I just posted a really long post over in the “Fat Chicks” ( <old rolleyes> ) thread, pretty much addressing this.
TL;DR: Actual “nice guys” (not “Nice Guys™”) go for years and years – possibly even their whole lives – without ever having a “relationship” (which doesn’t just mean “sex”), until they eventually evolve into angry, resentful, embittered “Nice Guys™” who just pretend to be nice – and then even beyond to the point of not even trying to be nice. Can you blame such guys?
Taking another look at FloatingGimpy’s quote of my earlier post, ISTM that was actually a seriously sour-cherry-picked excerpt from the whole post that I wrote. Way to make a really baddddd guy (I really wish we still had that old roll-eyes un-smilie) look even baddder.
Strangers (or dudes I’m meeting for the first time), no. I might think he’s so incredibly handsome it’s like looking at the sun, or dear GOD, his voice is making me weak in the knees, or whatever, but I don’t visualize having sex with him. It’s like it just doesn’t occur to me.
Men I know? Sometimes, but not often. (It depends on his voice. :)) Seriously, though, when I find someone so attractive that it leads to Thoughts About Him, I’m usually thinking about kissing him or running my hands through his hair…something more romantic/erotic than outright sexual. The sexual thoughts don’t come until we’re in a relationship or a relationship between us is imminent, because for me sex is a direct expression of the affection I feel for him. Some random man could be my physical ideal, but if I don’t know the guy, I don’t have any affection for him to express, so…it just doesn’t occur to me to think about us getting it on.
I have to wonder about them. Are their standards too high? Do they have unspeakable body odor? Because THE MOST ANNOYING MAN I KNOW married not one, but two women (the first one died - they were very happy together, she passed away very young of cancer). Now, this is a truly nice guy. It isn’t his fault that most people can barely stand to be in a room with him for more than half an hour - well it is - the incessant Star Trek puns, the very loud voice. However, not one, but two, women found the overpowering voice and need to make a pun out of everything (plus the completely average job, his dedication to geek fandom, his “teddy bear” physique) to be attractive enough to marry him. Though, honestly, I suspect it was that he is really a nice person.
Now, neither woman would stop traffic with her looks, but I knew his first wife pretty well - and she was a wonderful woman who was perfectly average looking. And I’ve met his second wife on a few occasions, and she seemed fairly normal, and kinda cute, in the short and curvy way.
This is not a man more than average in the looks department - he looks like a guy deeply invested in fandom should look. This is not a man with a ton of money. I suspect this is a guy who understood how to talk to the woman no one talks to. A guy who, at some level, despite what I would consider an OVERWHELMING personality, picks up signals. I’ve know him 30 years (God, maybe going on 35 - I’m getting old), and he has never invaded my boundaries in a creepy way. Not when I was cute and 17, not now that I’m 50.
@Dangerosa, thank you for a response that is at least civil – although to be sure, I’m having a bit of a hard time trying to parse just what point(s) you’re trying to make – hey, it’s late here. I’m still thinking about it.
It looks like you’re citing evidence that even a fairly obnoxious male can get, not one, but two wives, leading to the conclusion that all those angry bitter males who can never get so much as a coffee date must have something mighty mighty wrong with them after all, even before they became angry and bitter, QED. Am I on the right track here, as far as I’ve figured it out it so far? Is that the point(s) you’re trying to make?
(ETA: Among the several current related threads that I am allegedly “all over”, I’m not entirely sure which one this little side-conversation best belongs in.)
I don’t get Senegoid’s response in this thread. The OP was started by a man seeking primarily women’s opinions and thoughts about challenging a set of stereotypes. And none of the responses are male-hostile. The post looks more like thread-shitting. Is that allowed?
Yes. Although this guy is not fairly obnoxious. This is the guy who gets invited places because of the Geek Social Fallacies. And because he volunteers and joins in the groups in which those fallacies operate. But he is kind. And he does seek people out to talk to. And I suspect he handles rejection really well - but he also gets signaling enough that he isn’t just taking stabs in the dark to get shot down - I was friends with his first wife during their courtship and it was more of the month long elaborate circling courtship dance of a bird, than the jump and hump of a dog. And unlike men who get bitter, I think if she would have rejected him at the end of the dance, he would have been friends with her - the dance was equal parts courtship and an offer of friendship.
I don’t know that they guys who don’t succeed have something mighty wrong with THEM. But there is something wrong. Who they approach. How they approach. Or maybe they need to stop letting the cat pee on the laundry.
And I suspect internet dating has made it worse. As I said, I’ve known this guy for a long time - well before internet dating was a thing. He met both his wives at clubs. Places where strangers meet, talk, see each other the next week at the next event/meeting, talk more, start hanging out. Where you start with something in common - a shared love of rolling dice and a hatred of orcs, the ice breaker of “who is your favorite Doctor or Star Trek captain?” And where you have to keep seeing someone if you reject them - or are rejected - unless you are going to leave the club. Not the find a profile, email a few times, meet for coffee, and then - most of the time - get rejected. That old fashioned sort of courtship - its both higher and lower risk.
