Not even needy, pathetic, constantly feels sorry for himself ME would consider it a smooth move to complain to the Future Mrs zone about my failed relationships and my problems with women. That’s a tactical error of the first order. Don’t TELL the woman what a loser you are. Maybe you’ll “get something” before she figures it out on her own. 
“Nice guy” now seems to mean “Passive-aggressive guy” - someone who doesn’t take risks or responsibility and then blames others for the fact that he’s alone.
Oops - meant to tell a boring personal anecdote about a “nice guy” I dated a couple of times in Calgary - relating to an earlier post about “nice” equalling “cheap”.
We were set up by a friend - “Oh, so&so is SOOO nice - you’ll just love him!”. He picked me up for a dinner date. At the last minute I stuffed some cash in my pocket just in case I needed a taxi home.
I wasn’t super-hungry so I just ordered from the appetizer menu (we were at a pub-style place). When the bill came, he looked at it very carefully and I actually thought for a minute he was going to pull out a calculator. He paid for EXACTLY what he had ordered, plus EXACTLY 10% ( :wally ) of his share, for the tip.
I threw down $20 for my $7 wings and my $2 iced tea. Then I stood up and put on my coat. He said “don’t you want to wait for your change?” I said “no, that’s okay, it’s for my food plus a tip.” He was shocked - “But that’s almost a $10 tip!!!” I said “Well, when you add the tips together, it works out just fine.”
When we got back into his truck, he asked for a kiss - I could NOT believe it. I said “maybe later” because I was almost speechless at his nerve, and that was the best I could come up with.
Told my friend about it afterwards - she said to give him another chance, maybe he was just really broke that day. So he invited me over to his place for dinner - asked if I could bring anything, he said “No, I have it covered”.
He served me hot dogs and potato chips.
I did not see him again. The guy had no class. If he didn’t have money for a proper meal, he could’ve just invited me over for a drink, or to watch a movie or something - or when I asked about dinner, he could’ve told me that a salad would be great.
This guy was 27 or 28 IIRC. Definitely old enough to know better.
Yes, but “Nice Guy” is the label they give themselves: “I don’t understand why she blew me off- I’m a nice guy.”
“She’s dating another asshole- I guess girls just don’t like nice guys.”
It’s their motto, their justification, and their excuse all in one.
Do you not see the difference between these two behaviors? The guy in the latter example is only pretending friendship to “get” the girl, often going so far as to feign interest in things that he knows nothing about. That is dishonest, and it makes women feel betrayed and used.
In romantic movies, the shy guy will almost always come right out and ask her out, even if it is only on a “friendly” date (like a hockey game, etc). If they do form a friendship first, it is based on a mutual interest or activity. This is honest, and it makes women feel connected and respected.
Stainz, that’s not a “nice guy”. That’s what we call a “cheap bastard”.
I think you kinda did: “many of [the quiet ones] are quiet not because they lack the confidence to take a stand for themselves, but because they have the confidence to realize that they don’t need to” seemed to be saying that to me. I figured that if you meant “some” instead of “many” you would have said so. But we agree, so I guess the point is moot now. 
Sorry for whatever I contributed to the misunderstanding.
I disagree. Some people try to fake it, sure, but I find that many people are just being themselves but are completely unaware of the vibe they give off. “Misnomer, you seemed really pissed off in that meeting! What’s wrong?” “Um, I did? Geez, I’m not pissed off…”
It’s also entirely possible that what comes off as a “spineless loser” vibe to one woman will come off as a “just my type” vibe to another woman.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that you thought it was.
Oh, it’s definitely not a “blame” thing. It’s not my brother’s fault that he doesn’t know how to act around people any more than it’s my fault that I do: it just means that we have little in common.
My point was that socialization starts way before high school: it starts in daycare, pre-school, kindergarten, etc.
Never said – or meant to imply – that it is. As I say above to passengerpigeon, it’s not their fault that they didn’t see the signs any more than it’s my fault that I figured them out (eventually).
Point all you want, pal: it wasn’t my analogy. (And what’s with the hostility? 
)
Jane Austen? WTF?
