"Nice Guys" vs. Decent, Albeit Clueless, Men

In My Humble Opinion
361

I don’t think I disagree with any of this, and it seems to be pretty much what I’ve said before, in this thread. These women don’t enjoy the actual abuse, but they enjoy other aspects of the abusive personalities.

But the same also applies to Nice Guys versus Jerks. As I’ve suggested repeatedly, women are not attracted to jerkiness in and of itself, but are attracted to strength and self-confidence, which is correlated to jerky behavior in the same sense that you describe. And conversely, a lot of nice guys have an aura of wimpiness that women don’t find attractive.

So if you ask a women "are you happy about the fact that yesterday when you said “jump” he said “how high?”, she might say yes. But the overall cumulative impact of consistently being too obsequious is to be perceived as weak, and hence less attractive.

362

Can anyone define exactly what ‘jerkishness’ and ‘niceness’ mean in this context? Because the way ‘nice guys’ use the words, they clearly don’t have the standard meaning. In some cases, ‘Jerkishness’ is a synonym for ‘has a backbone’ (ie a guy who doesn’t just do whatever his girlfriend says is a ‘jerk’), sometimes it’s for confidence (ie a guy who can go up and talk to women is a ‘jerk’), but rarely does it seem to be refering to actual bad behavior.

It’s a major tenant of the nice guy mindset that they are not ‘jerks’ and don’t display any ‘jerkish’ behvaior, and that women like ‘jerkish’ behavior, but it’s never clear exactly what is being referred to. Trying to figure it out from context in this thread, ‘jerkish’ seems to be used for ‘any trait women find attractive’, which just gets silly (well of course women are attracted to traits women find attractive, that’s a tautology).

363

It might be worth considering how we’re defining ‘‘jerk’’ also. Jerk is in the eye of the beholder. I would imagine sour grapes can look a lot like jerkitude if you’re a lonely person looking for attention. I’m sure women who get a lot of attention from men are more likely to be perceived as bitches regardless of whether their actual behavior warrants it. It’s maybe code for, ‘‘I don’t understand what this person has that I don’t.’’

Also, like, to a saint, an average person might seem like an asshole. So if you are a person who tries to focus especially hard on being a nice/sweet person, I could see unfairly maligning the competition as being worse than it actually is. I made that mistake a lot in high school. I didn’t really grasp why some women got more attention than others since it didn’t necessarily seem to correlate to their attractiveness. I remember one friend I had in particular who was very intelligent, but was very good at acting stupid and helpless around boys, and they seemed to like that. I did kinda judge her for that, because male attention didn’t seem worth the apparent sacrifice of my dignity. I’m not saying I was right to judge her, just that I did, that I was jealous and it seemed patently unfair because I wasn’t less attractive I was just less willing to act like an idiot. But if we are going to bare our souls here, one massive generalization I got out of observing high school and college interactions is that men fucking love it when women act like idiots.

I just decided that wasn’t a price I was willing to pay for companionship. And turns out I didn’t have to, because there are dudes that value good conversation and intelligence and emotional strength and all of those things I bring to the table. It does mean I’ve had fewer hookup opportunities overall, but they were higher quality opportunities, in my estimation.

My point, I guess, is… when I look for a partner, I look for Nice, but that’s not inherently superior to looking for artistic, or smart, or funny. Just because your #1 attribute isn’t Nice doesn’t make you a jerk. And my friend’s willingness to act dumber than she is doesn’t make her a bitch. It certainly protects my own feelings of inadequacy when I label her one, though. (To use a less morally charged example: flirting. I’m fucking terrible at it. I can barely deal with it when my own husband flirts with me. I could learn to flirt but it feels like a put-on, not a real extension of myself. Again, not a sacrifice I’ve been willing to make.)

Which is why I am of two minds. My scientific mind vs. my personal experience of how absolutely fucking shitty it feels to have my most traumatic experiences discounted, minimized and ignored. You could call it irrational or human, same difference, really, but the sun doesn’t rise and set on rationality. Rationality is mostly a delusion anyway.

364

Now, now. Don’t be hasty. Remember that earlier in the thread someone said that women don’t even understand what an attractive man looks like.

365

Saying we’re pitting science against personal experience makes no sense. The “science” being invoked is observation. The personal experience is observation. Both have equal claims to scientific validity.

366

I’m referring specifically to the vast body of scientific literature supporting the assertion that humans don’t have a damned clue about themselves.

367

Ah, I missed that context. Sorry.

368

Exactly.

To me, a “jerk” is defined as someone who intentionally and unapologetically treats others with disrespect, typically because the jerk holds sexist, racist, classist, or other bigoted views. I’d never date a guy who’s a jerk (or at least, not after I discovered he was a jerk, since it’s sometimes not immediately apparent).

