# Nice guys, the friendzone, and assholes



## Persephone (Nov 14, 2009)

I've been reading way too much of the internetz lately and one issue has cranked up my contempt and pity like nothing else: the famous "nice guy". For any connoisseur of the internet, I'm sure you've met the angry, dejected, back-into-a-corner guy (at times, girl) who no longer knows what to do. "I'm a 'nice guy' (it's almost creepy how this description always crops up), but my female friends always go for the 'asshole'. Maybe I ought to become an asshole and give her the shitty treatment she deserves!" It's like every one of these people have a gigantic conspiracy and claimed a trademark for the term "nice guy"- no wonder it's "nice guy(tm)" on HBI.

First of all, one thing that is rarely mentioned is that the asshole in question is usually _hot_. When they _do_ talk about the hotness factor, it's almost always how these bitches are oh-so-superficial, as if they weren't, because it seems like every woman they go after are significantly more attractive than they are and they hope to find a way into her pants through friendship, while neglecting the less attractive, but equally nice (perhaps even nicer. As an attractive person myself, I can attest that good looks and sexual attention does go to your head) girls get neglected. However, in an almost impossible act of hypocrisy, they take it out on the _object_ (yes, object) of their affection for doing the exact same thing they're doing. Women are women. We ain't saints. Many men have told me that they don't begin to consider "personality" unless the woman passes a minimum threshold of attractiveness. There's no reason to believe many women don't hold the same attitudes.

One such "nice guy" commented in the "Nice Guys Finish Last" group on experienceproject (note how "nice" he sounds): "'I love you as a brother, but we can never be anything more'. I'm tired of this shit from women." Funny how he calls that "shit", as if the woman is making excuses for not wanting to be with him, like being with him is the legitimate, right thing to do and she's being immoral by _not_ doing so. I'm not going to go into how terrifyingly warped is the notion that if you give a woman friendship, she is obliged to give you herself, and proceed to act cheated when she doesn't. I think I know a few things about him just reading this brief post. That the object of his affection is leagues more attractive than he is. That he's read, and think he needs, PUA material. I'm also willing to bet that he does over-the-top bullshit like roses for the first date because that's what he thinks (as in old wives tales) that if you set everything up like a fairytale, you'll get the girl. Somebody needs to give him a wake-up call and remind him that the woman is permitted, and within her rights, to reject him and to not feel attracted to him, just as the opposite is true.

I have a friend who is a genuine nice guy, never sinks into misogyny and "nice-guy-dom" even though he is perpetually romantically unsuccessful. He is sweet, compassionate and eternally understanding of others in a way that is too innocent and artless. I admit he's not particularly attractive or "masculine", and most girls may overlook him due to their own immaturity, but if anyone deserves love, it's him. He readily does things for me and other friends without expecting anything in return. We had a mutual attraction for a while and it were not for the circumstances, I would certainly have courted him; I pined after him for two years after that brief summer camp. Want a nice guy? Here's a nice guy for you. Were he more attractive, he would have been scooped up in a second, and the nicest male friends (who are confident and well-adjusted) I have are _all_ in relationships. Actions like holding the door open and being willing to listen to a girl are no-brainers. They get me presents, hold doors open for me, listen to me- all because I'm their friend.

Contrasting him with the anonymous netizen mentioned above, it's clear who's the real asshole in this equation. Acting nice and understanding and willing to provide a shoulder to cry on are verbs. Being nice is in a man's essence, and I submit that anyone who considers demeaning a woman in order to fuck her are doubly jerks- at least her asshole boyfriend isn't covertly manipulative on top of being a jerk.//endrant


----------



## viva (Aug 13, 2010)

Some very good points here.

Check out these threads for some interesting discussion if you're in the mood for some reading...

http://personalitycafe.com/sex-relationships/72126-annoyance-pua-nice-guy-label.html
http://personalitycafe.com/sex-relationships/75745-bitter-nice-guy.html
http://personalitycafe.com/sex-relationships/68227-hey-ladies-bad-boy-nice-guy.html


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

There is a core assumption about female motives and the varieties of actions they use that creates this "nice guy" concept. I found out about the PUA community a few years back and being the sort of person I am, I read a bit of it to see what the hub ub was about. 

The angry nice guy is operating under the assumption that women are using their (the "nice guy") attraction to them to manipulate them but never receiving a return on this obedience. This is not a complete falsehood, I know several women who knowingly use men in this fashion and are quite proficient at it. I know other girls who fought to learn to do so the way some guys fight to be PUA. Many dating guides for women offer this sort of advice, the ones that refer to men like they are dogs to be trained. Same hate different side of the coin.

Learning to be a PUA in the standard sense (magic tricks and negging) is learning to manipulate manipulators, which of course makes someone more vulnerable to a third party manipulator, the guy who charges $1000 a day to teach lonely men how to take rejection under the veil of revealing some secret. Going out to a bar and approaching everything he can all night a guy can get the bulk of what I've read those lessons to be about, losing fear of the situation. 

The sad truth of the PUA community is real, that modern dating is often a dog eat dog environment. Your friend presents the truth of that: the sweet, truly kind hearted and honest people, are those who suffer the worst in how modern courting is gone about. Love is still out there for them, but the kind hearted have trouble navigating battlefields, they don't like the violence.

Not all bold men are jerks, but all jerks are bold. Mathematically if you consider confidence an essential pre-dating criteria, you've limited your viable pool to a population that has an abnormally high jerk distribution. Much of the PUA communities tactics rely on some women's inability to grasp that relationship.


----------



## Chipps (Jun 1, 2011)

I've said it before, there is nothing wrong with being a "nice guy". That is, a guy who treats people with respect. However, most nice guys aren't "nice". They are a bunch of men who have no back bones, no boundaries and will put up with anything. They don't respect themselves and allow women to treat them any kind of way, and use and abuse them and then they wonder why they don't want to sleep with them. They stroke the egos of girls who ignore them, and rush out to bring her everything she needs while she refuses to date them, and they get bitter when there is no pay off. 

If they learned to stop acting like push overs and grow some self respect, maybe they would attract women. They really don't see themselves how other people see them. They think theyre being "nice" while other people think they are being desperate. Also, the reason girls like "assholes" is because while they are selfish, they are also usually confident, and go after what they want. They go for the confidence and fearlessness of approaching a woman and will also take the "asshole" as well if they have to. 


I spent a couple of months reading game blogs (not PUA stuff either) and a lot of the stuff they discussed was really useful. It was simply about developing confidence in yourself and learning to be comfortable with talking to women and setting boundaries and not allowing women to cross them just because they were "attractive". Its about not pedestalizing women simply because they have a vagina because all women have vaginas and you can get it anywhere. Lastly it was about doing other stuff with your life and not allowing women (or lack there of) to control how you feel about yourself.


----------



## DarkyNWO (Mar 21, 2011)

Persephone said:


> They get me presents, hold doors open for me, listen to me- all because I'm their friend.


I'll let that slide cause I don't feel like getting myself banned.



Look princess, do you know how a 'nice guy' became a 'nice guy'?
Most men in western society are brought up by their parents to be nice to girls. To be respectful and go out of their way to please them (for some reason) read; open doors, pull out chairs, give them presents. Why? Well, they ain't sure in the start, why ain't the girls doing nice things back? Is just their presence in his life enough to justify doing these seemingly mindless things?

Then of course puberty hits and they start to realize why they've been taught to do these things and why it's considered so nice to do them. It's called courting* and has been around since like forever. However, our society have developed faster than our culture and thus, these things have lost some of their value, lost what they once were and became something else entierly, but thats still how men are raised to attract girls, to court them. 

So, they do all these things, they are nice, they listen, pull out chairs and so on. They have been thought that it means one thing, females another. So when it's not achiving the desired effect they look to why, and most people look at everything but themselves when it comes to things that are wrong in their life. So they think, hey, maybe we just did not work out? Not all people match! So when they meet the next girl and do the same things, and get the same results without understanding why, they get just slightly more frustrated, and then on it goes.

So after some frustrating teenage years he becomes 18 and hits the pub, having heard tons of bawdy stories about that place. So he has not been that lucky with girls, maybe only had one or two girlfriends during his entire teenage years. So he is a bit shy, but perhaps manages to muster up some courage and actually speak with one of these females cause hey "It's just to man up, right?". Well, have you ever tried picking up girls in a pub? One wrong move and usually you're pretty much screwed in the getting laid department. This creates inmense pressure on the male thats trying to do the flirt, and makes him vulnerable, which ain't that comftrable. 

So there is no way he's going to score in the pub, and with his previous history he becomes downright friggin' cynical about the whole thing and starts to blame the women. Why are they stuck-up bitches anyway? Why does he have to pay for their dinner, give her a gift, open the door into the resturaunt, pull out her chair, being incredibly nice and not get anything in return? I have no idea. You women state that you want equality all the time. So, pull out my chair and give me a sandwich damnit. 



*Traditionally, in the case of a formal engagement, it has been perceived that it is the role of a male to actively "court" or "woo" a female, thus encouraging her to understand him and her receptiveness to a proposal of marriage.


----------



## strawberryLola (Sep 19, 2010)

I remember my ex told me once, "Be careful of the so-called 'nice guy' who is your friend who wants to do everything for you, the type of 'friend' who always does favors for his female friends. They're not as nice as you think." I've known nice guys who seem pretty innocent to their female friends, who have done pretty bad boy stuff to girls and can equally be heart-breakers. 

While I agree that there are truly some nice guys that finish last and they're worth a shot, I think given the situation when they're presented an equally nice girl, there are still underlying issues of (for _some_) people being humans and wanting what they can't have. In other words, the truly nice person may not always be a saint.

I think the degree of how well a person will treat another person in a relationship also relates to how well they know themselves enough to not hurt others along the process. The guy who's standing in line (who may not be as attractive) may also have opportunities his friends don't know about and takes advantage, yet, put on that "good boy" happy face. In other words, what I learned- it depends. There are multiple sides to one story, and nothing's always quite as it seems. People may present different sides of themselves. In the moment of temptation, people may change. There are always exceptions to stereotypes. The actions people as human beings don't surprise me. Nice is not a permanent label. It's so situational. (Just from my observations). Sorry for the negativism.


----------



## GoodOldDreamer (Sep 8, 2011)

... So much for thinking the most inane topic discussed on this forum in 40,000 threads already might just die off for a day or two.

:dry:

Yeah, it's that popular. It seriously never stops getting threads made about it. Search is your friend. Or hell, just browse the first few pages of the forum. You're bound to find a thread replied to recently about this.