The “mechanism in modern society to teach people how to interact” is society. You learn by doing, and it’s an ongoing process. Some people fall behind the curve, is all.
The rest of the garbage you spewed about my constructs and assumptions is completely ridiculous. I never forwarded such ideas, nor claimed any such assumptions, and – once more, with feeling – the “socialization gets taught” analogy wasn’t my idea. You know nothing about my standards, the effort that I put into my interpersonal relationships, or the manner in which I expect anyone else to behave. :rolleyes:
Stainz: Your story is a perfect example of how different expectations can affect someone’s perception of a guy. The 10% tip was indeed a bit cheesy, but if I’m on a blind or first date I go in expecting to split the bill. And to me, hot dogs and chips are dinner – if it were me serving that dinner, I would have said I had it covered, too. But I also would have made it clear that dinner was going to be casual, which it sounds like this guy did not.
(Side note: Man, I’m glad that this board allows long posts. )
Reminds me of the time I bought a gift for my wife (my girlfriend of 3 years way back then) when she graduated from college. She was secretly hoping for an engagement ring, but since I was being “me”, I gave her…
luggage.
:smack:
:smack:
:smack:
:smack:
:smack:
:smack:
:smack:
…ad infintum…
I was forgiven 6 months later, and did eventually make it up to her in a big way. We still use that luggage on occassion and that story keeps cropping up like a stubborn weed.
I just gotta say, !!! 
Okay, I see what you mean now. Yeah, bad phrasing on my part. Sorry about that.
Right. Which is part of what I was saying. When it comes to people who are just being themselves, “vibes” as a whole are basically a crock. I often get the same thing as you: people asking me what I’m pissed off about when I’m perfectly fine. It’s an unfortunate side effect of having a neutral expression that looks like a scowl. So, take that guy who gives off such strong “spineless loser” vibes…if people can’t even reliably tell whether you’re pissed or not, are you really going to trust “vibes” when it comes to making judgements about this poor man’s personality? It just doesn’t work that way. I’ve met numerous people whose personalities are exactly as the vibes I picked up led me to believe they’d be…and I’ve met even more people who’ve turned out to be the complete reverse. Bottom line: impressions like that are rarely completely accurate, often largely meaningless, and never under any circumstances reliable as a basis for judgement.
There is no question that people - men and women - engage in repetitive behavious that harm their own interests: the difference is that the “nice guys” described here end up girl-friend-less as their “punishment”, and the women who get taken in by assholes end up with boyfriends as theirs.
Neither is good; but on the whole, of the two I would prefer to be the “nice guy without a date yet again” than the “woman suckered yet again by an ass”. From what I have seen, it is less dangerous and humiliating.
Better still - treat people as human beings with their own motivations; strive to be honest with yourself and others; and be not bitter, clingy, jugmental or obsessive in dealing with people of the preferred sex – and you will end up neither being nor with an asshole or a “nice guy”.
I think of myself as a nice guy; in the years before I was married, I never had too much trouble getting female attention. I suppose I’m not a “nice guy” in the sense described here.
I must say I have seen guys “get” women by behaving badly. I think it can work, as some women are attracted to self-confident machismo. On the other hand, these relationships were never very good, being essentially exploitative. The female equivalent is where a woman deliberately plays dumb and clingy, in the belief that this is feminine. This also can work, but is also I think a mistake.
The primary mistake both make (and I suppose “nice guys” too) is in looking on a relationship as something to “get”, like a prize (and to be upset when this “prize” is withheld).
Okay, here’s my experience with a “nice guy” (the one who turned stalker). Now keep in mind, we weren’t dating. He would have LIKED that, but I just was not attracted to him, really. Not his fault in and of itself, it was just one of those things. Here’s some of the things that really got on my nerves:
-Unlike others, he wasn’t cheap. Quite the opposite. He was ALWAYS paying for stuff, even when I offered to treat. Always giving me little cards he made on the computer, for the slightest little thing. Always trying to buy me things. Okay, a gift for a friend is one thing. But don’t try to buy me. I’m not for sale.
