Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 05-24-2016, 02:55 PM
Fuzzy Dunlop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
We need clarification: Are nice guys getting successful because of being nice, or in spite of being nice?
It's like DigitalC said. There are plenty of traits comparable to "nice" that at least some women find very attractive - kind, considerate, compassionate. Men like that can find a great partner if, like Shodan said, they have some standards and are pursuing the right kind of woman for them.

Then on the other hand, there are guys who are "nice" because they're bland and there's nothing else of note to say about them. If you're being described as nice because nobody can think of anything else to call you, you're going to have to succeed with women in spite of yourself.
  #52  
Old 05-24-2016, 03:15 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
We need clarification: Are nice guys getting successful because of being nice, or in spite of being nice?
Actually nice guys are having success because they're also normal human beings. I'm not actually sure if their niceness is the most important factor in that success, one way or the other.

"Nice" guys are having some success, now and then, inexplicably, in spite of being desperate, rapey and smelly.
  #53  
Old 05-24-2016, 03:18 PM
DrFidelius's Avatar
DrFidelius is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 12,598
Faking being nice is a nasty thing. Women can tell.
  #54  
Old 05-24-2016, 03:27 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFidelius View Post
Faking being nice is a nasty thing. Women can tell.
We have one of these in my writer's group. He hits on me in front of everybody else and generally acts like he's there to pick up women. He practically falls all over himself to pull out chairs and hold open doors. His writing has potential but it is very, very shallow and female characters are either nonexistent or pathetic caricatures.

Last session, he made a comment about one of the female characters in another writer's story: ''If it were me, I'd smack that bitch and dump her ass.''

The he looked directly at me with an expression bordering on panic and said, ''Uh, not physically.''



The worst thing about these guys is that they truly think they are nice. They think just because they may not have any ill intent means they are incapable of doing douchebag things. The best sort of people, IME, are the ones willing to honestly examine their own behavior for traces of dickery. These guys don't. They are perpetual victims of innocent misunderstandings and other people overreacting.

Last edited by Spice Weasel; 05-24-2016 at 03:28 PM.
  #55  
Old 05-24-2016, 03:27 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFidelius View Post
Faking being nice is a nasty thing. Women can tell.
Well, sometimes they can tell. Sometimes they can't tell, but they get clued in when the "nice" guy throws a tantrum and demands the sex he thought he was "buying" from said women. Sometimes the "nice" guy doesn't throw the tantrum, and instead goes home and sulks, and the women can never tell. But they still don't particularly want to hump the "nice" guy. 'Cause why would they? He's not particularly attractive.
  #56  
Old 05-24-2016, 04:22 PM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 32,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by astro View Post
Any man who actually says (out loud) "I'm a nice guy" to a woman he is considering is either an incipient sociopath on the make or someone excusing their social awkwardness by being overly solicitous and fawning.
Or maybe they're just boring and/or unattractive.

Sociopaths don't seem to cover for their sociopathy by proclaiming how nice they are. And many of them attract lots of women (a poster child is Ted Bundy, who did quite well before and after achieving notoriety, including having a gaggle of women giggling at his Florida murder trial).

I never got anywhere with Mrs. J. until I got my "Born To Raise Hell" tattoo and served a prison stretch for littering (and creating a nuisance).
  #57  
Old 05-24-2016, 05:09 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
Or maybe they're just boring and/or unattractive.
It's a complex situation.

On the one hand, you have the sort who are faking nice, but really just want some nookie. But, in many cases, I suppose the "nice" guys really are nice. Or, well, nice enough. They're just still completely unfuckable for completely unrelated reasons. There are people in the world, on the internet, and, to be blunt, in this thread (not mentioning names), that I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't even fuck with Donald Trump's dick, completely regardless of whether they're being nice or total assholes. Niceness doesn't even enter into it.

The problem is that these guys tend to suffer from any combination of related delusions. Let's see if we can sum this up:

1) They imagine that the fact that they're being nice means that the world owes them sex. This is the big one, I suppose.
2) They think that the fact that they're nice should somehow compensate for their otherwise horrid personalities and/or physiognomies.
3) For some reason, they decide that the problem must be the niceness itself, not said personalities and/or physiognomies.
4) The fault somehow lies with everyone else - the women who don't appreciate the niceness, and all other men, who are obviously assholes - instead of themselves.

The human capacity for obliviousness and self-delusion in this matter can be quite baffling and intriguing indeed.
  #58  
Old 05-24-2016, 08:39 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
I've tentatively identified as a "nice guy", quotation marks and all. As in, yeah, one of the guys who go on record complaining that women in general don't want "nice guys" and go out with the other kind of guys.

(It's complicated because it was never a bunch of Nice Guys™ who came forth and self-identified in this fashion; it was women, most specifically heartless bitches international, who wrote a screed about nice guys, which then went viral So for me to identify as a Nice Guy™ means I think I'm among the guys that the author of the heartless bitches piece was writing about).

Anyway, yeah.

Most women would like to be with male-bodied people who are men, who embody certain characteristics that we can designate as masculine, manly. Which isn't how I am at all. And for the record, I'm not angry and bitter about the majority of women having that preference. I just didn't like being left out in the cold, as it were.

There are several general categories of women who kind of like to be with guys like me, in other words good territory for me and guys like me to go a-flirting:

• masculine dykey females who (despite stereotypes to the contrary) aren't into other female-bodied people by preference, even if they generally tend to like women as people a lot.

• sexually active women who have been labeled sluts and similar terms, who have had sufficient time and opportunity to sow their wild oats and bang all the random cute guys and all that, who are kind of ready to be with someone who will love them and appreciate them and who don't have some kind of judgmental issue about who they've been with.

• feminist women who have a strong distaste for patriarchally scripted gender-specific courting and dating roles and would like to play with someone who doesn't do them either.


(cf — Chasing Amy, The Rose)
  #59  
Old 05-24-2016, 08:46 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
1) They imagine that the fact that they're being nice means that the world owes them sex. This is the big one, I suppose.
Some probably do. Some of us are a lot like nice girls who expect that if they are good company and are amenable to getting involved with a guy, there will indeed be guys who will want all that including sex, and those guys will make themselves available on that level, for them (the nice girls) to consider and choose from. Think about it.