----------



## Yardiff Bey (Jun 5, 2011)

@Persephone - get your friend to go through the book "No More Mr Nice Guy". It gives a different perspective on Nice Guys.

Worth a read for the girls too.


----------



## Kormoran (Mar 15, 2012)

In one of the blog articles linked to in this thread, the concept of negging was exemplified with "Nice dress, I saw it on another girl recently" and "Beautiful nails, are they real". Strangely, I've only ever heard gay men mention dresses and nails and things like that. Perhaps men have become such pussies. Maybe that's why PUA is so popular.

"Nice shoes, I have a pair myself".

I don't do any PUA stuff. When I last dated, I went to my dates' house with a dead animal I'd hunted, and a DAB radio, as a gift to her. She wasn't impressed, though...*


*Just to clarify, this last story is entirely fictitious. It was just meant as a joke, considering the articles mentioned that men are still, instinctively, cavemen.


----------



## Persephone (Nov 14, 2009)

DarkyNWO said:


> I'll let that slide cause I don't feel like getting myself banned.
> 
> Look princess, do you know how a 'nice guy' became a 'nice guy'?


Wow. Name-calling. I don't even- Nevermind.



> Most men in western society are brought up by their parents to be nice to girls. To be respectful and go out of their way to please them (for some reason) read; open doors, pull out chairs, give them presents. Why? Well, they ain't sure in the start, why ain't the girls doing nice things back? Is just their presence in his life enough to justify doing these seemingly mindless things?


Hm. I don't know, because it's just a nice thing to do? Can't you be nice without an ulterior motive? These nice things are called "nice" because presumably it shows that the doer is considerate of others's feelings. When you walk through a door, the person behind you wouldn't like the door to swing in his face, so knowing that neither of you would want that, you hold it open for them. Likewise, you give presents to people as a demonstration of your affection. Giving presents for some other purpose is called "bribery", and these are not limited to government and business circles. It's disingenuous. I don't know where you get off calling these things "mindless", but perhaps it tells more about your attitude than society's reason for teaching them not just to young boys, _but to everyone_. You think boys are the only ones chastised for not holding doors open? You think I wasn't, even up to my late teens?



> Then of course puberty hits and they start to realize why they've been taught to do these things and why it's considered so nice to do them. It's called courting* and has been around since like forever. However, our society have developed faster than our culture and thus, these things have lost some of their value, lost what they once were and became something else entierly, but thats still how men are raised to attract girls, to court them.


Really? So everything is about flattering a girl into a relationship with you? Do you hold doors open for old ladies? Or rich men? If you listen to rich men talk, hold doors open for them, be polite and respectful, do you expect him to dole out a share of his dough?



> So, they do all these things, they are nice, they listen, pull out chairs and so on. They have been thought that it means one thing, females another. So when it's not achiving the *desired effect* they look to why, and most people look at everything but themselves when it comes to things that are wrong in their life.


So to all of these so-called "nice guys", being nice is a means to an end. I fail to see why you don't understand that I, and the majority of thinking females, don't think that's "nice". Women are people, and this is real life. We don't have a set of buttons you can push to get the desired result, and girls were never taught that if someone holds the door open for you and listen to you like he fucking cares (he doesn't, apparently, according to your post), you're supposed to spread your legs for him. 

We're not "investments" that you can be sure to get a "return" on- we're _people_; these "nice guys" act like we aren't holding up our end of a deal when there's _no_ deal. You can be sure that if he articulates his desired "deal" to any female friend, she'd run far, far away. Girl friends hold doors open for each other _and_ listen to us, do you think if she's a lesbian she's entitled to bitch about this on the internet too? It's like learning the rules of a game that never really existed (or if it existed, it doesn't now), and then complain when the "game" doesn't work.



> So after some frustrating teenage years he becomes 18 and hits the pub, having heard tons of bawdy stories about that place. So he has not been that lucky with girls, maybe only had one or two girlfriends during his entire teenage years. So he is a bit shy, but perhaps manages to muster up some courage and actually speak with one of these females cause hey "It's just to man up, right?". Well, have you ever tried picking up girls in a pub? One wrong move and usually you're pretty much screwed in the getting laid department. This creates inmense pressure on the male thats trying to do the flirt, and makes him vulnerable, which ain't that comftrable.
> 
> So there is no way he's going to score in the pub, and with his previous history he becomes downright friggin' cynical about the whole thing and starts to blame the women. Why are they stuck-up bitches anyway? Why does he have to pay for their dinner, give her a gift, open the door into the resturaunt, pull out her chair, being incredibly nice and not get anything in return? I have no idea. You women state that you want equality all the time. So, pull out my chair and give me a sandwich damnit.
> 
> *Traditionally, in the case of a formal engagement, it has been perceived that it is the role of a male to actively "court" or "woo" a female, thus encouraging her to understand him and her receptiveness to a proposal of marriage.


I don't know about you, but I'm polite, I listen to their feelings and troubles, I pull out chairs and hold doors open for the aforementioned guy friends (I still balk at your calling me "princess"), I get food for them whenever I go for second rounds in the dining hall, I ask them what they need when I go to the supermarket, and bring meals to their rooms when they're sick. If a "nice guy" did all of the above for a hot girl and gets passed over for a "jerk", I'm sure we'll get another one of these posts that are just so god damn typical of "nice guys", but I have done this for male friends, and they have done it for me and each other, and none of us are bitter that _we aren't getting any_. In short, we believe in being nice because we're inherently nice people who care about each other. I have a boyfriend, and they have girlfriends, so we're off-limits to each other, but that doesn't stop us from being _friends_ because there are no romantic rewards on the other end.


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

Unfortunately the best book I've come across so far regarding this subject does not (yet) exist in English.

What a shame.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

I'm just a man - and that means I am what you perceive me to be. 

Every person is capable of sliding along the continuum of "Nice ---> Asshole" ... No one is ever at one particular spot along that continuum. These are not labels to go by, to conform to, nor stick with. 

If a guy decides to get rid of a woman because she wants to see him as a brother and he wants to see her as more, then that's his prerogative as well. Everyone has their own motivations that are unique to them and cannot be generalized so simply. 

I couldn't care less if anyone sees me as either an asshole, or a nice guy --- because these are two things I know I can be both of given the person I'm interacting with. If I'm nice to someone, it's because I like them for whatever reason - if I'm an asshole to someone, then they've done something to piss me off. I don't differentiate between gender when I get involved with people - though I have noticed that an inordinate amount of my friendships have always been with women. 

Some women just like having an empathic guy to talk to ... I don't care what their intentions are ... they're responsible for their own feelings as I am responsible for my own. If I've broken hearts by being a guy who women fall in love with, then it's not my responsibility. I'm not going to change the way I behave just because society or someone else expects me to behave a certain way. If I feel the need to get close to someone I do it .. If I want to get away from them, I do it. It's all a matter of personal choice in the end.

Edit: How many more of these threads can this forum host  Is it really infinite? Can we have a sticky about this particular topic in the venting section?

Maybe a couple of stickies ... one for "nice guys" who want to rant about being "friendzoned"

And another for women who want to rant about "nice guys" who like to rant about being "friendzoned".


----------



## Persephone (Nov 14, 2009)

Jawz said:


> If a guy decides to get rid of a woman because she wants to see him as a brother and he wants to see her as more, then that's his prerogative as well. Everyone has their own motivations that are unique to them and cannot be generalized so simply.


Exactly. If two people have conflicting and irreparable differences expectations from the relationship, both are entitled to walk away. But sinking into misogyny and throwing a fit when your (unspoken) expectations weren't met and spewing vitriol at the object of your affection because of that is not cool.


----------



## reletative (Dec 17, 2010)

@Persephone

Extra-thanks to your OP.

I agree with you. I often see friends bitching and moaning on facebook about how they're Nice Guys and the girls they like only like Assholes. It's so annoying. Stop whining already. Maybe women are put off by your whining. Maybe they're put off by your fake Nice Guy persona. Maybe they're put off by your clingy desperate manner? Whatever it is, take a look at your OWN self before pointing fingers elsewhere.

Oh and if you want a woman who likes to stay home and snuggle and have babies and settle down and commit....maybe that's not the woman at the club who's living a wild partying lifestyle. Sounds to me like the Nice Guys don't know how to find a woman who's ready for what they're looking for.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Khys said:


> @Persephone
> 
> Extra-thanks to your OP.
> 
> ...


One of the latest arguments I've noticed recently is an argument against the dynamics of the label itself. There's a new breed of men who desire to accept that label as well as deny the negative stereotypes associated with that label. Basically, first they see themselves as "nice guys" and then cry even more when everyone tells them all the bad stuff associated with that label trying to deny all those things in themselves --- when in fact, in doing so further substantiating the associations


----------



## Persephone (Nov 14, 2009)

Yardiff Bey said:


> @Persephone - get your friend to go through the book "No More Mr Nice Guy". It gives a different perspective on Nice Guys.
> 
> Worth a read for the girls too.


Looks like a great book on the subject. Reading the reviews make me think the author is advocating the view that once you like yourself, others will like you too. As a previously insecure girl whom no men liked, to where I am today, I can attest to the truth of that. I'll forward that to him, the same guy who's convinced I'll get bored of him if I transfer to his college and spend almost everyday with him- that's far out! He's one of the most intelligent and thoughtful guys I've met.


----------



## reletative (Dec 17, 2010)

Persephone said:


> once you like yourself, others will like you too.


IF ONLY everyone understood that


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

First thing I noticed chatting to people online was the 'nice guys' looking for 'friends and interesting people to chat with'. 

So why do they stop talking abruptly, if you say you're in a relationship? 

The easiest way to judge a man's character is how he treats those who can do nothing for him. 

My opinion, 90% of the single nice guys would be assholes if they had the looks/charm to pull it off. There's nothing nice about bitter spitefulness, I don't think it's frustration, I think it's true colours showing through.


----------



## Airy (Feb 7, 2011)

Khys said:


> IF ONLY everyone understood that


Which doesn't solve the problem of people liking themselves but still being 'nice guys' and 'assholes' or imo the more common hybrid 'nice guy-asshole'. Knowing who you are, respect and understanding will you get much further than just liking yourself but it definitely helps!