But other people might define a “jerk” as someone who is loud and self-assured and frequently making dumb jokes, or someone who’s quiet and reserved and rather serious, or someone who’s very laid-back and flexible about their romantic relationships, or someone who’s very serious with high standards for their romantic relationships, or someone who’s unabashed about showing their sexual interest, or someone who thinks that any kind of display of sexuality is vulgar, and so on. I’ve dated or been interested in guys of all these types and more, and I’m sure that someone, somewhere would look at my romantic history and see one long string of jerks.

And of course, there might be people who agree with my respect-based definition, but then you get into the question of what’s respectful. Is telling a woman you think she’s beautiful disrespectful? Is holding the door open for a woman only because she’s a woman disrespectful? Is saying that you’re willing to sleep around, but you’d prefer your eventual wife to be a virgin disrespectful? Depending on who you ask, and what’s the context, these could all be defined as jerkish, disrespectful behavior, or extremely respectful.

But it also comes back to my other point: it isn’t the jerkishness that’s the asset, and it isn’t the niceness that’s the liability. It’s the other things that correlate with jerkishness and niceness that tip the scales. If a guy is “nice, but…” then niceness isn’t his problem.

369

This is somewhat OT, but this is actually a big problem for a lot of intelligent women. There are a lot more men who like women who are less intelligent than they are than there are men who like women who are more intelligent than they are. (The reverse seems to be true of women.) If on average, men and women are of equal intelligence, and you have a lot of more intelligent men pairing off with less intelligent women, then that leaves the more intelligent women with a smaller pool of available men.

So these women who fake being dumb are helping keep the playing field level. :slight_smile:

[When I was dating my future wife, we once played a chess game. She was slightly ahead in the later stages of the game but made a blunder or two and lost. I accused her - then and later - of having thrown the game deliberately in order to make me look smart, but she’s consistently denied it. :)]

370

It’s hard to define, for sure. Someone else gave some relevant, albeit a bit extreme, examples in another thread:

371

This is a great illustration/example; best of the thread. I think it explains the logic and thought process perfectly.

372

OK, so you’re saying that the definition of ‘jerkish’ is giving out squicky personal information even when she begs him to stop, being a ‘violent shitbag’, and taking her money then wasting it? This doesn’t seem to fit ‘jerkishness’ as it’s being used in this thread, as it’s trivial to find counterexamples of men who do none of those 3 things but also date women, and to find women who won’t date men who do any one of those 3 things. And I don’t think anyone seriously asserts that women are attracted to the specific traits listed, but rather that they are attracted to the person in spite of those traits, which also doesn’t fit the what jerkishness is being used. And there are people who do (or attempt to do, it’s hard to take your GF’s money if you don’t have a gf) things like what you listed that aren’t good with women, which further weakens the connection to the word as it’s used in this thread.

If it’s really hard to define, maybe people should use a word that has a reasonably clear meaning, instead of using a term that’s nebulous and seems to shift meaning from usage to usage.

373

Those are 1) extreme examples (as he noted) and 2) manifestations of jerkishness rather than the underlying mentality. So it’s a mistake for focus on the specifics.

As I would define jerk versus “nice guy”, it’s a scale between complete concern for oneself and one’s own needs and desires and lack of concern for that of other people’s at one extreme, and complete self-negation and obsequious focus on the needs and desires of the other person and disregard for one’s own at the other extreme. These are the extremes, and there’s any number of points in between.

374

I never needed to date top of the class types, but I always wanted women I could discuss things deeper than events and other people with. I broke up with my first girl friend partly because of intelligence. She was physically attractive, and nice enough, but that made us incompatible. I only dated her out of desperation, which was unfair and certainly not a very kind thing to do. She was dating someone a week or two later, while I was about to go three years or so without a date. My wife is more intelligent than me, but we’re not in “why did she marry that goofball” territory.

375

[QUOTE=Heart of Dorkness]
To me, a “jerk” is defined as someone who intentionally and unapologetically treats others with disrespect, typically because the jerk holds sexist, racist, classist, or other bigoted views. I’d never date a guy who’s a jerk (or at least, not after I discovered he was a jerk, since it’s sometimes not immediately apparent).
[/QUOTE]

And that’s where the bait and switch comes in, because the PUA movement is predicated on the assertion that women like jerks of the ‘‘having a backbone’’ variety, and then teach men skills of the ‘‘being a disrespectful asshole’’ variety while telling the bald-faced lie that this is what it means to have a backbone.

