and I want to hear the other side of this argument...</p>

#4

<p>HERE IS WHY YOU SHOULD:</p>

<p>1). You want to build character:</p>

<p>Many people who come to Georgia Tech want to see it if they have it within themselves to complete some of the most rigorous education the Untied States and maybe even the world has to offer. Get ready to have probably the biggest baddest challenge that will ever be thrown at you. If you make it through the 5(barely anybody finshes in 4 years) or 6 years hear, you are equivalent to a Terminator mentally. Nothing out in the real world pertaining to your job can stop you. You don't give up, you rise to the challenge. And then you crush it. That is what this school teaches you to do by keeping everything so academically rigorous. </p>

<p>2) You will have a much broader understanding of the global scene.</p>

<p>Georgia Tech has some pretty highly acclaimed study abroad programs all around the world. Over 40% of the students study abroad some time at their time here. There are also some very talented professers from all walks of life from all Countries and parts of teh globe. Same goes with students. You will meet students from every continent. Not just the one or two like you would in a regular college, but quite a bunch more. </p>

<p>3)If you want to drive a BMW</p>

<p>If your goal in life is to be rich and go on vacations and drive nice BMW, you could have some potentially pretty good prospects going to this school. Now i am not advocating that life for anybody, but if you think thats what you want, then you are choosing a good school. </p>

<p>4) Love to learn: If you are a highly passionate individual, the individual who dreams about the Mean Value Theroum for Integrals, or why the cosmolgical constant value is the way it is, then it would not do you wrong to go to this school. Let me say this: You have to be extremely extremely bright if you want to get somewhere in these "theoretical" fields, but if you want to do it because the sheer love of knowing it, then come here. However, I thought I loved this stuff until i got here and realized the truth about it. It gets incomprehensible. Only you know how much you love it and what your intellectual abilities are. Dont be supprised when you hit that brick wall much sooner than you expected. That happened to about 85 percent of the students i knew here who thought they had a passion. </p>

<p>Grand Summary: Come here if you want to be finacially solid, mentally iron, and want to test yourself. Believe me, you will be tested to your core.</p>

#5

<p>"Now i am not advocating that life for anybody, but if you think thats what you want, then you are choosing a good school."</p>

<p>nice</p>

#6

<p>Now here is my own Personal Bottom Line:</p>

<p>Going through Georgia Tech, I got to look deep inside myself and see how far I could actually go. Now I imagine what else I can do in life. I got pushed to my limits, and then probably 50% further. Before I came here, there was no way I could have imagined myself doing what I can do today back in the old high school days.</p>

#7

<p>Sorry you have had such a bad experience, but I hardly think you represent what has to occur as a Tech student.</p>

<p>I have not touched a video game in almost three years, and I have plenty of friends and a good time at Tech. TBS is a complete myth. Some classes are very challenging and others are not, but I would say few are torture. If you manage your time well you should have plenty of free time. I am currently taking 15 hours of classes and have a 15/hr. week internship, and I still have time on the weekends and usually one night during the week to hang out with friends/not study. If you are just taking classes, you should have plenty of free time/time to get involved. Oh, and I get 7+ hours of sleep most nights. You must be doing something seriously wrong...</p>

#8

<p>I wouldn't say TBS is a complete myth, but perhaps I am defining "Tech [expletive] Syndrome" differently. To me, it refers to the tendency for Tech girls to overrate themselves in terms of their looks because of scarcity. They're in an environment where it's not uncommon to see four or even five guys surrounding one girl in an attempt to compete for her affection. (Didn't they ever see A Beautiful Mind?) It is natural and entirely expected that girls start thinking that they are better looking than they actually are.</p>

<p>Now, I'm not saying that there aren't beautiful women at Georgia Tech. There are. Nor am I saying that I disrespect women and think they're stupid. Quite the contrary, as I would disrespect them and think they're stupid if they didn't behave this way, as not behaving this way would be irrational. What I'm saying is that girls who are average (5-6 out of 10) start thinking they're above average (7-8 out of 10), and girls who are above average start thinking they're near-perfect (9-10 out of 10).</p>