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

Its nothing to do with being nice, it's not being a wimp
The problem is most girls think that if you are nice then you're a wimp, but these girls are usually immature
Mature girls will look past it


----------



## Persephone (Nov 14, 2009)

Logical Ambivert Feeler said:


> Its nothing to do with being nice, it's not being a wimp
> The problem is most girls think that if you are nice then you're a wimp, but these girls are usually immature
> Mature girls will look past it


I do see some of that, in extremely immature girls who think: wow. He's nice to me. To _me_. Since I'm worth next to nothing, he must be dirt! But then it should be emphasized that _women_ (as in, those deserving of the title), the type you _want_ to be dating, will not think like that.


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

Persephone said:


> I do see some of that, in extremely immature girls who think: wow. He's nice to me. To _me_. Since I'm worth next to nothing, he must be dirt! But then it should be emphasized that _women_ (as in, those deserving of the title), the type you _want_ to be dating, will not think like that.


Lol I meant in the sense that the immature ones would go after bad-boys and the like, while the mature ones would go for the nice guy


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

I have seen nothing to suggest that girls view nice guys as wimps ... unless you're talking about a subset of girls whose tails you shouldn't be chasing anyways. And frankly, for the most part, I agree with the OP. The majority of self-described "nice guys" I've met IRL in fact turned out to be hugely misogynistic assholes. Generally, any person who thinks they're "worthy" of anyone and everyone ... yeah, sorry, they usually aren't.


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

koalaroo said:


> I have seen nothing to suggest that girls view nice guys as wimps ... unless you're talking about a subset of girls whose tails you shouldn't be chasing anyways. And frankly, for the most part, I agree with the OP. The majority of self-described "nice guys" I've met IRL in fact turned out to be hugely misogynistic assholes. Generally, any person who thinks they're "worthy" of anyone and everyone ... yeah, sorry, they usually aren't.


Thats the thing, I think it is very much a maturity thing, the more mature a girl is, the more likely she would go for a nice guy (an actual nice guy that is)


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Logical Ambivert Feeler said:


> Thats the thing, I think it is very much a maturity thing, the more mature a girl is, the more likely she would go for a nice guy (an actual nice guy that is)


Possibly. I don't think it has as much to do with maturity as it does with mentality (you could say that relates to immaturity or maturity, but I say maturity is generally a relative thing). The difference between an actual nice guy and a self-described nice guy is definitely a different thing, though.


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

koalaroo said:


> Possibly. I don't think it has as much to do with maturity as it does with mentality (you could say that relates to immaturity or maturity, but I say maturity is generally a relative thing). The difference between an actual nice guy and a self-described nice guy is definitely a different thing, though.


Well ofcourse, theres always a difference between any actual type of person and what they profess themselves to be. And the mentality thing makes sense, but the majority of girls I know go through this 'bad boy' phase when they are still immature, which they usually get out of. But yh some girls do just prefer that, a bad boy, sometimes due to underlying issues.


----------



## Yardiff Bey (Jun 5, 2011)

Persephone said:


> ...once you like yourself, others will like you too...





Khys said:


> IF ONLY everyone understood that


IMO it's not a case of liking yourself and then others liking you.

If you don't like yourself, then you hide yourself and show nothing. Difficult for a girl to fall for nothing.

Once you like yourself, you feel comfortable showing that self. Then others can decide if they like you - for being real, if nothing else.


----------



## Duck_of_Death (Jan 21, 2011)

Translation: I'm going to complain about "lesser" people to elevate my perceived superiority, point out the error of their ways and then relentlessly harass them until they change into what I expect them to be.

Props to @DarkyNWO as well--the majority of women out there aren't worth being "nice" to.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Duck_of_Death said:


> Translation: I'm going to complain about "lesser" people to elevate my perceived superiority, point out the error of their ways and then relentlessly harass them until they change into what I expect them to be.
> 
> Props to @DarkyNWO as well--the majority of women out there aren't worth being "nice" to.


Majority? Nah. I think it's a minority that doesn't deserve it. The thing is ... whining either way looks bad. Whether you're whining about whiners  It's still whining. That attracts no one.


----------



## Zorgh (Dec 11, 2011)

The whole "nice guy/friendzone problem" wouldn't exist if those guys stopped behaving like idiots. Everyone is different ofcourse, but to me it's idiotic to allow yourself to be "friendzoned" when you _really_ want another type of relationship. It's their own fault that they're in that situation. This goes for "nice girls" too, who we rarely hear about. This issue transcends gender.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

No self respecting woman wants to be with a guy who is more submissive than she is. I will admit, most assholes I have seen CAN get away with it because their looks pull them through. Imagine if an ugly guy was being an asshole to women? it would just not work out in his favour. Although, when you throw a stereotypical jock into the equation and he's being an asshole to a girl, then he will pobably get laid, but let's face it, most women wouldn't put up with a bad attitude or arrogance. Unless it's a superficial relationship where both parties are using each other. I believe that a man has to know when to grow a pair and stand up for himself, and when to be nice and charming. Too much of anything is not good for you.


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)

matt1991 said:


> No self respecting woman wants to be with a guy who is more submissive than she is.


I'm impressed. You've managed to fit so much wrong into one sentence.

First and foremost, you've put forth the assumption that all women are submissive. Badly worded, perhaps, but I think what's there was your actual intent.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

Cheveyo said:


> I'm impressed. You've managed to fit so much wrong into one sentence.
> 
> First and foremost, you've put forth the assumption that all women are submissive. Badly worded, perhaps, but I think what's there was your actual intent.


Everyone is submissive to an extent. There will always be a person above you who has more power, authority, strength, etc.


----------



## bigtex1989 (Feb 7, 2011)

The quintessential nice guy finishes last for a lot of reasons, and usually it has nothing to do with being a "nice guy".

Stereotypically, a nice guy is more shy than their jerky counterpart. This cuts down to how many girls he engages and the chances of success decrease. A nice guy is also less confident. Women can sniff out lack of confidence like a shark in a pool of blood. It's also an instant turn off in most cases as it is a sign of deeper issues. A nice guy is usually clingy, less attractive, more feminine, etc. Of course all this is based on the nice guy stereotype. None of those are desirable qualities. For all the bad qualities about jerks, they have self confidence and are uncompromising in who they are. What you see is what you get, which I imagine is actually refreshing for a lot of attractive women. 

The problem with the internet is, you have some genuinely nice guys who get emotionally invested too early (and sometimes it is unwarranted) and get hurt badly, sometimes never recovering. A majority of the internet "nice guys" are just assholes who aren't getting laid and want to look everywhere else except their Cheetos stained shirt, their pizza encrusted X-box headset, their pimple filled and dirty face, and body they have abused for at least a decade with no exercise and sunlight. The fact that they are strictly concerned with getting laid is a pretty big indicator that they aren't nice guys XD


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)

matt1991 said:


> Everyone is submissive to an extent. There will always be a person above you who has more power, authority, strength, etc.



It isn't submission to not always demand to do things your way, or fighting everyone at all times.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

matt1991 said:


> Although, when you throw a stereotypical jock into the equation and *he's being an asshole to a girl, then he will pobably get laid,* but let's face it, most women wouldn't put up with a bad attitude or arrogance.


Ummm what?

Gives me an idea for a meme

*Be asshole to girl*

*Get Laid *

*brofist*

:dry:


----------



## Airy (Feb 7, 2011)

Jawz said:


> Ummm what?
> 
> Gives me an idea for a meme
> 
> ...


Those already exist btw :frustrating:. And they have many likes on facebook and stuff (as with alot of the other garbage men vs women memes).


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Like I keep saying, guys who are actually nice guys are different than the majority of self-described nice guys (particularly on the internet). When you have an ulterior motive to being nice (such as, getting laid), then I'm sorry but you are most definitely not a "nice guy" ... especially when you then go on the internet and bitch about your particular female of interest who has you "friend zoned". You're just a strategizing douche bag who fails at strategy

Hey, maybe she actually figured out that you're a creeper and NOT actually a nice guy. Find a new game, player.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> Like I keep saying, guys who are actually nice guys are different than the majority of self-described nice guys (particularly on the internet). *When you have an ulterior motive to being nice (such as, getting laid)*, then I'm sorry but you are most definitely not a "nice guy" ... especially when you then go on the internet and bitch about your particular female of interest who has you "friend zoned". You're just a strategizing douche bag who fails at strategy
> 
> Hey, maybe she actually figured out that you're a creeper and NOT actually a nice guy. Find a new game, player.


But isn't it human nature to want to have sex? If no one wanted to, none of us would exist in the first place.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

Jawz said:


> Ummm what?
> 
> Gives me an idea for a meme
> 
> ...


I know it sounds dumb, but I have seen it MANY times myself.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

matt1991 said:


> But isn't it human nature to want to have sex? If no one wanted to, none of us would exist in the first place.


No, not really. Ask anyone who identifies as "asexual".


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> No, not really. Ask anyone who identifies as "asexual".


But their parents had to have had sex so that person exists. I looked for statistics on asexuals and could only find this, other than wikipedia.

Study: One in 100 adults asexual - CNN

So if that's correct, 99% of the world has sexual desire, so I still think it's safe to say it's human nature.


----------



## Emerson (Mar 13, 2011)

If you think you're a nice guy, you're not a nice guy. If a girl you like doesn't like you and she likes an 'asshole' look at it from someone elses stance, chances are you're the asshole, who thinks that by being a doormat, or that by acting in as a gentleman purely for the sake of sex or getting 'the girl' you're an asshole, not a nice guy.

Grow a set, man up, and drop these nice guy labels. You're a guy, you might be nice, you might not be don't let it define you.

And as for the friendzone? Really, lets all grow up really.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

matt1991 said:


> But their parents had to have had sex so that person exists. I looked for statistics on asexuals and could only find this, other than wikipedia.
> 
> Study: One in 100 adults asexual - CNN
> 
> So if that's correct, 99% of the world has sexual desire, so I still think it's safe to say it's human nature.


So, that makes it perfectly OK to strategize as a "the nice guy" while hoping to get laid, and then blaming the other party in question when your strategy fails? Something being "human nature" doesn't make every strategy to get something legitimate -- and in this case, playing the "nice guy" while not actually being a nice guy is the biggest losing strategy so far. Try another strategy to get it.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> So, that makes it perfectly OK to strategize as a "the nice guy" while hoping to get laid, and then blaming the other party in question when your strategy fails? Something being "human nature" doesn't make every strategy to get something legitimate -- and in this case, playing the "nice guy" while not actually being a nice guy is the biggest losing strategy so far. Try another strategy to get it.