Quote:
2) They think that the fact that they're nice should somehow compensate for their otherwise horrid personalities and/or physiognomies.
Yeesh. Not all of us have horrible personalities. Well, not unless your personality-expectation of guys is that they should be manly and stuff. We don't all look horribe either.

Quote:
3) For some reason, they decide that the problem must be the niceness itself, not said personalities and/or physiognomies.
See above.

Quote:
4) The fault somehow lies with everyone else - the women who don't appreciate the niceness, and all other men, who are obviously assholes - instead of themselves.
*Wince* Point taken. If I am right about "who we are", and that I am one of these nice guys and all that, ... it takes awhile to figure out that one is a peculiarly different person, and before understanding this there can be bitterness towards the normal folks, both the normal women (who don't appreciate nice guys) and the typical men (who aren't nice guys). I did. I admit it. I got over it.
  #60  
Old 05-24-2016, 08:52 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
Yeesh. Not all of us have horrible personalities. Well, not unless your personality-expectation of guys is that they should be manly and stuff. We don't all look horribe either.
Fair enough. I'm being a jerk, partly for attempted comedic effect. Point is: If you (general you, which at times includes me) can't get laid, being nice, of all things, may not be the number one reason. Or, indeed, a reason.

Last edited by Don't Panic; 05-24-2016 at 08:55 PM.
  #61  
Old 05-24-2016, 08:55 PM
P-man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 1,884
We had the long thread (which I started) about the problems genuinely nice, but socially inept, guys. My conclusion was that being a decent person doesn't preclude us finding female companionship, but it isn't enough. Even being decent and nice looking may not be enough. Some of us just never learned to flirt or read signals. I was lucky enough to meet someone who was both willing to make the first move and highly compatible with me. The bottom line is that being nice doesn't keep us from finding someone, but by itself it's not necessarily enough.
  #62  
Old 05-24-2016, 08:58 PM
Stringbean is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 2,829
There is one difference between a nice guy and a "nice guy":

The nice guy isn't afraid to make a move early on.
  #63  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:02 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
Fair enough. I'm being a jerk, partly for attempted comedic effect. Point is: If you (general you, which at times includes me) can't get laid, being nice, of all things, may not be the number one reason. Or, indeed, a reason.
Yeah, true enough. But I'm asking to you seriously consider the proposition that what we (in general -- "society") consider sexy in a male-bodied person is different from what we in general consider sexy in a female-bodied person. And that a lot of the characteristics bundled in the latter overlap with what might be described as "nice", and fewer of them overlapping with the former. Especially if some of what "niceness" means is lack of sexual pushiness, sexual aggression, attempting to do stuff to actually make sex happen. (And yeah, that's what the Nice Guys™ are often referring to when they talk about it and about girls/women preferring the other kind of guys. the Bad Boys™, if you will).

Which means in general we aren't so wrong about the observation. We do live in a world of gendered expectations.

The world expects it to work like this: boy meets girl, boy attempts to make sex happen if girl is cute, girl attempts to strike a balance between rejecting the guy outright and spreading her legs outright if boy is cute, slowing things down so as to allow proximity and time a chance to let feelings develop. So she can have boyfriend.

There's no point of entry in that scripted scenario for nice boys.
  #64  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:04 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stringbean View Post
There is one difference between a nice guy and a "nice guy":

The nice guy isn't afraid to make a move early on.
^^^^ yeah, that.

Or, to rephrase it with different value judgments, a no-quotation-marks nice guy is sexually forward and makes moves and stuff. Which is not an expectaton of nice GIRLS, you may notice.
  #65  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:05 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 9,525
Why do people over complicate women? Ask yourself what it is you want in a relationship and think about how you can provide what a woman might want in a relationship and act accordingly.

I knew what I didn't want and that was sufficient to narrow down what I did want. Showering and the ability to sincerely listen, and pecs that flex, did the rest. And what is a "nice" guy? Someone who is superficially courteous?

Last edited by octopus; 05-24-2016 at 09:10 PM.
  #66  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:19 PM
spamforbrains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,416
Quote:
And what is a "nice" guy? Someone who is superficially courteous?
Apparently it's short hand for sexually aggressive jerks with few social skills who don't think women are actual people and who go around blaming women for running away in terror from them. Kind of "players" but without any social skills to hide their misogyny.

Not REAL nice guys. Most women like real nice guys, even if they are slightly socially inept. Particularly if they have pecs.
  #67  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:28 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by spamforbrains View Post
Apparently it's short hand for sexually aggressive jerks with few social skills who don't think women are actual people and who go around blaming women for running away in terror from them. Kind of "players" but without any social skills to hide their misogyny.

Not REAL nice guys. Most women like real nice guys, even if they are slightly socially inept. Particularly if they have pecs.
My extrapolation from the behaviors and quotes attributed to Nice Guys is that they are NOT sexually aggressive guys until they get pissed off and start complaining that girls / women don't like nice guys. The complaining tends to coincide with some really klutzy and unsophisticated attempts at sexual aggression, combined with anger and bad attitude towards the women they're trying this behavior with.

Once again, the identification of Nice Guys wasn't from the inside (people creating a social movement of Nice Guys and explaining their agenda) but instead from the outside (women describing the phenomenon of Nice Guys as they experienced them). I think some extrapolation isn't unreasonable here.
  #68  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:37 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 22,879
I thought this was interesting on the subject of nice guys.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31...e-romanceless/

Quote:
I will have to use virginity statistics as a proxy for the harder-to-measure romancelessness statistics, but these are bad enough. In high school each extra IQ point above average increases chances of male virginity by about 3%. 35% of MIT grad students have never had sex, compared to only 20% of average nineteen year old men. Compared with virgins, men with more sexual experience are likely to drink more alcohol, attend church less, and have a criminal history. A Dr. Beaver (nominative determinism again!) was able to predict number of sexual partners pretty well using a scale with such delightful items as “have you been in a gang”, “have you used a weapon in a fight”, et cetera. An analysis of the psychometric Big Five consistently find that high levels of disagreeableness predict high sexual success in both men and women.