-Don’t take everything so personally. If I had to study for a test, and couldn’t talk on the phone, or go out, he’d mope and whine and complain about how I was neglecting him. And then say, “But that’s okay, I’m so annoying, I can see why you don’t want to spend time with me.” One night waking me up when he called crying hysterically because I had been in a bad mood earlier, and just didn’t feel like chatting. I’m like that-we all have those kinds of days, right? I basically had said to him, “You know, I just don’t feel like talking, I’m PMSing/cranky, so I just need some alone time.” Nope, that wasn’t allowed. I couldn’t have ME time.
-Don’t put me on guilt trips. Don’t act like if I can’t spend time with you, that I’m “neglecting” you. Don’t sulk and mope if, when we go somewhere, I see another friend and stop to chat for a minute-especially if said friend is another guy. I’m not your property, I’m allowed to talk to others. And then when I ask you if something’s wrong, don’t start saying, “Oh, no, it’s just me being stupid…” all the while saying it in a tone that implies I DID do something wrong, somehow.
-Give me your opinion sometime. Don’t say, “I don’t care where we go-you pick.” Then you’re so obviously unhappy with my choice, that I feel guilty. That’s not being nice, it’s being passive aggressive.
-Do NOT put me on a pedestal and worship me. Do NOT treat me like fine china. Don’t make me out to be perfect. Don’t tell me that I’m the only thing making you happy, that I’m the most important thing in your life and you don’t know what you’d do without me. I’m not perfect. I have flaws just like every other human being on this planet. If you’re truly my friend, you see me as I am-and still like me. You don’t make me out to be this supreme goddess, some heavenly angel who descends to bring joy and meaning to your miserable little life. I don’t NEED that kind of responsibility!
So what is a real nice guy? Someone can just RELAX. Who, while he likes and wants to impress me, will make it known if I’m a bitch and mistreat him. And won’t put up with abuse. Someone who understands that sometimes I need time to myself, or have something to do and can’t be at his beck and call. Who has a life OUTSIDE of me, and knows the same thing is true for me. Who doesn’t see me has his soul reason for existing to the point that he sees ME as his soul property. Who doesn’t freak out if I talk to someone else. Someone who is willing to disagree with me, to have an argument, and not fall all over himself to buy my approval.
And someone who doesn’t freak out if I’m not attracted to him, physically/romantically/sexually. It goes both ways, you know. Sometimes, there have been guys I was really attracted to, who didn’t feel the same way. Yes, it sucked, and yeah, maybe I cried about it to myself. But I didn’t hold it against him. I still talked to him. I was still willing to be friends, because, quite frankly, a person can NEVER have too many friends. (And I don’t mean “friends only because I was hoping he’d change his mind. It would be nice, if it happens, but not the end of the world if it doesn’t.”)
C’mon, people cannot control who they are sexually attracted to. It’s just one of those things in life that sucks, but you have to accept.
Yeah, this would’ve ended the date for me. I’m okay going dutch, but when you’re pulling out a calculator at the dinner table, I’m ready to call it quits.
If you’re worried that I may try to fuck you out of a dollar fifty, we are NEVER going to get along.
Jesus, even my most platonic friends take turns buying lunch/dinner/coffee/whatever for eachother… I can’t even imagine running to McDonalds on my lunch with a co-worker and insisting that the bill be split accurately. :smack:
I dunno what’s wrong with serving hot dogs and chips, but I have a feeling that after the first exchange, you were just waiting for another reason to dislike him.
The taxonomy of sucky guys–cheapasses, milquetoasts, social incompetents–I can’t argue with that. But I’m not seeing much insight here on the part of the women into the psychology and sociology that underlies this taxonomy and other things we’re discussing. It’s rather disappointing.
I think one thing that’s frustrating for men (and I think I perceive the same frustration in this thread) is that, whereas men have little problem understanding what makes men bad to women, women seem to have the damnedest time of seeing how they are nasty and unjust to men.
Let’s start with men. These are tendencies, generalizations of course. Men value looks–a lot. This bothers women, understandably, because they want to be loved for who they are inside. Women don’t want to be rejected just because they gain a few pounds, but men will indeed reject them for that. Like it or not, looks are a necessary (but not always sufficient) condition for a relationship to begin.