People lie to get what they want and blame others for their mistakes all the time. It's been like that for thousands of years and it's not going to change any time soon.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

matt1991 said:


> But isn't it human nature to want to have sex? If no one wanted to, none of us would exist in the first place.


This is unrelated, but it's a massive generalization that 'everyone' wants sex. Please resaerch Asexuality.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

Human nature- "ordinary human behaviour, esp considered as less than perfect". Since apparently 99% of the world wants sex at one point or another, I would still consider that ordinary human behaviour, even if it's not shared by all.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

matt1991 said:


> Human nature- "ordinary human behaviour, esp considered as less than perfect". Since apparently 99% of the world wants sex at one point or another, I would still consider that ordinary human behaviour, even if it's not shared by all.


But the idea is to change "ordinary" human behaviour by broadening perspective and being accepting of the difference, not to "stick" to ideals of normal and just making statements like "That's how it's been so that's how it'll be". 

Because if people hadn't changed their ideas about what's "normal" or "ordinary" ... most of the world would still believe that the earth is flat and that it's a sin to bathe because it was normal in those eras. 

Evolution involves inclusion and acceptance and one of the reasons how that's possible is by examining differences and why they exist instead of proclaiming everything as a standard and adhering to that standard.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

So you think that over time there will be a lot more asexuals?


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

matt1991 said:


> So you think that over time there will be a lot more asexuals?


I think there are already more Asexuals than those who report in. Just as there are more Homosexuals and Bisexuals. Sexuality is one thing that's sadly both personal as well as public. There's a lot of factors when it comes to proclamation of ones sexuality and I do believe that the host of problems that Asexuals go through are probably more than the problems that even Homosexuals and Bisexuals do. 

Asexuality is largely misunderstood and based on whatever I know about human society, I can venture to guess that the pressure to "find a mate and settle down" may put Asexuals at a huge disadvantage. The odds of an asexual finding and falling in love with another asexual is extremely difficult. No one wears their sexuality tags in public ... Many asexuals settle for sexual relationships even though they may not "enjoy" them at all and turn sex into a chore / obligation that they have to perform --- never quite liking it, but forcing themselves to perform nonetheless. I'm also willing to bet that there are Asexuals, who never even consider the possibility that they may be Asexual. 

I do believe that the 99% figure could very well be misleading.


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)

Emerson said:


> If you think you're a nice guy, you're not a nice guy. If a girl you like doesn't like you and she likes an 'asshole' look at it from someone elses stance, chances are you're the asshole, who thinks that by being a doormat, or that by acting in as a gentleman purely for the sake of sex or getting 'the girl' you're an asshole, not a nice guy.
> 
> Grow a set, man up, and drop these nice guy labels. You're a guy, you might be nice, you might not be don't let it define you.
> 
> And as for the friendzone? Really, lets all grow up really.



I believe your, and a lot of others', idea of the men who lament being in the friendzone is incorrect. While not completely false, not all men who get put into the friendzone and hate it only want sex.

That's just an assumption you're making to make it easier to disregard them all.


A lot of men are genuinely interested in a relationship with the person. If all they wanted was sex, it wouldn't be that big of a problem. However, they run into a brick wall, of sorts.











A nice guy who gets friendzoned isn't simply a guy who thinks too highly of himself and blames everyone else for his problem. No matter how much you may look down on them, they will never be that kind of person.
Thinking that it's their fault is no better than thinking all women are whores.


----------



## Playful Proxy (Feb 6, 2012)

I'm just going to throw out this bit of data: Comparing the time I went from being completely unsuccessful in romantic relationships to back when I used PUA tactics (I didn't follow completely by the book but general concept), I did get results. They were quite remarkable and it was pretty cool aside from the massive amount of upkeep it required to maintain (it stated that you flirt with multiple women until one bit, so you had like 4 mini 'games' going on with separate women until one really got interested. I got more interest in those few months than I had in my life. 

It is not all about looks. There is a reason many 'nice guys' turn to PUA. It works. It's a pain in the ass, but it works. It's biggest weakness is that if you are in it for a relationship, you always have that PUA shield in between you and your partner. You are always evaluating body language, always interpreting signals and adjusting yourself accordingly. They are not in a relationship with you, they are in a relationship with who you have found out is who they want in a relationship. Like I said, it has massive upkeep if a relationship is your intention. It reminds me of OS emulation in a computer system. It works, it does its job, but there are downfalls, lack in quality, bugs, etc. But hey, compared to nothing, it wasn't half bad (Pretend like you didn't trying to emulate OSX Lion on an AMD processor computer...that is more than slow and buggy). 

Now, let the judgmental flaming begin!


----------



## lifeisanillusion (Feb 21, 2011)

If anything, these threads show the double standards out there. If your a guy, and so called "nice" and your not in a relationship, it is all your thought. Doesn't seem like people that are in relationships, especially women, where the relationship isn't that good, get judged that harshly? Well it's all your fault for staying in it. Maybe it's just me? 

Also think that not all these "nice" guys have low confidence and the "assholes or pick up artists" have lots of confidence. May appear that way on the surface, but some of them have low confidence and hide behind by dating all the time or getting laid. Low confidence can be showed at both ends of the spectrum ie never having sex or being single or getting lots of sex and always being in a relationship. 

The only real constant or important thing to take away is the liking yourself. If you genuinely like yourself, all the rest will take care of it self. Whether your in a relationship or not.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

Signify said:


> I'm just going to throw out this bit of data: Comparing the time I went from being completely unsuccessful in romantic relationships to back when I used PUA tactics (I didn't follow completely by the book but general concept), I did get results. They were quite remarkable and it was pretty cool aside from the massive amount of upkeep it required to maintain (it stated that you flirt with multiple women until one bit, so you had like 4 mini 'games' going on with separate women until one really got interested. I got more interest in those few months than I had in my life.
> 
> It is not all about looks. There is a reason many 'nice guys' turn to PUA. It works. It's a pain in the ass, but it works. It's biggest weakness is that if you are in it for a relationship, you always have that PUA shield in between you and your partner. You are always evaluating body language, always interpreting signals and adjusting yourself accordingly. They are not in a relationship with you, they are in a relationship with who you have found out is who they want in a relationship. Like I said, it has massive upkeep if a relationship is your intention. It reminds me of OS emulation in a computer system. It works, it does its job, but there are downfalls, lack in quality, bugs, etc. But hey, compared to nothing, it wasn't half bad (Pretend like you didn't trying to emulate OSX Lion on an AMD processor computer...that is more than slow and buggy).
> 
> Now, let the judgmental flaming begin!


So basically what you're trying to say is that as long as a guy who is not all about looks knows how to talk to women, then he should still be pretty successful?


----------



## Playful Proxy (Feb 6, 2012)

matt1991 said:


> So basically what you're trying to say is that as long as a guy who is not all about looks knows how to talk to women, then he should still be pretty successful?


 I was rebuking the argument that stated women were not interested in the guy because of his looks. I would have thought it would be common sense that you need to get a basic feel for where you stand in the looks department and realize that you cannot stray too far away while looking for a woman. But keep in mind, how you see yourself, how other people see you, and how others see themselves are completely separate ballgames. Simply saying you are too ugly for the woman is a bit of a stretch. A general rule of thumb: compare with her ex boyfriend if she has one (or her boyfriend if you are one of those). That will give you a decent idea where her standards are.


----------



## Impermanence (Apr 24, 2012)

Signify said:


> I was rebuking the argument that stated women were not interested in the guy because of his looks. I would have thought it would be common sense that you need to get a basic feel for where you stand in the looks department and realize that you cannot stray too far away while looking for a woman. But keep in mind, how you see yourself, how other people see you, and how others see themselves are completely separate ballgames. Simply saying you are too ugly for the woman is a bit of a stretch. *A general rule of thumb: compare with her ex boyfriend if she has one (or her boyfriend if you are one of those). That will give you a decent idea where her standards are.*


I'll take you up on this advice.


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

I really do think a lot of the problems stem after going for the wrong girl, maybe you shouldnt go for the most attractive
That being said, it is very easy to get these girls, if you know what to say and how


----------



## snowbell (Apr 2, 2012)

I can't help but notice the irony of this being posted by a lady named Persephone . 

You do raise good points though


----------



## Cat King Cole (Mar 11, 2012)

Gender is really important here.

I think there's a subset of "nice guys" who just struggle with the masculine gender's script. In my case, I'm just not that physical (and additionally pretty undersexed to begin with), and need my partner to close the distance, so to speak. I suppose this could be construed as lack of interest, or judged harshly as "failing to man up" (I've seen this attitude before).

Some of the lamenting the friendzone can be because you just don't want to play the dating game and let relationships develop in a way that gets you _a relationship_. It seems like people who want a "companion" and not a sexual partner have a much harder time. Sadly again, these kinds of emotional schemes and that level of passivity is only acceptable in women--men are supposed to want to plant their seed everywhere, not be sensitive and artistic cave hermits like Chopin or The Doctor.

That said, there are plenty of forward women out there who aren't bitchy about men conforming rigidly to a very specific gender image they hold, so that brand of nice guy has decent prospects for the future.


----------



## Logical Ambivert Feeler (Aug 17, 2011)

Lots of girls don't like nice guys for one way or another, so just go for the ones that do
They are a rarity and worth it


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

Double thank you. Not much else to say here, you're all pretty much covering all of it already.


Neverontime said:


> 1.So why do they stop talking abruptly, if you say you're in a relationship?
> 
> 2.The easiest way to judge a man's character is how he treats those who can do nothing for him.


1.That' why it's a good idea to have in your online profiles that you are in a relationship or married even if you are not.

2.Actually this point I've also possibly proved to be true, but in my case it's more like "how he treats those who _will do_ nothing for him." I wasn't really surprised the last time I was in this situation, either when I'd say the word "no" when trying to emotionally manipulate me or when making very unreasonable demands.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Most girls prefer a guy who is actually a genuinely nice guy (he doesn't have to be nice ALL of the time, though). Too many self-described nice guys, are as I've repeatedly said, are not actually nice guys. The proof is in the pudding as they say: these "nice guys" then go on to lament, bitch and whine about how their female of interest isn't interested in them. Instead of blaming it on ANYONE but themselves (of course, they're perfect, they're "the nice guy") they blame it on the female who isn't interested in them.


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> Most girls prefer a guy who is actually a genuinely nice guy (he doesn't have to be nice ALL of the time, though). Too many self-described nice guys, are as I've repeatedly said, are not actually nice guys. The proof is in the pudding as they say: these "nice guys" then go on to lament, bitch and whine about how their female of interest isn't interested in them. Instead of blaming it on ANYONE but themselves (of course, they're perfect, they're "the nice guy") they blame it on the female who isn't interested in them.