<p>That's the so-called TBS, at least to me.</p>

<p>Edit</p>

<p>How does that make things harder? Now, women who are average in looks are not desperately seeking men. But in general, they are easier to approach because they know that while they're not bad looking, they certainly could never rival the looks of, say, Tyra Banks. At Tech, because the environment causes them to overrate themselves, they do become harder to approach. They've already been hit on by so many guys, so if you want to stand out, you have to do something differently. As I said, normally, you wouldn't have to do this.</p>

#9

<p>So... Are you implying that the women at Tech are not smart enough to correlate a sudden increase in male interest upon arriving on campus with the fact that they are a minority, rather than with some sudden increase in there actual attractiveness? I think your hypothesis would be met with laughter by many Tech women. Tech women may choose to be more selective simply because they can, but this doesn't mean they think they are hot stuff...</p>

<p>Any Tech women lurking who would like to comment?</p>

#10

<p>No, I was not implying that at all. Moreover, I am not talking about actual attractiveness, which probably did not change at all upon arriving to Tech. What changed was perceived attractiveness. Hence, my wording, "...start thinking..."</p>

<p>I think you're discounting the possibility that environment has an effect on self-perception. When you have the option of "be[ing] more selective simply because [you] can," an option that may not have been available before, that option can change the way you think and behave.</p>

#11

<p>After the many GT sporting events I've watched over the past few months (basketball/football games) and seeing the cheerleaders several times on TV, I've come to a conclusion that just because a girl is from Georgia doesn't make her hot. I was kind of disappointed but maybe my expectations were too high for a smart but hot girl.</p>

#12

<p>
[quote]
No, I was not implying that at all. Moreover, I am not talking about actual attractiveness, which probably did not change at all upon arriving to Tech. What changed was perceived attractiveness. Hence, my wording, "...start thinking..."</p>

<p>I think you're discounting the possibility that environment has an effect on self-perception. When you have the option of "be[ing] more selective simply because [you] can," an option that may not have been available before, that option can change the way you think and behave.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I wasn't talking about actual attractiveness changing, which is my point. The women at Tech realize they haven't changed, just as you and I realize they haven't changed. It is true that they may change their behavior (by being more selective), but I do not believe this correlates to a change in thinking, mainly because this is talked about enough on Tech's campus that actually thinking you are more attractive would require quite a bit of ignorance. One's perception of their own attractiveness is not purely a byproduct of the number of interested people approaching you. In an environment where the male/female ratio was approximately equal, I believe your argument is valid, but most women at Tech are aware that the increased male interest is due to their rarity, not changes in attractiveness. I would concede that they may feel better about their level of attractiveness, but I haven't observed anything on campus to make me believe that they actually think they are more attractive.</p>

<p>Anyway, It is a bit absurd to say that women at Tech are somehow "**<strong><em>ier" than women on other campuses. A woman being more selective does not mean she is treating the guys she doesn't choose in a *</em></strong>*y manner.</p>

#13

<p>I actually would not expect "XBS" to occur in an environment where the ratio was approximately equal. Where there is no scarcity of women; consequently, I wouldn't expect to see a bunch of guys tailing one girl. I used to take classes at Georgia Southern back in high school, for example, and I never, ever saw five guys surrounding one girl, with each guy obviously trying to make a good impression. When the ratio is approximately equal, there is even less value in doing that than there is at a school where the ratio is highly skewed to one gender.</p>

<p>When one "feel[s] better about [one's] level of attractiveness," it's fair to say that one's behavior will adjust in response to the improved self-esteem. I don't think one will be behaving as one used to when one goes from having only secret admirers who never had the courage to ask for dates to being approached by multiple guys at once.</p>

<p>I want to emphasize that I'm not saying that ladies at Tech are [expletive]ier than ladies at other campuses. I believe that ladies adjust their behaviors in response to changes in their perceived attractiveness. In a normal environment, I posit that actual and perceived attractiveness are equal. At Tech, however, I'd argue that perceived attractiveness > actual attractiveness, leading to the aforementioned behavior adaptation.</p>