If you’re smart, don’t drink much, stay out of fights, display a friendly personality, and have no criminal history – then you are the population most at risk of being miserable and alone. “At risk” doesn’t mean “for sure”, any more than every single smoker gets lung cancer and every single nonsmoker lives to a ripe old age – but your odds get worse. In other words, everything that “nice guys” complain of is pretty darned accurate. But that shouldn’t be too hard to guess…
  #69  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:39 PM
spamforbrains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,416
Quote:
Once again, the identification of Nice Guys wasn't from the inside (people creating a social movement of Nice Guys and explaining their agenda) but instead from the outside (women describing the phenomenon of Nice Guys as they experienced them).
I believe you have that backwards. These men self-described themselves as "Nice guys." I don't think very many women are aware of this label. I personally had never heard of it before reading this board. Women just call these guys "jerks."

And they are sexually aggressive- they think if they do x, y, and z the woman OWES them sex. That is a lot more sexually aggressive than some guy making a pass and getting turned down and calmly accepting being turned down. Women don't mind guys that ask and then accept rejection-that's not aggressive, it's just communication. It's the guys who EXPECT it or who won't take NO for an answer that are being aggressive.
  #70  
Old 05-24-2016, 09:49 PM
Fuzzy Dunlop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
My extrapolation from the behaviors and quotes attributed to Nice Guys is that they are NOT sexually aggressive guys until they get pissed off and start complaining that girls / women don't like nice guys. The complaining tends to coincide with some really klutzy and unsophisticated attempts at sexual aggression, combined with anger and bad attitude towards the women they're trying this behavior with.

Once again, the identification of Nice Guys wasn't from the inside (people creating a social movement of Nice Guys and explaining their agenda) but instead from the outside (women describing the phenomenon of Nice Guys as they experienced them). I think some extrapolation isn't unreasonable here.
They're sexually passive-aggressive. They're bitter and resentful of women for not having sex with them, even though ironically if they were just more direct and assertive they'd have a lot more romantic success.

I've always felt a hallmark of "nice guy" syndrome is clinging to a particular woman after there's long since clearly been no chance of anything romantic happening. That's where the aggressive resentment comes in. Romantic rejection is a normal part of life for people, but most of us move on to another partner instead of being angry that any given one won't fuck us.
  #71  
Old 05-24-2016, 10:01 PM
Fuzzy Dunlop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
Most women would like to be with male-bodied people who are men, who embody certain characteristics that we can designate as masculine, manly. Which isn't how I am at all. And for the record, I'm not angry and bitter about the majority of women having that preference. I just didn't like being left out in the cold, as it were.
In reality, most people appeal to a pretty limited range of their preferred sex. I'm not saying you're wrong for looking at yourself and saying you're not most women's type. But if you think most men are widely appealing to most women, I'd say you're mistaken. It's not a binary your type vs. all other men thing. It's your type vs. a whole bunch of different types of men.
  #72  
Old 05-24-2016, 10:07 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
(It's complicated because it was never a bunch of Nice Guys™ who came forth and self-identified in this fashion; it was women, most specifically heartless bitches international, who wrote a screed about nice guys, which then went viral So for me to identify as a Nice Guy™ means I think I'm among the guys that the author of the heartless bitches piece was writing about).
I first heard about 'Nice Guys never get the girl' growing up in the 80s, and went through a stretch of identifying as one before coming to my senses in the early 90s. The term was circulating at least a decade before there even was a web, and at least two decades before the website. The concept is much older than you think, and while it probably gained popularity from the site, it's NOT a recent invention. And yes, 'nice guys' self-identify, HBI didn't come up with the term or even attach it to people.

Also, have you read the site in question? Because they make it really clear that the people they're talking about are not actually nice at all, and I don't understand why anyone would want to self-identify as the whiny, sexist, manipulative, unkind person they describe.

Quote:
• feminist women who have a strong distaste for patriarchally scripted gender-specific courting and dating roles and would like to play with someone who doesn't do them either.
FYI Feminist women don't generally like the kind of guys identified as "nice guys" on the HBI site, because such guys are extremely sexist. I think you have a disconnect going on somewhere.
  #73  
Old 05-24-2016, 10:08 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by spamforbrains View Post
I believe you have that backwards. These men self-described themselves as "Nice guys." I don't think very many women are aware of this label. I personally had never heard of it before reading this board. Women just call these guys "jerks."

And they are sexually aggressive- they think if they do x, y, and z the woman OWES them sex. That is a lot more sexually aggressive than some guy making a pass and getting turned down and calmly accepting being turned down. Women don't mind guys that ask and then accept rejection-that's not aggressive, it's just communication. It's the guys who EXPECT it or who won't take NO for an answer that are being aggressive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop View Post
They're sexually passive-aggressive. They're bitter and resentful of women for not having sex with them, even though ironically if they were just more direct and assertive they'd have a lot more romantic success.

I've always felt a hallmark of "nice guy" syndrome is clinging to a particular woman after there's long since clearly been no chance of anything romantic happening. That's where the aggressive resentment comes in. Romantic rejection is a normal part of life for people, but most of us move on to another partner instead of being angry that any given one won't fuck us.


This is all a lot like feminist women saying "When you folks go on and on about 'bitches', I'm pretty sure you're talking about people like me". I mean, I'm doing that. I'm recognizing myself (in a distorted way, but it fits) in the core elements of the description.

Of course people can deny the identification. "Oh no, I actually did NOT mean willful unapologetic assertive women who don't take shit. I specifically meant the type of women who deliberately hurt people or who deliberately thwart other people because they enjoy doing so". Or "What I mean by Nice Guys is not-very-nice guys who say they're nice but act like sex is their just reward for god-only-knows-what".

We're all playing with something akin to an archetype here.

I can't prove you really mean guys like me any more than I can prove that you're seizing on the worst negative characteristics that we sometimes exhibit and refuse to see anything valid in the attitudes and statements that are attributed to us.