I`m going to throw you a question. I agree with some of your points but to be blunt you`re being one sided and drawing superficial lines in the sand. Nothing in life is that simple, those guys are in a much more complicated situation than you are giving them credit for. I appreciate that as a woman you have that side of the perspective, fine but there is a whole other set of circumstances across the bridge on the other hill. I suspect the ranting about a woman the "nice guy" you're deriding is really ranting about his inability to obtain women he desires, he's railing against the his inability in the world. The nice guy knows he is the problem on some level, he just can't understand it, if he could he wouldn't be in that situation. Given the way I know women talk about men they are interested in or dating, they aren't example giving fair assessment to their guys situations or perspective any more than the ranting you're commenting on. That is the nature of bitching about something, people don't bitch in balanced perspective. 

So my question, and this is sincere I want to know your answer,

If you don`t want men being nice to you to display interest, why do you expect them to be communicating nicely with you in the first place? I understand you want them to be nice because they are nice, but why are they talking to a woman in the first place if it is not a situation of interest?

I have met most of my female friends through shared circumstance, some of whom are close friends but without those shared circumstances would never have entered my life. If I am approaching a woman outside of my normal circumstances, I'm probably approaching her with romantic interest. I may be nice because I am nice, but I will also be being nice because I am interested in that woman. The meeting happens because I am interested. Both can be true. I also may tease her more than I normally would tease someone, depends on who she is and whats going on. We attempt to play, hence why it is called game, its supposed to be fun. 

I don't generally talk to random dudes precisely because I lack a motive to do so. Guys meet most of their guy friends through shared circumstance as well.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

I've had guys be mean to me who consider themselves to be "nice guys." 

Usually guys consider themselves to be "nice guys" when they are relationship-oriented and are capable of having female friends. A lot of times men who are Feelers consider themselves to be "nice guys" by default of feeling themselves to be more sensitive or ethical perhaps than their Thinking counterparts. 

However, a "nice guy" can be vengeful, emotionally unstable, vindictive, abusive, or conveniently "forget" the girls he screwed over via one-night-stands or girls he put in his very own "friend zone." A "nice guy" can also be a bitter, arrogant person whose sense of entitlement and "poor me" is anything but attractive.

Also, in my opinion, the worst case scenario is the guy who thinks he's a "nice guy" ...but that's only because he's rejected by women he deems goddesses, meanwhile he gives the cold shoulder to "nice girls" who would actually have a relationship with him.

NOW, I'm not saying you aren't genuinely a nice guy. In fact, you can genuinely be a nice guy and have emotional problems and be vengeful or abusive or oblivious to the fact that you're ignoring the kinds of girls who will actually, you know, date you.

I think my ESFJ ex is a nice guy. He's about as Fe as they come, and he'd even put on little puppet shows with stuffed animals for me in cute voices and tell me he loved me eight times a day. He's also an angry, abusive emotional trainwreck who I had to force myself to leave out of self-preservation because he wouldn't get therapy, because he was afraid they'd take his sense of "self" away, whatever that means.

I also know an ISTJ "nice guy" who is loyal, consistent, a good listener, and is sensitive enough to listen to 80's love songs. He's also into negging, emotional manipulation, and has so many issues with women I'm not even sure he realizes how screwed up he is. I wanted to believe at one point he was just an asshole who was deluded into thinking he's a "nice guy" but his behavior of continuing to passive-aggressively pursue me (yes, I know, I didn't know you could passive-aggressively pursue someone either) when it has ceased to make sense helps me to see that he has some serious, serious issues with allowing himself to be "vulnerable" or something. 

I'm not saying there are not genuinely nice guys, but human beings are pretty much more complex than that. Most people have good and bad, nice and mean, and most people have some kind of hang-ups. 

There's also a difference between being "nice" and being "passive." A lot of women aren't attracted to passive, and unfortunately I do think sometimes I've made some choices for mates because I'd rather be with someone who is decisive or dominant and less "nice" because I am not attracted to passive men.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Cormo said:


> In one of the blog articles linked to in this thread, the concept of negging was exemplified with "Nice dress, I saw it on another girl recently" and "Beautiful nails, are they real". Strangely, I've only ever heard gay men mention dresses and nails and things like that. Perhaps men have become such pussies. Maybe that's why PUA is so popular.


LOL. I've had MY HAIR negged by a straight man. 



> "Nice shoes, I have a pair myself".


Ahhh...metrosexuals. This totally cracked me up trolololololol. 



> I don't do any PUA stuff. When I last dated, I went to my dates' house with a dead animal I'd hunted, and a DAB radio, as a gift to her. She wasn't impressed, though...


A dead animal?


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Neon Knight said:


> Double thank you. Not much else to say here, you're all pretty much covering all of it already.
> 
> 1.That' why it's a good idea to have in your online profiles that you are in a relationship or married even if you are not.


Always do, but most don't bother to read it, they just look for the pictures.


----------



## Kormoran (Mar 15, 2012)

fourtines said:


> LOL. I've had MY HAIR negged by a straight man.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hahaha. That was a joke, but for a very long time it was considered tradition to bring gifts to a lady. I figured a dead animal would be useful in a slightly caveman way. It's something Bear Grylls or Lars Monsen would give.


----------



## DarkWarrior (Sep 21, 2011)

I personally just had bad luck with women, which I'm sure is the case for some guys. They think they are doing it right, and well they are, except they choose women who are assholes. I mean seriously my first girl cheated on me. That left me emotionally damaged, and it seeped through. I was being nice I was acting the same way I do now, except I was wounded emotionally, and women would sense that, and back the fuck off. Well I finally got over it all and what do you know, I find my wonderful girlfriend a couple of months later.

So here in short this is how you fix the issue.

1. Don't date Assholes
2. Sort yourself the Fuck out.
3. Don't change the nice side of you, that isn't the problem, obviously.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

@Mountainshepherd -

Again, I've explained that there's a difference between a genuinely nice guy and a self-described nice guy on the internet, who then goes on misogynistic rants because playing nice (when he's actually little more than a "player") doesn't get him the girl or get him laid. I'm not drawing lines in the sand; there is literally a difference between these two types of people. Person A is genuinely nice (with a little spice); Person B isn't actually a nice person, except to get what he wants (it's a strategy of "the game"). Person A is nice; Person B is playing a role. 

I have never said that I don't want men being nice to me to display interest -- I just said a genuinely nice person (a guy in this case) doesn't have to be "nice" all of the time. What I mean by this (since things need clarification) is that if a person needs to be censured and someone I consider nice does it, I don't think less of them. If a genuinely nice person fights back for him/herself or for someone else, I don't think less of them. This doesn't exclude a man from being nice to me when he's interested in me. These actions don't exclude a person from actually being nice.

What does exclude someone from being a genuinely nice person? That person who plays "the game" trying to get someone interested in them. Then, when the person of interest shows no interest beyond friendship, the person playing the nice "game" turns into a raging asshole. Being nice back to someone who is nice to you and making them your friend ... that isn't leading the guy on. If you're a guy and you think that it is, you need to reevaluate yourself and your actions. 

I also just don't buy that a man and a woman can't just be friends, since I have many guy friends with whom there is no sexual interest between us -- for the most part, our interaction is intellectual dialogue or video games. These are people with whom I share a mutual respect and friendship, but no sexual interest or spark between. The assumption you seem to have is that guys and girls can't simply be friends ... with nothing sexual involved. Guess what? It happens, for both attractive and unattractive people.

Furthermore, light teasing in terms of flirtation is perfectly fine ... and doesn't go against the genuine nice guy definition. Your definition of "the game" is different than mine, because I don't think of mutual "courting" as a game. When I'm referencing "the game", I'm referencing what "the player" does -- not what a genuinely nice person would do. If we want to call "courting" a "game" ... let me just say that the courting game is different from the player's game.


----------



## Hosker (Jan 19, 2011)

Is being nice the only thing these guys have going for them? If so, they must be really boring.


----------



## Persephone (Nov 14, 2009)

Hosker said:


> Is being nice the only thing these guys have going for them? If so, they must be really boring.


One of the unfair aspects of life is that good looking guys tend to get away with being assholes. To remedy that, less attractive guys go the "nice" route, but many of them, as I have noticed, are not inherently nice people, but they literally don't know what else to do. To be fair, there are good looking nice people, but it seems the kind of guys these "nice guys" complain about are always handsome bastards who can get away with bloody murder, or really eccentric or interesting people who can get away with much of the same (to cite a female example, see Alma Schindler. That woman is just a shitty girlfriend and wife, yet she still gets the leading artists, composers and architects of the day going gaga over her, being a woman with astounding intellect and good looks)



Signify said:


> I was rebuking the argument that stated women were not interested in the guy because of his looks. I would have thought it would be common sense that you need to get a basic feel for where you stand in the looks department and realize that you cannot stray too far away while looking for a woman. But keep in mind, how you see yourself, how other people see you, and how others see themselves are completely separate ballgames. Simply saying you are too ugly for the woman is a bit of a stretch. A general rule of thumb: compare with her ex boyfriend if she has one (or her boyfriend if you are one of those). That will give you a decent idea where her standards are.


While looks are not everything, there are things analogous to it that keeps a man from the "friendzone". Whichever way you look at it, if you want to be in a relationship with someone, you need to have something to offer them. Some people have looks, some people have a great sense of humor, others have a flair in their personality and others yet have virtuosic musical abilities. Again, as Hosker said, if all you have going for you is "niceness", you haven't got much at all. Personality is something everyone has. If you simply do not like yourself, none of it will come out. For some, personality is their biggest asset and given that women have such diverse interests and tastes, you're bound to find someone for you.