Men can be extremely aggressive and power-oriented. They’re the ones who form the gangs and governments and commit 95% of the violence in the world. I myself have never enjoyed dealing with the alpha males and the preening peacocks. I had liked to operate in a society based on what society ostensibly values: intelligence, decency, etc. But no, in the world of male-female relationships and in the world of work, one is constantly dealing with the primate hierarchies and all the hangups of the people therein.
So men have their problems. There might be disagreements among men about the facts as I have stated them above, but how many guys would fail to recognize the general outline thereof? I’ll repeat the point I’m trying to make: Men in general have some insight into the failings of the sex and why women get frustrated with them.
But all I hear is excuses when we start talking about the failings of the female sex, as if women were completely blind to them. As every guy knows, women want a guy with money, power, and social status. They also want someone who projects the dominance I described in the post above. Sometimes they may be willing to trade less dominance for greater wealth, power, and rank (and vice versa), but within a group of men (say, a social class) who are roughly equal in terms of money, power, and rank, the dominance factor becomes quite a distinguishing factor.
Yet women say they want something else, and this is what drives guys bonkers. They say they want a smart, sensitive, fun guy, etc. They undoubtedly do, but, again, they are blind to the money, power, rank, and dominance factors. There seems to be a hardwired lack of insight.
Men’s focus on looks is superficial and unfair, but in reality what men want is fairer and more achievable than what women want, for one simple reason: what men want–a hot body and pretty face–is absolute, whereas what women want–money, power, rank, and dominance–is relative. Let me explain.
If a guy doesn’t find you hot, it really is nothing personal. It is not a slam on your character or who you really are. In addition, because looks are an absolute, or non-relative, condition for attraction, your good looks do not detract from those of another person. Among equally physically attractive women, guys will indeed then go for the best character. This, coupled with the fact that most women have the potential to make themselves basically attractive, means that, aside from that first filter of looks, the other filters are fairly meritocratic. The big exception is that guys will generally be pressured not to pair up with someone outside their social system or class; this pressure comes both from men and women who have an interest in preserving the class/social structure. Needless to say, however, that it is far more likely for a rich guy to marry a poor gal than vice versa.
With women, however, the selection criteria are relative. Another guy’s high social rank lowers mine; his higher wealth makes mine seem like peanuts. It’s realitive. So even if I can provide a woman a very high standard of living in an absolute sense, she will still reject me if my competitors can do better. Women do compete with each other in the looks area by getting buff and dressing well, but the limit to what can be done there is quickly met with. There is no limit to the competition guys can engage in when it comes to wealth and power. Competition is a bitch.
We have an asymmetry that frustrates both the sexes. Let’s look at the high school milieu. The girls compete on looks, the first filter. The pretty girls become the cheerleaders; but there tend to be quite a few pretty girls, so secondary filters tend to be parental wealth and class, and then comes actual cheerleading talent. Meanwhile, the guys are competing on raw, physical, primate dominance. It’s the successful sports dudes who are perceived as being at the top (is this not universal in American culture?). They get the cheerleaders, natch. The first filter for the sports guys was looks; the cheerleaders from the beginning were selected for looks, so that’s no problem. They match up like magnet and steel. Once that core, top clique is formed, everything else tends to fall into place quite neatly.
Let’s look at poor Trevor, the whipping boy of the OP, in terms of the above. Had Trevor picked up the OP in a limo a la Dudley Moore’s Arthur while exhibiting all the other behaviors she detailed, I think he would have been described as a sensitive eccentric; oh, the trouble this poor man has experience–I want to take care of him!
Or had Trevor exhibited dominance instead of puppydog wimpitude (“I like to hear you talk”), ceteris paribus, I doubt the OP had been written. If only for the simple fact that men who project dominance, regardless of any other flaws, are not labeled “nice guys.”
So what really is a Nice Guy? Simple. It’s a guy without wealth, power, and social rank who doesn’t project dominance. In other words, a total zero as far as women are concerned.
A guy who lacks these things but does project dominance is the roadhouse rogue–one form of “asshole” described at various points in this thread. The reason why these guys can get women, if only temporarily, is A) they fake/lie about the money/power/rank part (dominance itself can’t be faked, as it is like body/face is too men); and/or B) they target other low-rank women within a milieu where they are competitive.