But fuckit. You're talking about me. You are. The stereotype you're pushing around is a negative caricature of me.
  #74  
Old 05-24-2016, 10:20 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,215
Let's back out and look at the issue from more of a macro perspective - that is, let's examine the "Nice guys finish last" issue not merely from a romance/relationship angle:


I once read an anecdote about how Prince Harry, during childhood, once finished last in a "race" with other children - the race was that the children were to be blindfolded and make their way through a maze/obstacle course. The reason that Prince Harry finished last was because he was the only blindfolded child who didn't cheat by peeking.


There is also the well-documented phenomenon about how, in the office workplace, it is often people who step up and boldly promote themselves - even if a bit arrogantly or in a self-centered way - who will rise up the career ladder. The dutiful, quiet, humble, type who sits in the cubicle, doesn't make themselves heard, and doesn't promote themselves, isn't likely to become a CEO or even rise up far much on the company ladder.


In other words, there is a certain logic to the notion that "Nice guys finish last." If anything, circumstances logically make it so that nice guys will finish last. Someone who doesn't cheat by peeking while blindfolded will, obviously, progress through an obstacle maze slower than someone who does, to use the Prince Harry example.
  #75  
Old 05-24-2016, 10:30 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop View Post
They're sexually passive-aggressive.
Hah! I was just about to post that. Spot on, I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
But I'm asking to you seriously consider the proposition that what we (in general -- "society") consider sexy in a male-bodied person is different from what we in general consider sexy in a female-bodied person. And that a lot of the characteristics bundled in the latter overlap with what might be described as "nice", and fewer of them overlapping with the former. Especially if some of what "niceness" means is lack of sexual pushiness, sexual aggression, attempting to do stuff to actually make sex happen. (And yeah, that's what the Nice Guys™ are often referring to when they talk about it and about girls/women preferring the other kind of guys. the Bad Boys™, if you will).

Which means in general we aren't so wrong about the observation. We do live in a world of gendered expectations.

The world expects it to work like this: boy meets girl, boy attempts to make sex happen if girl is cute, girl attempts to strike a balance between rejecting the guy outright and spreading her legs outright if boy is cute, slowing things down so as to allow proximity and time a chance to let feelings develop. So she can have boyfriend.

There's no point of entry in that scripted scenario for nice boys.
Look, sure. Problem is, what you're doing here is going about the whole thing bass-ackwards, if meeting a nice girls to ride bikes with is what you want. I won't even respond to your argument, I'll just cut to the chase instead, because I think I know what's actually going on: You're trying to logic women into having sex with you, and when the logic doesn't produce results, you're being all mopey about it.

That whole approach needs nuking from orbit. I mean, wholesale. Attraction works on the caveman level. This stuff is hard coded. It does not benefit from overthinking. There's nothing less attractive than presenting someone with a theory and a power point presentation detailing why they should date you.

Just... be a person, in the world. Yes, maybe we do need to man up a bit, and be a bit more assertive and up front. Sucks to be us, I guess. In an ideal universe, we shouldn't have to. But we're probably stuck with this one.
  #76  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:05 PM
Moriarty's Avatar
Moriarty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 3,122
I think that there is another nice guy besides the "I do nice things and therefore deserve sex" nice guy. There is also the guy who thinks that being polite and respectful means not making sexual advances or being flirtatious.

Absolutely, a man should respect a woman's right to say no. But it took me a while to understand that many women on a date do want the man to try something.

And a lot of women do like it when a man tries to charm them. The key is to respect their right to disengage from the conversation or the situation, not to avoid pursuing them altogether.

But some guys don't get that. They give off a disinterested vibe, meeting smiles with a blank look, and women lose interest and move on. Or, at least, that was me for a long time, well before I stumbled into a happy marriage.
  #77  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:21 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
Problem is, what you're doing here is going about the whole thing bass-ackwards, if meeting a nice girls to ride bikes with is what you want. I won't even respond to your argument, I'll just cut to the chase instead, because I think I know what's actually going on: You're trying to logic women into having sex with you
No.

I am not and historically have not tended to exert any more effort to get women to have sex with me than I perceived them to be expending in an attempt to get me to have sex with them. I wanted it to be equal in that regard. Part snobbery and part hatred for the way it feels to be told I'm making a sexual nuisance of myself, but whatever you wanna call it, that's how it is and has been.

Like other Nice Boys™ there came a time in my life when I observed that Nice GIRLS were choosing from among boys who were expending more effort than they were to make sex happen; the nice girls were negotiating with those boys to get some sense that the boys really liked them as people, and weren't just approaching them for sex, but it was always starting with the boy-person making some expression of sexual interest.


Quote:
That whole approach needs nuking from orbit. I mean, wholesale. Attraction works on the caveman level. This stuff is hard coded.
I accept that. But I'm one of the outlying points. Not all male-bodied people are distributed in the exact same space. Nor are all the female-bodied people. Instead it is like a scatter-plot. The boys IN GENERAL are more of what we call "masculine" and that includes a certain tendency towards taking sexual initiative. The girls IN GENERAL are in a direction we call "feminine". I'm one of the outlying points. I'm not a caveman. I'm more of a cavewoman, albeit a male-bodied cavewoman.


Quote:
It does not benefit from overthinking. There's nothing less attractive than presenting someone with a theory and a power point presentation detailing why they should date you.
You don't have to approach girls with a powerpoint presentation because you, and they, can go with the socially endorsed gendered expectations and, by doing so, y'all don't need to have a discussion beforehand.

I do. So do some of the female-bodied people who inhabit this world.

Yes I went through a bitter and vindictive phase, I admit it, I did. The only thing I can say in my defense THERE is that in my case it did not last long. But yeah.

On the other SIDE of that anger I discovered how to find women who ALSO aren't going to hook up in any meaningful way without having exactly the kind of intellectual discussion you dismiss as unnecessary and counterproductive.

Radical feminists amongst them.


Quote:
Just... be a person, in the world. Yes, maybe we do need to man up a bit
Nope. Thank god. I'm not a man. Never wanted to be one. I think I'd rather be dead.