I do agree with you that to woo a woman, you should know what she looked for in the past to get a good idea of your own chances (unless it was so abusive there was no way she was going back to anything like that)


----------



## Hosker (Jan 19, 2011)

Persephone said:


> One of the unfair aspects of life is that good looking guys tend to get away with being assholes. To remedy that, less attractive guys go the "nice" route, but many of them, as I have noticed, are not inherently nice people, but they literally don't know what else to do. To be fair, there are good looking nice people, but it seems the kind of guys these "nice guys" complain about are always handsome bastards who can get away with bloody murder, or really eccentric or interesting people who can get away with much of the same (to cite a female example, see Alma Schindler. That woman is just a shitty girlfriend and wife, yet she still gets the leading artists, composers and architects of the day going gaga over her, being a woman with astounding intellect and good looks)


I can definitely see how someone would go down that route: "What I'm doing now hasn't worked so far, so why would it in the future? I'll try something else." Also, I guess blaming a lack of relationships on being a Nice Guy would preferable to blaming it your own appearance, if they didn't feel confident with it.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

To the honest nice guys out there:

Some nice men really do get unfairly rejected for shallow reasons, or because niceness is mistaken for weakness. You aren't all alike, and each of you has your own reasons for being a nice guy. If you are nice because you sincerely care about other people, then you are pure at heart, and you definitely deserve to be loved. 

Here is where some women are likely to disagree with me. Almost all people, male and female, engage in behaviors designed to attract the mates we desire, and being nice for the sake of being liked isn't always a bad thing as long as it isn't inauthentic or contrived. It is natural to have wants and needs, and to take action to make your situation work out in a manner that fulfills you. I see nothing wrong with intentionally trying to get someone to like you, as long as you aren't being dishonest in the process, and as long as you aren't encouraging anyone to be attracted to you for the wrong reasons. If you honestly feel like writing romantic songs for a woman you love, and playing them under her window at night, or otherwise feel like being sappy and sweet, then that is exactly what you should do, as long as you aren't disrespecting the woman's boundaries. Just try not to be creepy or threatening about it, because men sometimes forget that nearly all women live in constant fear of sexual predators. Respect her feelings as much as you want her to respect yours. 

One shouldn't have to pretend to care less than one actually cares. Showing signs of submission when one feels emotionally vulnerable around someone is not necessarily evil or manipulative. It might be the most sincere expression possible. It doesn't make you less manly. It makes you human. A woman who demands that you always be dominant, and that you never seem to care too much, or who disbelieves all of your attempts at expressing how you feel, is probably the kind of woman who can't appreciate the depth of your feelings. Maybe she has been hurt by so many dishonest men that she is in no position to handle a new romantic attachment, or maybe she just wants to be with someone who makes her feel helpless, because being controlled means feeling safe and nurtured to some people. Whatever her reasons, she will probably always expect you to love her less than she loves you, and won't trust your sincerity when you go out of your way to please her. She will probably expect you to hide your feelings indefinitely.

Why are women so unwilling to trust your kindness? There are the false nice guys who give the real nice guys a bad name. There are manipulative creeps, and there are cowards with control issues. They are all mixed together with the honest men, and the categories can be difficult to distinguish. The scary part is that the fake nice guys don't always know who they are. If you have read this far, and have agreed with most of my points, this is where things might get dangerous, because I am about to put your niceness to the test. 

Do you discriminate against otherwise compatible women for shallow reasons, such as for being poor, fat, of a certain race, physically disabled, or for having asymmetrical facial features?

If so, you are not a nice guy. At best, you sabotage yourself by limiting your options in stupid ways, and at worst, you might be a hypocrite. If you have ever complained about how all of the pretty girls are materialists who won't date you because you don't have a nice enough car, or about how unfair it is that the hotties all want men who are taller than they are, you should know that you are getting exactly what you deserve, because you are only being treated the way you treat others. As you probably know, it isn't right for girls to treat people that way. What you might not know is that it isn't right for guys to do it either. 

Do you expect a woman to have sex with you to reward you for spending your time and money on her? 

If so, you are not a nice guy. You should probably find a prostitute, because it would be more honest. Only give a woman your efforts and resources if you actually care about her as a person. Seeing her as a sex vending machine that is malfunctioning when it doesn't release the product you paid for is one of the surest ways to make her feel objectified.

Do you consider women mostly interchangeable?

If so, you are not a nice guy. If you ever talk about wanting to "get a girl," as though we were all pretty much the same, each being just as good as any other, then you will not find the right one. When the woman of your dreams sees you looking for women in a non-specific way, she will not feel respected as an individual. Try to empathize. Would you really want to be with someone who made you think of yourself as one of many equally acceptable options? Would you really accept being treated like a meaningless commodity when a different woman might think of you as the best one for her? Wouldn't you rather be the only one she wants, special to the one who understand you and considers you irreplaceable?

Do you ever consider behaving in inauthentic ways in order to get attention from women?

If so, you are not a nice guy. Have you ever thought, "If she doesn't like me when I'm nice, maybe I'll start acting like an asshole so she will notice me?" Have you ever gone out of your way to get a prestigious job you hated, for the sole purpose of impressing a woman by making her think you were a different kind of person? If so, perhaps you planned to keep up the act indefinitely, which would have probably turned you into a resentful jerk eventually, or maybe you were going to pull the old bait-and-switch on the unsuspecting target. Whatever your long-term plan is in such situations, it is always unfair to the woman you are pursuing.

Do you get angry when women think of you as "just" a friend?

If so, you probably aren't a nice guy. Being friends is a special honor, even if it isn't exactly what you were hoping for. If the idea of friendship is so upsetting to you, how could you possibly care about someone enough to want a sexual relationship with her, which requires an even greater level of trust and intimacy? If you have presented yourself as a friend, and end up getting what you seemed to be aiming for, it is not a rejection. Friendships can grow into more, but even when they don't, they should be cherished. If you think you are in love with someone, but you are angry about having to be her friend, then you probably aren't really in love, and you probably aren't a very good friend.

If you don't engage in any of those not-so-nice behaviors, you are probably an authentic nice guy, and you're probably sick to death of hearing about how much all "nice" guys suck, or how all guys who seem nice are probably lying to get sex. I'm sorry a few jerks have made life harder for the rest of you. Please be encouraged by the fact that some of us still believe in your existence. We may struggle to discern which of you are real, but we know you can't all be pretending.


----------



## Elaur (Jan 5, 2010)

It's amazing how the "nice guys" either

1. Are only interested in "hot" girls who are douchebags themselves. This type normally puts down the "nice girls" because they aren't "what they want" (the girls they think are the hot girls) This type is also why PUA gets a good name.

2. Don't ask girls out.

I know a "nice guy" with all the normal nice guy complaints who ended up dating married women. Such a "nice" guy


----------



## Hruberen (Jan 2, 2012)

Well I have no experience being friendzoned, and i've only conciously friendzoned someone once, but that was due to sexuality issues. However, I have an ENTP friend who is in the friendzone with his crush. 

What makes this bad, is that instead of stating she just wants to be friends, she is leading him on, she'll kiss him but never wants to form a monogamous relationship with him publicly. She slept with another guy while his was going on, and I haven't heard about him since, though he is in my Algebra class. It's different almost every week, and she asks everyone to do EVERYTHING for her.

@snail



> Do you discriminate against otherwise compatible women for shallow reasons, such as for being poor, fat, of a certain race, physically disabled, or for having asymmetrical facial features?





> Do you consider women mostly interchangeable?


Seems conflicting, If a guy places high standards, according to the latter, he is a nice guy, but due to his high standards there will be people he won't consider, making him a mean guy.

Sometimes for weight, it's less of being fat or skinny, it's finding someone who is close to your weight, in some cases (and in mine) since we're on the skinny side, and it doesn't get any skinnier........


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Cormo said:


> Hahaha. That was a joke, but for a very long time it was considered tradition to bring gifts to a lady. I figured a dead animal would be useful in a slightly caveman way. It's something Bear Grylls or Lars Monsen would give.


Hey, I have no problem if it's an animal you planned to eat, skin, and use nearly every part of for your own survival. My exes dad used to make "deer jerky." 

However, "dead animal" also conjures up images of accidental roadkill, or house pets and cute bunnies tormented by sociopaths.


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> @Mountainshepherd -
> 
> Again, I've explained that there's a difference between a genuinely nice guy and a self-described nice guy on the internet, who then goes on misogynistic rants because playing nice (when he's actually little more than a "player") doesn't get him the girl or get him laid. I'm not drawing lines in the sand; there is literally a difference between these two types of people. Person A is genuinely nice (with a little spice); Person B isn't actually a nice person, except to get what he wants (it's a strategy of "the game"). Person A is nice; Person B is playing a role.


I actually wanted to avoid being this blunt but you seem to want me to be. The tone of everything that follows is a reply to your own tone.

True nice guys (any man with real confidence) don't need someone else to define who they are, they know it for themselves. No man should need your subjective definition of what a nice guy is because the concept is a self serving fiction. We are all nice or not nice in different circumstances. I'm known amoung my friends for both being very kind and for being a person you don't want to push to the edge because I can be merciless. I live my life by a standard and that standard makes me both kind and cruel at times. They aren't mutually exclusive. I've treated some women poorly and I've been treated poorly by some women, they are parts of who I am but they don't define me. 



koalaroo said:


> I have never said that I don't want men being nice to me to display interest -- I just said a genuinely nice person (a guy in this case) doesn't have to be "nice" all of the time. What I mean by this (since things need clarification) is that if a person needs to be censured and someone I consider nice does it, I don't think less of them. If a genuinely nice person fights back for him/herself or for someone else, I don't think less of them. This doesn't exclude a man from being nice to me when he's interested in me. These actions don't exclude a person from actually being nice.


That is a reasonable assessment of your position but I didn't actually ask you that question. It seems like you're applying niceness with too broad of a brush. Niceness exist in circumstances, no one is inherently nice unless they are emotionally disturbed and lack depth of expression. People choose to be nice or not to be nice, those choices have motives.



koalaroo said:


> What does exclude someone from being a genuinely nice person? That person who plays "the game" trying to get someone interested in them. Then, when the person of interest shows no interest beyond friendship, the person playing the nice "game" turns into a raging asshole. Being nice back to someone who is nice to you and making them your friend ... that isn't leading the guy on. If you're a guy and you think that it is, you need to reevaluate yourself and your actions.


Thank you for the inappropriate and presumptuous personal advice, I always enjoy getting emotional schooling from someone whose arguments carry so much anger and recrimination for others.

I agree with you BTW (as I said in my reply to you I agree with many of your points), being spineless and nice to someone and then getting mad about them not giving you sex is childish, but its usually more complicated than that. Men aren't born with an internal playbook on how to court women, lots of men really suck at it and keep fighting battles they should walk away from. I don't dispute that, I just don't think you can define who they are as people from one situation you barely understand. Some of these poor bastards have been lead on by women who knew what they were doing to them, sometimes the anger is valid. Sometimes its a pissy child raging at the world because they can't express themselves properly, specific circumstances are always important. 



koalaroo said:


> I also just don't buy that a man and a woman can't just be friends, since I have many guy friends with whom there is no sexual interest between us -- for the most part, our interaction is intellectual dialogue or video games. These are people with whom I share a mutual respect and friendship, but no sexual interest or spark between. The assumption you seem to have is that guys and girls can't simply be friends ... with nothing sexual involved. Guess what? It happens, for both attractive and unattractive people.