<p>But I will accept that TBS may be an overexaggerated phenomenon.</p>

#14

<p>
[quote]
I actually would not expect "XBS" to occur in an environment where the ratio was approximately equal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You misunderstood me here. I agree that it is unlikely for a female in an environment with an equal number of males and females to actually experience an increase in male interest, but the example was meant to explain my point, not represent some actual event. If a girl receives more interest in an environment where the ratio is approximately equal, it would be likely for her to believe she is more attractive, because there is no other obvious explanation for the increased interest. At Tech, the girl would know the increase in male interest is related to decreased male selectivity due to the scarcity of females and would not necessarily think she is suddenly more attractive.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I believe that ladies adjust their behaviors in response to changes in their perceived attractiveness.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't believe I ever contested that there is a behavior change among women resulting in increased selectivity. However, I would argue the behavior change in females is more a result of changing male behavior rather than changing female perception. You seem to be implying that a female cannot be more selective unless it is a result of her increased perception of her attractiveness. Why is it unlikely or impossible for her to simply understand her temporary situation and respond accordingly, while also understanding that she has not actually changed?</p>

<p>
[quote]
At Tech, however, I'd argue that perceived attractiveness > actual attractiveness, leading to the aforementioned behavior adaptation.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Once again, female behavior is not a direct result of female self-perception. If I win a set sum of money, I can buy more expensive things until that money runs out. Temporarily, I may act in a manner that makes me appear to have more income potential than I actually do, but I will still understand that my earning potential has not actually changed, but has simply been temporarily supplemented. The reasoning of the myth of TBS would say that because I am spending more, I must think I am a some sort of rich hot shot. While it would be true that I can temporarily buy nicer/more things, it does not follow that I think I am a hot shot. Likewise, it is true women can be more selective and potentially get "nicer guys" than they might have elsewhere. However, it does not follow that they think they are suddenly hot stuff.</p>

<p>I have never contested that women at Tech can be and choose to be more selective. I am contesting that they consciously think they are better looking than they were before. To say that they consciously think they they are more attractive would imply that they are too ignorant to understand that the increase in male interest is due to decreased male selectivity due to female scarcity. Tech women are generally smarter than that.</p>

<p>It should also be noted that to any extent that TBS actually exists (I still say it doesn't), it is a direct result of male behavior. If the male population would become more selective of women, women would accordingly become less selective of men and TBS would disappear.</p>

<p>I would also add that your editorialized corrections to my grammar were in poor form. In the future, I would appreciate it if you let your arguments stand for themselves, without needing to resort to your own version of TBS in an attempt to belittle a poster you disagree with. If you just happen to have a compulsion to correct grammar, I apologize for my ignorance.</p>

#15

<p>OK, I see that I did misunderstand you. That makes sense now.</p>

<p>I don't think we actually disagree on what's happening, only on how to describe it. In post 8, I used the term "thinking" (eg. ...start thinking they're above average...) If I changed that word to "behaving," would you still vehemently disagree with me? The way I see it, if I use "behaving," then it becomes very similar to your "increased selectivity" explanation. Almost by definition, in a normal environment, ladies who are average in looks will get approached by interested men, but they certainly won't get swamped. As we've established, Tech is not a normal environment because of the skewed ratio. And so ladies who are average in absolute beauty are likely to find themselves approached far more often than they were accustomed to, resulting in the option of "increased selectivity," an option previously available to ladies who were at least above average in absolute beauty.</p>

<p>So, yes, the ladies may think that they're still as beautiful as they were, but they will not behave as they used to. I think we agree on this, but we may disagree on whether it is appropriate to describe the behavioral change as TBS. In fairness, I don't know whether any instances of TBS I have personally experienced or directly witnessed are because the girls are at Tech or because the girls just have truly [expletive]y personalities, and hence they would've acted that way anywhere. I mentioned in another thread about how I saw a guy get totally shot down for trying to open a conversation with a girl. He wasn't using a cheesy pick-up line; he was just trying to engage her by referring to the book she was reading. As I said, I don't know if her response was because of TBS, because she wasn't in the mood for conversation at that time, or because she's just that way. As another example, I once commented on a girl's dress by saying, "Looks like you've got an interview." I was expecting a "Yeah, I've got one with [insert company name here]." Instead, I got a, "Nah, I dress like this all the time, you know?" in a super, super, super sarcastic tone of voice. Again, I don't know if it was TBS, if she wasn't in the mood for talking, or if she's just like that. There's always the possibility that I shouldn't have said that, in which case I would value your input as to why I shouldn't have said that.</p>