Quote:
and be a bit more assertive and up front
Never more than 49% of the way across the sexual-initiative bridge for me. I only play with certain women. I'm not attractive in a meangful significant way to most of the others. Good thing it's a diverse world and that I figured out what I needed to look for.

Quote:
Sucks to be us, I guess. In an ideal universe, we shouldn't have to. But we're probably stuck with this one.
Speak for yourself

Last edited by AHunter3; 05-24-2016 at 11:24 PM.
  #78  
Old 05-25-2016, 07:05 AM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
I am not and historically have not tended to exert any more effort to get women to have sex with me than I perceived them to be expending in an attempt to get me to have sex with them. I wanted it to be equal in that regard. Part snobbery and part hatred for the way it feels to be told I'm making a sexual nuisance of myself, but whatever you wanna call it, that's how it is and has been.
Look... oh, how can I explain this? I need to sort out my thoughts a bit. Bear with me for a moment.

First of all, I'm happy for you if you're doing good. Maybe you, in particular, don't need to hear any of this. If you've found something that works for you. great. But I just want to use your post to illustrate a general point.

Right there, by saying what you're saying in your post, you're coming across as sexually passive-aggressive.

You say that you don't want to be a nuisance, but just by bringing up the subject, you're expressing interest in sexual matters. The end result is that you risk sounding like a stereotypical Jewish mother. "Oh no, I don't want to be a burden. You guys all go out on dates. I'll just sit here in the dark. Don't worry about me." It's like you're trying to guilt trip women into wanting to have sex with you. It's not a great look.

Also: If you're being too non-assertive, but still giving off a vaguely sexual vibe, it's creepy. You go out of your way to not say or do anything explicitly sexual, but then, in a backwards sort of way, consciously or sub-consciously, expect women to respond sexually to that. So you go around waiting for that response, and get ever more frustrated when you don't get it.

Like it or not: That right there is pretending to be nice, to get nookie. People do pick up on it. I know you're maintaining plausible deniability, you can say no, I'm just sitting here minding my own business, but people do pick up on it.

A major light bulb moment for me was when I realized just how downright threatening such an over-the-top non-threatening approach can come across, paradoxical as it sounds. There are women out there who probably still look over their shoulder, avoid dark parking lots, and have invested in pepper spray just in case, after meeting me. Not because I made any kind of explicit sexual advance towards them, but because I was being creepy. I was nice, polite, and maintaining plausible deniability at all times. But there was something going on. I was always sending out extremely vague and rather bizarre sexual signals. People do pick up on it.

The problem is that there's a dishonesty about it. I'm not being nice just because I'm nice. There's some hidden agenda. It's not enough for them to confront me about it. And if they were to confront me, I would of course deny everything. But there is something there. And women can't read my mind. They notice the dishonesty, but they don't know how deep it goes, or what lurks in those depths.

I know that I'm no threat to them. I'm a nice boy. I just want to be their friend and maybe engage in some horizontal tango on occasion. That's a fairly normal set of wants, right? If they don't happen to be into that, I'm no danger. I won't sexually assault them or anything. Heck, I couldn't sexually assault a fly. Never have, never will. But they don't know that. For all they know, I might be a serial killer.

Frankly, someone who is bluntly sexually aggressive is probably preferable to that for most women, by most metrics, even if they don't like that person. Well, as long as said person backs off at a reasonable point after being rejected. If there's an angry rhino in the room, at least you know what you're dealing with. It won't sneak up on you. You can take out your gun and shoot it in your head. There's something respectable about that. But if there's some kind of slithery creature hiding in your shoe, that's different. The creature may know that it's actually a kitten. But the owner of the shoe can't tell. It could be a scorpion.

Last edited by Don't Panic; 05-25-2016 at 07:09 AM.
  #79  
Old 05-25-2016, 07:47 AM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Actually, a couple more things:

I think it's incredibly difficult for non-assertive "nice guys" to realize that they can be anything other than victims. Most likely, they've felt like the butt of the joke that is society and the world for their entire lives. Maybe they were bullied in school. Hence, everyone else must be to blame. All women, and all other men.

You guys are calling it misogyny, but I don't actually think it's that at all: It's general misanthropy. It's the ingrained attitude that other people, normal people, are the bad guys, the bullies, by default. It comes from a lifetime of being on the defensive.

For a "nice guy", to come to the understanding that they themselves are the bad guys in the situation, that they're the ones (passive-aggressively) doing the bullying this time, is a major leap. When you've always felt like a doormat, it's very hard to see that you can come across as threatening, aggressive (or, again, passive-aggressive), or predatory.

And it's so unbelievably frustrating. How can it be my fault?! Not only are everyone either ignoring me or walking all over me, but now you're saying it's all my fault?! Man, it's tough. And it feels unfair. Because the only thing that "nice guys" really want is to be loved. They just really, really want to be loved.

But, yeah, "nice guys": It is your fault. You're the problem here. You, the weak, spineless one, is being predatory. The other people, the strong, confident ones, are your victims. Take a long, good look in that mirror. Think about it for a while. It's a terrible thing, I know. But you need to face it.

How can this be possible? The thing is: You're not actually weak. That's the misunderstanding. When relating to women, you, just by being a man, is in the stronger position. At least to some extent, in a certain way. Or, even if it's not factually true that you are, there is at least something deep and ingrained in the lizard brains of both men and women still whispering it.

And because of that, you're a potential threat. Your first job is to diffuse that threat. It's not actually true that you have to be "protective" for women to like you, or at least not to any extreme degree, beyond normal human levels. But you do have to prove that you're safe. "Nice guys" are often doing the opposite.

So, yeah, maybe that's an insight for you: You're not actually weak. Now take that, stuff it in your pipe, and see if you can do something with it.
  #80  
Old 05-25-2016, 08:01 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop
They're sexually passive-aggressive.
This +1. Nicely put.

Regards,
Shodan
  #81  
Old 05-25-2016, 08:16 AM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
BTW, AHunter3, another thing:

This:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
females
and this:
Quote:
female-bodied people
are not examples of well-chosen words. You're objectifying. Yes, I know you're also doing it with men, so it's an equal opportunity thing. But people don't notice it when you do it with men. They do notice it like all get out when you do it with women.