I quite firmly believe men and women can be friends, depending on how both behave. Please read my post again you missed the part where I referred to my female friends. I talked about this in detail precisely to avoid you replying like this paragraph. My closest friend is as woman, she is the person I would call if I needed to talk to someone after a tragedy. Yet as I said in my post, I would never have met her had I not trained her on the job. We traveled completely different social circles and likely would never have met otherwise. 

What you complaining about ignores a simple point, most people don't meet without a motive or a cause to their meeting. You cannot untie one from the other, independent action without motive basically doesn't exist. It is the cause and effect relationship, there is no effect without a cause. Circumstance can bring people together without motive, those kinds of relationships may not have sexual elements because sex may not be an applicable variable. If a guy is approaching a woman without those circumstances, of his own volition, it is probably sexual by the math alone. 



koalaroo said:


> Furthermore, light teasing in terms of flirtation is perfectly fine ... and doesn't go against the genuine nice guy definition. Your definition of "the game" is different than mine, because I don't think of mutual "courting" as a game. When I'm referencing "the game", I'm referencing what "the player" does -- not what a genuinely nice person would do. If we want to call "courting" a "game" ... let me just say that the courting game is different from the player's game.


How do you think you've extrapolated any concept of why my idea of courting is from a simple assertion that it should be fun and can involve niceness or teasing? Your reply also repeats what I said as if I didn't just say it. You know the part where I said "depending on the person and the situation". I used the term "game" because it is linguistically convenient and has broad definitions far beyond the PUA use of the term. The fact that you are hung up on that use isn't my problem. To make this simple, I do not use PUA material nor do I endorse it. As previous posters have said some of its interesting and useful, but it isn't how I go about it. As I mentioned earlier I live my life by my own standard and their methodology generally doesn't jive with my standard. I could use it and it would be effective but that isn't how I like to play, I have too much respect for my fellow human beings, men and women alike. 


You are taking extreme efforts to misunderstand me and avoid a direct question. If you didn't want to answer the question I can accept that and I can accept being directly told that. The rest of your reply was unnecessary repetition filled with unfounded presumptions that had nothing to do with what I said or what I asked.

My point is this. The guys you are getting so angry at, the self proclaimed nice guys, are men with confidence problems and personal expression issues. They need understanding and guidance, not criticism and BS tossed out with a healthy side of rage. Many of these guys are actually also nice guys, but they are spineless with women because they lack romantic confidence or understanding. Your replies appear so wrapped up in their own pain that you would deny the fact that these men themselves are in pain. That is what I meant when I called your expressed viewpoint narrow minded, you're forgetting they are human beings with failings, pains, and confusion of their own. Many of these guys aren't manipulative false "nice guys", they just don't know how show women their affections in better ways. They don't understand how to make women see them as men.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

@Mountainshepherd - I answered your question. If you can't find it in my response ... then that's your loss. I don't know what "pain" you're talking about other than my irritation with people who think they're nice and actually aren't (back in the day, people called this "putting on airs"). 

Talking about extreme extrapolation ...


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

Hruberen said:


> @snail
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It is possible for men to treat women like individuals, and to have standards that take each woman's individual character into account, without being shallow about her body or any of her other possessions. I fail to see how these two requirements are conflicting. 

If the only kinds of standards one can imagine for distinguishing individual women are physical standards, then I can see how such a person might be confused. Otherwise, there is no reason to assume that meeting the basic requirements for niceness in one category negates one's ability to meet the basic requirements for niceness in the other. 

A person doesn't have to make every possible mistake in order to be messing up his status as a sincere nice guy. Even if a man has passed the part of the nice guy test that requires him to treat women as unique individuals, he may have failed another part of the test by answering that he sees their uniqueness as being a physical quality, and that while he has standards, those standards are misguided because they have to do with the perception that women are physical objects. A man who feels that a woman's worth as a human being, and more specifically, as a romantic partner, is capable of being diminished by the kind of body she owns, is not an actual nice guy, but will probably be unaware of his not-so-nice status even when confronted about his tendency to unfairly objectify people.

However, there is also some variation within categories, and nice guys sometimes make mistakes, just as not-so-nice guys are sometimes kind to the people they care about. Some niceness is situational. The entire topic is more complex than it seems, and what I am presenting is only a simplified version of it that relies on the assumption that people have habits and belief systems that they live by, and are usually inclined to behave according to patterns.


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> @Mountainshepherd - I answered your question. If you can't find it in my response ... then that's your loss. I don't know what "pain" you're talking about other than my irritation with people who think they're nice and actually aren't (back in the day, people called this "putting on airs").
> 
> Talking about extreme extrapolation ...


What loss? 

You answered like a politician. You know, ignoring facts and replying based on personal ideology.
I gave a detailed reply to show you respect, which you clearly don't want to show yourself. Yet you're complaining about people being manipulative which is about not respecting other human beings. 

The emoticon is a nice childish touch btw, but I guess that suits your tone.


----------



## Duck_of_Death (Jan 21, 2011)

Runa said:


> I think the nice girls might have the same problem. They prefer douchebags, and then they complain when the guy doesn't wanna stay with them.
> 
> I know this girl who keeps talking about feminism, but chases after douchy alphamales like they're eldorado or something. and then she complains about how they only want one night stands, and how girls should stick together against those types. I mean, why won't people admit to their own mistakes?
> 
> when it comes to the nice guys I completely agree with @snail. I can see the frustration when being nice doesn't cut it. But girls are just as much human beings as boys. we have our own preferences and attractions. *we're not robots who will go home with the first guy who says the magic password or something*.


Bravo. This is much, much, MUCH more common than the nice guy chasing after the supermodel. 

On an additional note: People who tout their looks over and over again are generally not as attractive as they wish they were.


----------



## Playful Proxy (Feb 6, 2012)

@snail I am interpreting that you view bodily image as something which should not matter at all? What about sexual attraction? I could be wrong, but I believe that is quite an important factor. While I can love someone's personality and get along great with them, I can't have romantic feelings toward their brain. There needs to be both appearance and the ability to carry on a conversation more interesting than who won last night's football game, what happened on Jersey Shore, or which actors/actresses are now married, divorced, and married in the same month.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

Signify said:


> @snail I am interpreting that you view bodily image as something which should not matter at all? What about sexual attraction? I could be wrong, but I believe that is quite an important factor. While I can love someone's personality and get along great with them, I can't have romantic feelings toward their brain. There needs to be both appearance and the ability to carry on a conversation more interesting than who won last night's football game, what happened on Jersey Shore, or which actors/actresses are now married, divorced, and married in the same month.


You are correct in your interpretation of my views. I believe that a person's body should not be considered at all when determining sexual attraction, because the body is irrelevant. Intentional presentation choices can offer clues when used expressively, but the body itself is just an object. A person who objectifies women does not pass my nice guy test. Someone who requires women to look a certain way before he will consider them worthy of romantic love is not a nice guy by my standards.

I find that most shallow men tend to justify it by saying things like, "...but I care about intelligence too, so I'm not a bad person." They are wrong.


----------



## Playful Proxy (Feb 6, 2012)

snail said:


> You are correct in your interpretation of my views. I believe that a person's body should not be considered at all when determining sexual attraction, because the body is irrelevant. Intentional presentation choices can offer clues when used expressively, but the body itself is just an object. A person who objectifies women does not pass my nice guy test. Someone who requires women to look a certain way before he will consider them worthy of romantic love is not a nice guy by my standards.
> 
> I find that most shallow men tend to justify it by saying things like, "...but I care about intelligence too, so I'm not a bad person." They are wrong.


 But is sexual attraction a choice? You make it sound as if the guy can simply choose if he is sexually attracted to the woman or not. I can deny my emotions, but I cannot make them up. I can get along perfectly with a person intellectually, but in order to interact sexually, they have to pass through my subconscious' checklist, not me. If that checks out, I find them attractive. If you have figured out a way to rewire your brain for sexual attraction, feel free to share.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

Signify said:


> But is sexual attraction a choice? You make it sound as if the guy can simply choose if he is sexually attracted to the woman or not. I can deny my emotions, but I cannot make them up. I can get along perfectly with a person intellectually, but in order to interact sexually, they have to pass through my subconscious' checklist, not me. If that checks out, I find them attractive. If you have figured out a way to rewire your brain for sexual attraction, feel free to share.


I'm sorry if I seem too harsh. If it really isn't a choice, then that condition sounds unfortunate. I suppose you must be very glad that most women probably don't share my standards.


----------



## Playful Proxy (Feb 6, 2012)

snail said:


> I'm sorry if I seem too harsh. If it really isn't a choice, then that condition sounds unfortunate. I suppose you must be very glad that most women probably don't share my standards.


 It wasn't about harsh, it is about how is feasible it it to expect that of any man? I was not under the impression it was neurologically possible to meet your expectations. Or is that some subtle way of admitting asexuality?


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)

snail said:


> I believe that a person's body should not be considered at all when determining sexual attraction, because the body is irrelevant.



That sounds extremely... stupid.
Sex is physical; so why shouldn't sexual attraction be, too? That's how humans are. You can fight it all you want, but at the end of the day you're not going to change that.
You should stop being so unrealistic in your expectations of other people. They're disappointing enough, you don't need to add to that.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

Signify said:


> It wasn't about harsh, it is about how is feasible it it to expect that of any man? I was not under the impression it was neurologically possible to meet your expectations. Or is that some subtle way of admitting asexuality?


It is possible, but not necessarily as common as I wish it were. If it isn't possible for you, then you would likely be miserable in a relationship with me anyhow, because you would feel disappointed by my trying to alter the unchangeable qualities that make you unsuitable for me (your non-demisexuality), and I would feel disappointed by your trying to alter the unchangeable qualities that make me unsuitable for you (my deviations from your aesthetic ideal). Therefore, from a practical standpoint, it probably doesn't matter whether you meet my standards for being considered a nice guy, because we aren't very likely to choose each other. I think we would both have to be self-destructive to get into a situation where our conflicting requirements would matter in a personal way. 