<p>Look, of course I disagree with you that TBS is a complete myth, but I don't have anything against you personally. I was not "correcting" your grammar in my quotation, nor was I "belittl[ing]" you. I make the adjustments because when I quote you, I do not necessarily use the same pronouns that you used, therefore my penchant for proper grammar dictates that I adjust the verb conjugations to match the pronouns I pick. "[T]hey may feel better" is correctly written, but I cannot use "feel better" with the pronoun "one." I have to change it to, "one 'feel[s] better'". So, yes, I do have a compulsion to using correct grammar, but you don't have to apologize for the misunderstanding.</p>

#16

<p>Just look at the crap you guys wrote about this topic....no wonder dudes at GT can't get laid. </p>

<p>It is so dumb to be arguing about this.</p>

#17

<p>Lol @ Tanka, but that was pretty harsh</p>

<p>I've never been to GT, but this sounds like my high school (currently a senior)</p>

<p>In my school the ratio is about even, but the percentage of hot girls out of total girls is like <3% im not kidding, the guys are a lot better, I could be biased, but the guys are a bit better, I say this because I have been/lived in a few other towns and in the high schools there I say many more attractive women, who are with similar guys.</p>

<p>In my school I say girls that would rate pretty low on the attractive scale with some very "cool" superficial Jocks etc. (not saying that they only look for looks, but you get the message)</p>

<p>The avg. ones do seem that they think that they are all that and the ones that would be attractive anywhere else think that they are models or something. </p>

<p>Just my 2cents - Bottom line - I think that the phenomena being described here happens anywhere there is a mismatch of attractive people from different genders.</p>

#18

<p>Although I have not read the entire thread, I am quite familiar with Georgia Tech's campus & students. One reason that Tech's demanding workload seems heavier than it really is when compared to other engineering programs is that Georgia Tech has a high admittance rate for those with modest qualifications. Tech students love to tell everyone how hard they work & how miserable they are just like Swarthmore College students & Univ. of Chicago students repeatedly tell the world that they are intellectuals. Unfortunately, complaining at Georgia Tech--just like shouting "I'm an intellectual" at Chicago & Swarthmore--has become part of the campus culture. Almost every engineering program that I know of is quite demanding. (Oddly one of the highest ranked engineering schools is not.) Georgia Tech is almost exclusively an engineering school & this heightens the stressful, heavy workload atmosphere.</p>

#19

<p>I also didn't read most of this thread (I got tired of the TBS junk over a decade ago). But as someone that has attended multiple top ranked engineering schools, I can provide some insight: </p>

<ol>
<li><p>On a class to class basis, Tech does not require more work than other similarly ranked engineering schools.</p></li>
<li><p>On a degree to degree basis, Tech does require more work. This comes from two factors. First, Tech generally requires more hours/degree than other schools. Second, Tech does not have "joke" electives. You can't take "Philosophy of the Simpsons", Bowling, or Wine Tasting (all actual classes at other schools). Your electives options are more limited. As an example, I took Quantum Physics as a free elective.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>That said, this is getting MUCH better now that Tech has cross enrollment with Emory and GSU. You can now take infamous classes like Wine Tasting as a free elective.</p>

<ol>
<li> Engineers on other campuses actually complain more than engineers at Tech (because they can see the philosophy majors goofing around and still earning a degree). The difference is that at Tech, you have over 50% of the undergrads (8000 out of 13000) in engineering/CS. At a place like UIUC, it's 19% (6000 out of 31000).</li>
</ol>

#20

<p>Great advice from the OP.</p>

Thanks for subscribing! Be on the lookout for our next newsletter.

© 2021 College Confidential / Concentrical LLC. All Rights Reserved.