Women are just people, dude. (So are men, BTW.) "Females" is a word that sets off all kinds of alarm bells. Mine sure went off. You're risking some very heavy inadvertent well-poisoning here.

Last edited by Don't Panic; 05-25-2016 at 08:17 AM.
  #82  
Old 05-25-2016, 08:41 AM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
And...
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
Radical feminists amongst them.
Look, I'm not entirely sure what I'm trying to say here. But I can't help feeling that you're missing some point. There's no particular reason to think that radical feminists prefer weak men. It's just... it's just not what feminism is about. It doesn't work that way. And I can't help feeling like you're insulting feminists by putting it like that.

Feminists are just people. People are just people. You seem to be categorizing, classifying, applying logic, being all Spock-like about it. But people are just people.

Last edited by Don't Panic; 05-25-2016 at 08:41 AM.
  #83  
Old 05-25-2016, 08:57 AM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
Yes, I know you're also doing it with men, so it's an equal opportunity thing. But people don't notice it when you do it with men. They do notice it like all get out when you do it with women.

Women are just people, dude. (So are men, BTW.) "Females" is a word that sets off all kinds of alarm bells. Mine sure went off.
Last week is one of the rare times I heard an actual example of annoying mainstream political correctness. NPR was comparing men and women for some reason in a job, let's say engineers, and said "woman [engineers] did so-and-so", which first of all is annoying because most other examples of nouns-as-adjectives when applied to groups are seen as essentializing if not outright offensive, but that would be okay if they were consistent. But the piece went on to compare them to "male [engineers]" .

A bizarre overreaction to the use of "females" as a noun, which is indeed annoying in itself.
  #84  
Old 05-25-2016, 09:15 AM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludovic View Post
A bizarre overreaction to the use of "females" as a noun, which is indeed annoying in itself.
Not sure what your criticism is here. I was just pointing out the reaction one might get when using the word as the above poster did. I'm perfectly happy to give said poster the benefit of the doubt concerning his intended meaning. I'm just saying it's a red flag. And if you're walking around carrying a red flag, there might be angry bulls in your near future.

If someone wants to make it their mission to reform the noun "females", be my guest. If they also, say, want to walk around with a sign saying "misogynist" on their foreheads, because they like the look of the sign and the nice font it's written in, that's their call, too. But they'll probably draw some funny looks.

If someone was casually throwing around racial slurs, I would probably alert them to that, too.
  #85  
Old 05-25-2016, 10:10 AM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
*shrugs* You've said extremely little that I'm in agreement with, Martian Bigfoot. I don't feel like doing one of those line by line thingies, so instead I'll confine my replies to things you've said that I don't entirely disagree with —

Quote:
general misanthropy. It's the ingrained attitude that other people, normal people, are the bad guys, the bullies, by default.

I am guilty of a kind of haughty smug superior attitude towards "normal" males, yeah. I understand it in myself, it's partly compensation for everyone's silly assumption that I'm jealous of them, wish to be like them but in some peculiar fashion am unable to manifest as they do. It's also partly a kind of chauvinism: "Eww, why would you want to be like that? I'm not like that! You are doing it all wrong!"

Anyway... I don't think I'm an objectively better person than conventional males. Not when I stop to think about it and stuff. I may even have some form of the passive-aggressive nastiness you're accusing me of, although I don't think it makes me worse than other people, just a different specific form of selfishness.


Oh, I am going to reply to one other thing even though it's part of the total disagreement stuff: I use "male" and "female" to refer to people (either in the aggregate or singularly) I am identifying by their sexual morphology. It's different from gender. Gender is identity. This is sex. Sometimes I am making generalizations about people who are peniled, and who have the other physiological accoutrements associated with penis-ownership; I use female reciprocally to refer to people who are envaginated and have the other associated morphology that tends to accompany possession of a vagina. If I had meant "women" I would have said "women. If I had meant "men" I would have said "men". The generalizations I was making were at the sex, not gender level; I was sort of saying that male-bodied people tend to be men and boys, breaking down what "men" and "boys" actually means in personality and behavioral terms.

There's not a damn thing wrong with using those terms. I shall continue to do so, and I shall laugh at anyone who deigns to find them offensive.

Last edited by AHunter3; 05-25-2016 at 10:11 AM.
  #86  
Old 05-25-2016, 11:24 AM
Pábitel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Hardwick, VT
Posts: 1,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCitizen View Post
I guess dating for Autistic people is another topic. I do not date. I do not drive.
Hey, HFA here and I celebrate my 25th Wedding anniversary next year.
I've also never been on a date in my life.
I'm also a nice guy.
It can happen.
  #87  
Old 05-25-2016, 11:30 AM
Pábitel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Hardwick, VT
Posts: 1,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop View Post
A lot of young people of both sexes are pretty terrible at picking good partners.
I've brought this up before. There have been studies done where they ask women one of two questions. One is, "What do you look for in someone you would want to date." The other is, "What traits are important for you in a life partner." When the data is compiled there is not a single item that appears in the top 10 of both lists. Then people wonder why they never date anyone that they end up wanting to marry.

I don't remember what the age range of the respondents was, so this may indeed be something we grow out of.
  #88  
Old 05-25-2016, 11:35 AM
Fuzzy Dunlop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Let's back out and look at the issue from more of a macro perspective - that is, let's examine the "Nice guys finish last" issue not merely from a romance/relationship angle:


I once read an anecdote about how Prince Harry, during childhood, once finished last in a "race" with other children - the race was that the children were to be blindfolded and make their way through a maze/obstacle course. The reason that Prince Harry finished last was because he was the only blindfolded child who didn't cheat by peeking.


There is also the well-documented phenomenon about how, in the office workplace, it is often people who step up and boldly promote themselves - even if a bit arrogantly or in a self-centered way - who will rise up the career ladder. The dutiful, quiet, humble, type who sits in the cubicle, doesn't make themselves heard, and doesn't promote themselves, isn't likely to become a CEO or even rise up far much on the company ladder.