A guy who has money/power/rank but lacks dominance will also not get the Nice Guy label, because the Nice Guy is, by definition, a loser with the chicks, whereas a man with money/power/rank will inevitably succeed with women (though not as much as if he projected dominance).
Finally a man who has money/power/rank while projecting dominance is the ultimate babecatcher, completely unbeatable. Never would such a champion be labeled a “Nice Guy.”
Now that we’ve looked into what’s behind the term Nice Guy, maybe we can just drop it, as it only obfuscates the real issues: money, power, rank, and a projection of dominance.
No, but you ARE the one who said
I just wanted to say I think you are wrong and that such lessons are not taught, at least in an effective manner.
I am talking about actual in-school training, like you referred to In earlier times, especialy the 19th century, young people had books that taught them social behavior. Some were nonfiction and others, like Ms Austen’s, were wrapped in fiction. The nonfiction taught comportment and how to write an invitation. The fiction could get into the more delicate details of sending and interpreting signals, passengerpigeon’s sign language. In the rush to “democratize” education in the 1960s these formalities were tossed out so subsequent generations have had to learn by doing and by the 70s and 80s parents, who hadn’t received the formal training (yes, formal; as you can see if you have a fast connection they even made movies teaching boys how to ask girls on dates) weren’t much help for their kids. The lower case nice guys who are merely socially incompetent DO need some help from somebody who knows the ropes a little better, though I am not saying it has to be you. And some of them may have picked up from society that women like men who are in touch with their feelings but do not know how to show it without whining. The upper case and in quotes “Nice Guys” are obnoxious morons who would probably been obnoxious morons regardless of their training. They see that with some women this particular method works so they use it.
ALL of us live in a universe of our own construction, made of our knowledge, beliefs, and a large portion of guesses to fill the gaps. You have constructed an image of how a person you would like to date behaves. I have no problem with that and from our occasional meetings in here my image of misnomer would probably not construct a Mr Not That Bad who was unrealistic. However, I also know that Mr First Date does not know your expectations and how well he fits them (or you his) so you can both make a sound judgement before the date whether or not this is a good match. Given some time and effort on both your parts Mr Not Quite could become Mr Right. (God, is this getting too cute? I’m about to puke, too!) Not your job to train him? No, but you’ll find that there are more Mr Not Quites out there than Mr Rights and that Mr What Was I Thinking? is far more common than either.
It’s not my fault. I was never taught how to behave.
Like this bad behavior is unique to “nice guys.” :rolleyes:
Can we start applying accurate terms to personality types? These guys that you’re complaining about… they’re insecure nebbishes, not nice guys. One does not neccessarily define the other.
I’ve seen a lot of backlash against “nice guys” and I have to say you ladies better be careful what you wish for. Because when you bash nice guys, you are telling guys — both the insecure nebbishes as well as the considerate catches — that thoughtfulness and consideration is not appreciated. And then all you’ll get is lousy rude behavior from a guy whether he likes you or not.
You stupid bitch.
An interesting analysis, but it is contradicted by my anecdotal and personal experience of life.
There probably are men and women who behave in this deterministic manner. I don’t believe by any means that all do. I don’t for that matter think that I do, or that my wife does, or that the girlfriends I had prior to my wife did.
If I thought they did, I would not have gone out with them; if they did, they sure as hell would not have gone out with me!
When I was young and a-courtin’, I had no money, no power, low rank and I do not believe I projected much in the way of dominance. I certainly was not a sports star or anything of the sort.
I was, however, self-confident (maybe a bit too much ), reasonably charming and funny. Moreover, I have always really liked the company of women (lots of guys appear not to).
So I don’t think it is all as simple as your theory makes it appear. According to your theory, I would have been a “zero” as far as women were concerned. And yet, I am happily married. How did that happen?
Just to be clear here, I capitalize Nice Guys specifically to distinguish between guys who are, you know, nice, and the specific personality type we’re talking about, and I’m pretty sure a lot of us have been pretty consistent at that as well. It’s a Term of Art ™. No offense need be taken.
–p
I found a problem with your analysis.
–p
Word.