I’m married to a man with an actual backbone, and I promise you, negging has nothing to do with it. Being with one of these confident types is not all it’s cracked up to be, either. You have to deal with stuff like being periodically called out on your own bullshit (woebetide any woman who ever passively aggressively snaps ‘I’m fine’ to a man with self-respect… he’ll assume you’re telling the truth and move on with his life, can you fucking imagine?) And you are also expected to pay for your own Hulu Plus. Yeah, I said it! I’ve been trying for three years to get him to agree to sign up for Hulu Plus and he absolutely refuses to front his $3/month share because he doesn’t want it bad enough to pay for it – but has repeatedly told me if I’m willing to pay for the whole thing it’s fine. No way in hell am I paying for the whole thing, I’m tired of him profiting off my weakness (he always gets to enjoy things for free because he is infuriatingly patient and I break down and buy them first.) Now we are having a ridiculous stubborn-off over three bucks a month.

That’s what they don’t tell you about men with backbones! They will take you at your word and make you pay for your own Hulu Plus.

[QUOTE=Fotheringay-Phipps]
This is somewhat OT, but this is actually a big problem for a lot of intelligent women. There are a lot more men who like women who are less intelligent than they are than there are men who like women who are more intelligent than they are. (The reverse seems to be true of women.) If on average, men and women are of equal intelligence, and you have a lot of more intelligent men pairing off with less intelligent women, then that leaves the more intelligent women with a smaller pool of available men.
[/QUOTE]

Vindication!

My husband is smart in ways I’m not so we learn from one another all the time. 10% of the time I feel like a damned idiot, 10% of the time he’s the damned idiot, and 80% of the time we’re so deeply engrossed in conversation we could care less who’s smarter. This is my ideal.

Also… No way in hell would I throw a game, for anyone, for any reason. One of my most cherished high school memories is kicking my crush’s ass at air hockey in my friend’s basement… I may not have had the courage to actually speak to him, ever, but I would be damned if I looked weak in front of him!

376

The nice guys being discussed definitely don’t qualify as a ‘nice guy’ on your scale. They are concerned with their own needs and desires for a woman to date/bang/romance/etc and go past a lack of concern to actively resenting any women who dares to possess different desires. I don’t know in what context this definition would actually be relevant, but it’s certainly not this thread.

Also, I dispute completely the premise that being concerned for oneself and one’s own needs is in any way jerkish, accusing someone of being a jerk for standing up for themselves is actually common behavior from abusers.

377

OK, but let’s redirect, again: This behavior example, for instance, doesn’t match that definition:

378

Well if you put it that way, yeah. But what I said was: “concern for oneself and one’s own needs and desires and lack of concern for that of other people’s”, which is something else. A guy who can amuse himself by bantering with people about his GF’s period with no concern for how she felt about it would be one extreme example of that general concept. But it’s not a black-and-white jerk or non-jerk matter, and there are lesser jerks as well.

379

[middle ground between bluntness and white lies]

The other day I heard someone talk about turning down requests, and he opined that it’s best to not provide a reason. Not sure if that helps a lot in this context, as the other person will probably just ask why.

But a lot depends on the context: a random guy on the street, someone you don’t really know but are likely to run into again, someone you do know to some degree and want/need to stay cordial with, someone you met through online dating so a date is expected, or even someone you’ve gone out before.

In the first case the main thing is to get out of the situation with as little fuss as possible. I guess the easiest way to do that is say you have a boyfriend, even if that’s a total lie.

(When I talk to women and they casually mention a boyfriend at some point I always wonder whether that boyfriend really exists.)

With people you’re going to talk to again lying is more problematic. The busy route may work and isn’t a total lie, because you’re too busy to date him while you haven’t gotten around to dragging the icons on your computer desktop into alphabetical order. I might try something along the lines of “I don’t feel a spark” or “I think we’d be better off as friends”, which are truthful but perhaps not definitive enough (cue platonic friend backdoor gambit).

Like I said before, I feel it’s unhelpful in (online) dating to trawl for prospects, determine they’re no good and throw them back for the next person to drag them up and also throw them back, and all the while the sub-par catch doesn’t understand their lack of success.

But as you (or someone else? too lazy to go back) rightly pointed out, rejection is not the time for constructive criticism. So maybe that can come earlier. “You have such a nice smile. Too bad your online photos don’t show it.” “I’m so impressed by your knowledge of early 1980s synthpop bands. Why don’t you mention that in your profile?” Of course it’s easier with something positive. “Yeah, I prefer the metric system, too, but that doesn’t excuse entering “150” for your weight in lbs when you weigh 150 kg.”

380

So if you decide that you want me to stay away from a girl you’re interested in, but both me and the girl want to date, so we do date because we’re not concerned with whether an uninvolved third party approves, then we’re both being jerks? That’s an actual situation I’ve observed (the ‘you’ still holds a huge grudge 3 years later). I don’t dispute that your example can reasonably be called a ‘jerk’, but I dispute that your definition is reasonable.

I’m going to say that you’re the jerk if you use a definition of a negative term like ‘jerk’ or ‘asshole’ that hinges on ‘concern for oneself and one’s own needs and desires’, because avoiding that is being a doormat, codependent, enabler, or some other kind of victim, not being nice.