In other words, there is a certain logic to the notion that "Nice guys finish last." If anything, circumstances logically make it so that nice guys will finish last. Someone who doesn't cheat by peeking while blindfolded will, obviously, progress through an obstacle maze slower than someone who does, to use the Prince Harry example.
I often gravitate to these types of threads precisely because I have always been the type of person you're describing, and I feel the need to jump in and point out it's never been the hindrance a lot of people (men) insist it is.

I recall around the time I hit 30 being really proud to realize I've been living my life the way that comes naturally to me long enough that I could officially declare it a successful life strategy.

That is, I certainly got off to a good start, but at 22 or 25, who is to say it wasn't just luck and being honest, humble, generous and kind to others was holding me back.

After a dozen years of adulthood, to say nothing of my childhood, this strategy has been wildly successful and I felt confident sticking with it.

I can certainly see the appeal of blaming one's failures and setbacks on being just too good of a person, but I'm sorry to say it's definitely not in the case in my life.
  #89  
Old 05-25-2016, 12:05 PM
Pábitel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Hardwick, VT
Posts: 1,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
You guys are calling it misogyny, but I don't actually think it's that at all: It's general misanthropy. It's the ingrained attitude that other people, normal people, are the bad guys, the bullies, by default. It comes from a lifetime of being on the defensive.
I can relate to this. I guess I would self identify as a misanthrope because it has been my experience that, at least our society, and perhaps humanity in general, only tolerates a certain deviation from the norm. And it's weird because there is a sort of uncanny valley effect going on here. There is a certain distance an individual can deviate from normal and it's OK. But if you cross that line then watch out. But there is another line that if you cross that you are OK again. The truly eccentric get a pass and the "normal" folk get a pass, but if you fall in that gap in between then you are on your own.
Unfortunately I have inhabited that gap most of my life. I've gotten used to the fact that I make others uncomfortable and find it best to mostly just keep to myself because of that. There are a few individuals who either also inhabit the gap or who for whatever reason have chosen to associate with me regardless, but humanity and I are largely in mutual agreement that we don't like each other.
  #90  
Old 05-25-2016, 12:21 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
That's a very interesting way of thinking about it, Pábitel. Yeah, now that I think of it, I've seen that "uncanny valley" reaction towards some people where more unusual people get a pass. Now I'm going to have to think back on situations to see where else this may have applicability.
  #91  
Old 05-25-2016, 12:28 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pábitel View Post
And it's weird because there is a sort of uncanny valley effect going on here. There is a certain distance an individual can deviate from normal and it's OK. But if you cross that line then watch out. But there is another line that if you cross that you are OK again. The truly eccentric get a pass and the "normal" folk get a pass, but if you fall in that gap in between then you are on your own.
Huh. That's actually a very good observation.

So, pro tip to people who fail at being normal: Stop trying, and just go full out weirdo. Well, if that's actually easier to do. Maybe it isn't.
  #92  
Old 05-25-2016, 12:39 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 9,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
Actually, a couple more things:

I think it's incredibly difficult for non-assertive "nice guys" to realize that they can be anything other than victims. Most likely, they've felt like the butt of the joke that is society and the world for their entire lives. Maybe they were bullied in school. Hence, everyone else must be to blame. All women, and all other men.

You guys are calling it misogyny, but I don't actually think it's that at all: It's general misanthropy. It's the ingrained attitude that other people, normal people, are the bad guys, the bullies, by default. It comes from a lifetime of being on the defensive.

For a "nice guy", to come to the understanding that they themselves are the bad guys in the situation, that they're the ones (passive-aggressively) doing the bullying this time, is a major leap. When you've always felt like a doormat, it's very hard to see that you can come across as threatening, aggressive (or, again, passive-aggressive), or predatory.

And it's so unbelievably frustrating. How can it be my fault?! Not only are everyone either ignoring me or walking all over me, but now you're saying it's all my fault?! Man, it's tough. And it feels unfair. Because the only thing that "nice guys" really want is to be loved. They just really, really want to be loved.

But, yeah, "nice guys": It is your fault. You're the problem here. You, the weak, spineless one, is being predatory. The other people, the strong, confident ones, are your victims. Take a long, good look in that mirror. Think about it for a while. It's a terrible thing, I know. But you need to face it.

How can this be possible? The thing is: You're not actually weak. That's the misunderstanding. When relating to women, you, just by being a man, is in the stronger position. At least to some extent, in a certain way. Or, even if it's not factually true that you are, there is at least something deep and ingrained in the lizard brains of both men and women still whispering it.

And because of that, you're a potential threat. Your first job is to diffuse that threat. It's not actually true that you have to be "protective" for women to like you, or at least not to any extreme degree, beyond normal human levels. But you do have to prove that you're safe. "Nice guys" are often doing the opposite.

So, yeah, maybe that's an insight for you: You're not actually weak. Now take that, stuff it in your pipe, and see if you can do something with it.
Hmm. This is a bit combative in my opinion. I don't see anything wrong with people being confused by adopting traits that those they desire claim they desire and then getting terrible responses for their efforts. No, I am not saying people are entitled to other people but if they are conditioned to believe that by acting like x,y,z that the chances of mate selection increase and than they act x,y,z with no chance it can be frustrating to those who aren't wise to human nature.

AHunter3, the great secret to life is that people aren't honest with what they want even with themselves. People want to think highly about themselves and will verbally or internally lie to themselves about what they really want or desire. Now, of course that's not all people at all times.

For myself when I was looking for a long term partner and not just sexual interaction I had a set of criteria I wanted that prospective partner to follow. All the criteria were signals that the person was fit for me for a long term relationship. My wife and I have now been together over 20 years. So I think it worked. The criteria I was looking for were intellectual, disciplined, pretty, loyal, someone who wasn't partying or drinking, fiscally responsible, had a picture of St. Reagan on her wall, played Dungeons & Dragons etc. That excludes a lot of people. Sadly, that excludes a lot of nice girls. That excludes all guys.