Not to perpetuate a theme on this thread, but… you said that better than I did. ( = on the Nice Guys thread of a month or so ago)
Me neither. But I tried reporting it as such and I can’t get that function to work on my cell since Tapatalk upgraded again. So, I suppose the question is whether enough (any?) people have reported him.
Actually, I think the entire discussion about whether male-vs-female behavior threads are “male-hostile,” as you put it, belongs elsewhere. Whether or not that is in the Pit is not really at issue here—I don’t believe there’s any justification for this thread going into the Pit.
Senegoid, while I realize you were initially responding to beowulff’s comment, this has become a hijack at this point. So to you and to anyone else who wants to continue that particular discussion, please take it elsewhere.
Also, KarlGrenze, if you think someone is violating the rules, please report the post. I did not initially view this as threadshitting because I did believe Senegoid was responding to a post from the OP. But as I just noted, it has definitely taken the discussion off-track now.
So again, to everyone, let’s please refocus on the question asked in the OP. Thanks.
Think about it? Yes, but not generally just from appearance. If I catch a virile male in an act of random kindness or true charity, I might jump to thoughts of dropping my handkerchief in his path. But there has to be some indication of character in the mix, so it’s quite rare. (Not that good character is rare, you just can’t usually see it walking down the street.)
But if what you’re asking about (as several people seem to be answering about) is a desire to tap him on the shoulder and rush off to a secluded nook . . . no. I tried a couple of one-night stands in my twenties. They are usually not terribly rewarding for the female.
OP here.
At least for me, it’s not so much a desire to rush off and do it.
It’s more “She’s cute. I’d bet she’d be fun in bed.” And then, moving on with my life.
Yes, Asimovian, this much I agree with. In fact, IIRC I did acknowledge in one of my posts yesterday that it seemed awkward to pursue the point in the thread, as it was a bit off-topic w.r.t. the original OP; other than as a response to some earlier posts.
That said, I’d also note that it’s impossible to discuss things like that on this board, whether in the Pit or elsewhere; this board is massively intolerant of that. Any semblance of a constructive discussion, even borderline-civil, is difficult anywhere on this board, and totally impossible in the Pit.
Enough. I’ve made my point, as bast as that’s going to happen. I’ll BTFO now.
It was long ago that I was in my prime, but when I was, yes I felt a very strong attraction to some male strangers… from there I’d mentally undress them and then have a fantasy of sexual gymnastics with them.
There are sex clubs and on-line chat rooms were men and women that want only non-committed sex can hook up. Many women are not interested in that sort of hocking up or “flirting”. For actual relationships my own culture uses match-makers which is the only way I would ever consider looking for partner (if something were to happen to my DH). Men do not have “to walk on precarious eggshells every waking moment” in such a situation. If a meeting is arranged with a woman, it is only because he is considered a possible, acceptable match and subsequent conversations serve to discover if that possibility can become a probability.
What is your culture?
Roma.
Let’s everybody NOT be quick to knock ZPG Zealot’s suggestion there. Those old-style traditions (see: Fiddler On The Roof) assured that everyone, male or female, who at least wasn’t a flaming jackass, could get partnered.
We have nothing of the sort in modern, Western-style, love-and-romance-based dating culture. We’ve become a culture of haves and have-nots, in the sordid love-and-sex game, and the criterion isn’t simply that the jackasses do without. The nerds, the socially clueless, and yes even the “fatties”, who have done nothing wrong at all, get left in the dust, while the Hugh Hefners romp through an unlimited sea of pussy, and every level of real relationships in between. They could all be winners in ZPG Zealot’s matchmaker culture.
Even in Merrie Olde Victorian Englande, the cultural rule was that a proper lady never spoke to a gentleman until they were properly introduced. It was an expected norm that mutual friends and acquaintances would introduce their single acquaintances, male and female, to one another. That is totally lost in modern Western culture, leaving a swampy morass in which everyone must fend for themselves. This even forces all the males into the perceived “predatory” mode, where they must initiate conversations with total stranger females all by themselves, wherever they may find them, which females (see that other thread) find so offensive. Swampy morass indeed.
Sorry, everyone who’s been flaming ZPG Zealot (myself included), she may be onto something here.
With matchmakers, even some of the jackasses and other unpartnerables could get theirs!
I was about to post back, “never mind.”
A Google search turned up the Pit thread that goes into painful detail about ZPG.
Actually, there are quite a number of matchmaking services out there for a large spectrum of ethnic, religious, and social groups, not to mention internet sites that perform similar functions. If you are truly interested companionship and finding a partner (not just a lay), these are all excellent options.