Now I was honest with myself. I really did value those traits and I really wanted those traits. I valued stability very highly because I came from a rough childhood that had very little stability. I wanted stability and I wanted to provide stability for my family because I know how bad it is to be without it. I wasn't just saying these things in order to convince myself I was somehow more virtuous than those who weren't saying those things.

Now my traits are not perfect. I can be aggressive. I can be nasty. I'm big and loud. I don't tolerate attempts to be bullied and I've been in many fights. Even as an adult. I believe in two tits for every tat to discourage future tats. In some ways that's attractive to women. Not all women. Some women. It's weird but understandable when you look at life as if we live in a jungle. Which we do. It's just a transformed jungle.

Anyways, enough about me. What do you want? Write it down. Now, who are you? Not who you are to get something but who are you? Write that down.

There will be a set of women who want what you are. There will be a set of women who have what you want. What's the intersection of those sets? How do you identify those women to see that there may be a realistic chance of a relationship? MY strategy was to identify activities that signaled traits with a strong correlation.

Of course this was all 20+ years ago. So this may be fossilized and irrelevant.

It is puzzling how this would be today if I had to find someone new. I'd probably have to watch one of those pick up artists shows and work on my peacocking. Get me a fancy hat, some wild pants, some red and green shoes, maybe a white van. I wonder if all that would work. I probably would have to go to Nevada and pay for companionship

Last edited by octopus; 05-25-2016 at 12:40 PM.
  #93  
Old 05-25-2016, 12:40 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 9,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
That's a very interesting way of thinking about it, Pábitel. Yeah, now that I think of it, I've seen that "uncanny valley" reaction towards some people where more unusual people get a pass. Now I'm going to have to think back on situations to see where else this may have applicability.
I think it comes down to the appearance of total cluelessness vs choosing to be different.
  #94  
Old 05-25-2016, 01:05 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
I don't see anything wrong with people being confused by adopting traits that those they desire claim they desire and then getting terrible responses for their efforts.
Of course. I agree. There's nothing wrong with that. But "nice" guys aren't doing that. Or at least not beyond the first five minutes. After that, something entirely different is going on.

'Cause "nice" guys are quickly enough clued in to the fact that assertive men get the ladies. There's no actual confusion about that. The "nice" guys have made that observation time and again. That's their main complaint. They then classify these men as assholes, and then blame the women for wanting assholes. At that point, they are no longer being "nice" in the belief that it actually makes them desirable. They're being "nice" in the stubborn insistence that it should make them desirable.

If you hear "nice" guys continually complaining that women say that they like nice, but actually go for assholes, then they are either a) shifting blame to the women and playing the victim, which apparently is more interesting than getting actual results, to some people, for some reason, or b) attempting to logic women into bed. "Aha! You say you like nice guys. I'm nice. Ergo, you must go to bed with me in order to maintain logical consistency. You don't want to be logically inconsistent, do you? Here, have a look at this power point presentation where I explain this in detail."
  #95  
Old 05-25-2016, 01:11 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 20,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
... "nice" guys are quickly enough clued in to the fact that assertive men get the ladies. There's no actual confusion about that.
Not really— you're just not aware of our existence until that point in our lives where we decide that it isn't our imagination, isn't just how lots of people say it is, but actually does constitute a trend.
  #96  
Old 05-25-2016, 01:33 PM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
By "accept" do you mean "fuck"? Yeah, it happens. Not to me, but I've heard stories.
  #97  
Old 05-25-2016, 04:16 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 9,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
Of course. I agree. There's nothing wrong with that. But "nice" guys aren't doing that. Or at least not beyond the first five minutes. After that, something entirely different is going on.

'Cause "nice" guys are quickly enough clued in to the fact that assertive men get the ladies. There's no actual confusion about that. The "nice" guys have made that observation time and again. That's their main complaint. They then classify these men as assholes, and then blame the women for wanting assholes. At that point, they are no longer being "nice" in the belief that it actually makes them desirable. They're being "nice" in the stubborn insistence that it should make them desirable.

If you hear "nice" guys continually complaining that women say that they like nice, but actually go for assholes, then they are either a) shifting blame to the women and playing the victim, which apparently is more interesting than getting actual results, to some people, for some reason, or b) attempting to logic women into bed. "Aha! You say you like nice guys. I'm nice. Ergo, you must go to bed with me in order to maintain logical consistency. You don't want to be logically inconsistent, do you? Here, have a look at this power point presentation where I explain this in detail."
Yeah I can see that. And it also may be that "nice" guys aren't interested in the kind of women who are interested in "nice" guys. There are a lot of lonely women who are ignored why don't the nice guys ask one of these ladies out?
  #98  
Old 05-25-2016, 04:30 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
And it also may be that "nice" guys aren't interested in the kind of women who are interested in "nice" guys.
Look, no women are interested in "nice" guys (or, well, maybe there are some extreme masochists out there, the Bell is curve is pretty wide, but not beyond that). If a woman hooks up with a "nice" guy, she either doesn't notice that he's a "nice" guy, or he isn't operating as a "nice" guy at the time. It's not necessarily a 24/7 type of behavior. People are multifaceted.

But, again, women are interested in actually nice guys.
  #99  
Old 05-25-2016, 05:24 PM
Don't Panic's Avatar
Don't Panic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,098
BTW, this thing I posted earlier:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian Bigfoot View Post
It's not actually true that you have to be "protective" for women to like you, or at least not to any extreme degree, beyond normal human levels. But you do have to prove that you're safe. "Nice guys" are often doing the opposite.
is also why all complaints from "nice" guys about how awful and cruel women can be sounds like so much whiny garbage. How does the saying go? Men worry about being rejected. Women worry about being murdered. And it's true.

When it comes to the capacity for women to hurt men versus vice versa, there is just no damned contest. You were rejected? You had your heart broken? Aw, poor you, Watch me play the world's smallest violin. Were you raped, killed and left in an alley? Didn't think so.

Most men are harmless. But the slightest hint that you might not be will scare women off. For good reasons.
  #100  
Old 05-25-2016, 05:55 PM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 32,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
Why do people over complicate women?
In my experience, it's impossible to do this.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017