I still think that forming attractions on a spiritual level, to human beings who are defined by their intangible qualities, such as their feelings, thoughts and values, is something a person chooses according to his/her own priorities, although I have never existed in your head in order to empathize fully with your experiences, which clearly differ from mine. If I were to be very specific about what I am, I would say that the "I" is the will that chooses what matters to it. Perhaps you define yourself differently, or maybe objectifying people is a legitimate sexual preference, but when one puts it in perspective, is it really so hard to understand why I would see it more like a particularly disrespectful perversion? A person who can only get sexually aroused in the presence of specific physical objects is a fetishist, and no matter how one tries to associate other qualities with the body, I still believe that it is just an object a person owns. Someone whose fetish sabotages his/her ability to form meaningful relationships may not be intentionally behaving in a destructive way, but it would affect his ability to bond with someone like me, since I would never feel truly, deeply loved by someone who cared at all whether I had a body, or whether my body changed. I can imagine myself in any kind of body, and who I am would still be the same regardless of which body it occupied. If my body changes, I will still be who I am. Why would it make any sense for a person to want me even partially for the irrelevant packaging, especially when it seems very clear that the packaging means nothing true about me? It does not define my worth, and should not be treated as though it did.


----------



## Ayia (Feb 27, 2012)

I just want to mention that confidence is often more important than looks. if a guy is goodlooking and nice, it isn't going to matter if he hasn't got the necessary confidence. that's actually why I never fall for aggressive alphamales. to be that into attacking or dominating people, you can't be that comfortable in your own skin. and I tend to fall for someone who is confident in themselves, and therefore leaves other people alone. 

anyways... I think many beautiful people sabotage themselves if they are too insecure. so looks will always be tempered by personality.


----------



## Ayia (Feb 27, 2012)

Duck_of_Death said:


> Bravo. This is much, much, MUCH more common than the nice guy chasing after the supermodel.
> 
> On an additional note: People who tout their looks over and over again are generally not as attractive as they wish they were.


hm... I think it's just as common (if you think of supermodels as attractive people). many nice guys seem to only want girls who are beyond their reach. The same mechanism exists irrespective of gender. they want people they can't have/keep. the nice guys and girls that I know have yet to fall for someone who hits on them first, to put it that way.


----------



## Duck_of_Death (Jan 21, 2011)

Runa said:


> hm... I think it's just as common (if you think of supermodels as attractive people). many nice guys seem to only want girls who are beyond their reach. The same mechanism exists irrespective of gender. they want people they can't have/keep. the nice guys and girls that I know have yet to fall for someone who hits on them first, to put it that way.


"Supermodels" are rare and most guys won't approach them. Nice Guys usually back away due to anxiety.

Most "Nice Girls" dismiss the "Nice Guys" who attempt to court them and chase after some douchebag who isn't interested or is only looking for an easy lay. This is why many "sluts" are average looking. They refuse to date the guys on their level. They're on the opposite side of the coin as the cake-faced "hawt" girl, only they don't have the genetics (or sexual skill) to keep him around.

And if the "Nice Guys" are talking to the "hawt" girl, it's usually because she is reciprocal in some way (e.g.: She doesn't shut him down from the get-go).


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

Promethea, you've been here a while so you know how these threads always go.






I'll keep to myself and let the lulz flow in.


----------



## JackParrish (May 5, 2012)

The PUA thing is a correction within the system. 

In this country we used to have a truly horrific problem called "chauvinism". It was a genuinely sinister thing, in general. Women became tired of this and decided to fight back--a fantastic thing to do. 

In the process however, modern feminism didn't stop at trying to fight chauvinism. It in essence decided also to level all of masculinity for good measure. 

And now, a few decades into to this new scorched earth campaign, we are seeing some of the negative affects. We have an entire generation of men infused with the peter-pan syndrome (I won't grow up!). They play video games constantly and at the expense of socializing with women. They are terrified to talk to women. Terrified of rejection. Sexually illiterate and rudderless to develop a mature sexual identity. They were taught to be "nice" to women by their feminist mothers which really was just code for being very much like women who happen to have penises and to be ashamed of the vulgarities of "dominant maleness". 

A generation of feminists raised an entire generation of men that they are not even attracted to. 

Please don't think I'm attacking feminism. I'm not. Only the portions of the movement that went too far into the realms of systemic emotional/mental emasculation and could not stop simply at eradicating chauvinism.

PUA's are one outgrowth of this. They are generally guys with a huge tension between how they innately want to engage with women, their testosterone, and the give and take of sexual relationships in light of their cultural battering. So they are "good boys" during the day, and adopt elaborate personas at night to try and act out their "dark masculinity". 

Truth is, there is nothing that needs to be "dark" about masculinity at all. Femininity provokes the masculine, and masculinity provokes femininity and so the cycle goes. 

The good guy/bad guy thing is a deep cultural problem right now. I think I believe that time and maturity work work it out, but there is a very real chance that this violent swing back and forth between "PUA's" and "nice guys" will continue until a new generation comes up that is simply not afraid to talk to women, find great attraction in their intelligence/femininity/sexuality, and allow their masculine side to react organically in the world apart from some of the screwed up social engineering we've seen in the last few decades. 

There are good men out there. There's just a bit fewer of them, in socially mature form, than there used to be.


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

JackParrish said:


> The PUA thing is a correction within the system.
> 
> In this country we used to have a truly horrific problem called "chauvinism". It was a genuinely sinister thing, in general. Women became tired of this and decided to fight back--a fantastic thing to do.
> 
> ...


I agree with somen what you are saying but I`ve been wondering about the female side of this equation. I don`t think it is just men who are increasingly romantically incompetent in this generation, many of the women are too, it seems to be both genders. A woman I know recently told me one year into a relationship she was disappointed to not have a marriage offer from an older man she is dating. She seems to be expecting it as a matter of course. She had no real answer for me when I asked why she was expecting that. She`s also dated other men for longer and not expected that. Now this is just one example but it made me look more closely at what was going on around me.

We all know and make jokes about the meeting to look at our phones socializing that is common now but think of what else that does. It makes social interaction boring. We`ve all become very loud but very boring, no mysteries, no sense of adventure. Everything you want to know about many people and much more you don`t is available at a click.

I`ve dated beautiful women who have been very dull company. I don`t meant that arrogantly I know for a fact I am capable of being a bore, but it struck me that it was social incapability. They seem to always be waiting for something to play off of, I suspect many women would think the same of the men they`ve been dating. We`ve lost something dynamic, we`ve lost the understanding spark of what romance is. 

A lot of people complain about how shallow and superficial this generation appears to be, that they act as something without understanding it, perhaps this has happened to romance too. Perhaps it is just a hallow echo, and we`ve lost the meaning behind the dance so now we just dance awkwardly missing important steps. Important steps that have gotten lost along the way.

For fun. 

http://www.cracked.com/blog/3-mistakes-women-make-when-dealing-with-men/


----------



## JackParrish (May 5, 2012)

Mountainshepherd said:


> I agree with somen what you are saying but I`ve been wondering about the female side of this equation. I don`t think it is just men who are increasingly romantically incompetent in this generation, many of the women are too, it seems to be both genders. A woman I know recently told me one year into a relationship she was disappointed to not have a marriage offer from an older man she is dating. She seems to be expecting it as a matter of course. She had no real answer for me when I asked why she was expecting that. She`s also dated other men for longer and not expected that. Now this is just one example but it made me look more closely at what was going on around me.
> 
> We all know and make jokes about the meeting to look at our phones socializing that is common now but think of what else that does. It makes social interaction boring. We`ve all become very loud but very boring, no mysteries, no sense of adventure. Everything you want to know about many people and much more you don`t is available at a click.
> 
> ...


I'm certain you are correct that full responsibility is much more syndicated than I've presented. 

However, I do feel that for the broader culture right now, at least the origin of the problem is very connected to the weakening sense of masculinity and how that ripples throughout the broader fabric of culture right now.


----------



## infinitemess (Oct 8, 2011)

Mountainshepherd said:


> I
> 
> My point is this. The guys you are getting so angry at, the self proclaimed nice guys, are men with confidence problems and personal expression issues. They need understanding and guidance, not criticism and BS tossed out with a healthy side of rage. Many of these guys are actually also nice guys, but they are spineless with women because they lack romantic confidence or understanding. Your replies appear so wrapped up in their own pain that you would deny the fact that these men themselves are in pain. That is what I meant when I called your expressed viewpoint narrow minded, you're forgetting they are human beings with failings, pains, and confusion of their own. Many of these guys aren't manipulative false "nice guys", they just don't know how show women their affections in better ways. They don't understand how to make women see them as men.


i agree, and can sympathise with "nice guys" with genuinely low self esteem as a result of traumatic experiences. some of them are genuinely confused and misguided, but because women are very selective as well as concerned about being pursued for the wrong reasons, their perception is that a history of rejection does not make men helpless or unaccountable to their actions. many women do try to reject men with as much respect and humility as possible; not all of us take a nice guy's persistence for granted, and can only care enough to let them go so that they may find someone who is ultimately more compatible. a line is inevitably being crossed when mean nice guys act misogynistic and aggressively entitled, but that is a clear sign such men are in panic mode, and are vulnerable enough to feel the need to tactlessly defend their pride. 

i have been the disappointed nice girl and while i never resorted to man-hating tactics, i've always understood just how brutal the dating scene can be. for me, insecurities themselves aren't a turn off, it depends on how willing you are to own your feelings and value yourself enough not to take it out on others that earns my respect. bitterness and frustration are natural when we're not getting our sexual and emotional needs met, but find that i like myself much better when i'm making a conscious effort to keep improving myself rather than waste my time feeling resentful over some guy not liking me back. 

nothing worth having comes easy, so be patient with yourself and don't shy away from doing the work. we are all guilty of acting out and sending self-sabotaging signals at some point; many of us don't learn how to start avoiding the friend zone until much later in life, but it is never too late if finding love means that much to you. refuse to let your pain get the better of you, and never lose hope.


----------



## strangestdude (Dec 8, 2011)

snail said:


> I can imagine myself in any kind of body, and who I am would still be the same regardless of which body it occupied. If my body changes, I will still be who I am.


Neuroscience and genetics beg to differ. 

We can see this with brain damage - if your brain (a part of your biology) is damaged then aspects of your personality can and do change.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/professor-cromer-learns-read/201201/after-brain-injury-learning-love-stranger


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

JackParrish said:


> I'm certain you are correct that full responsibility is much more syndicated than I've presented.
> 
> However, I do feel that for the broader culture right now, at least the origin of the problem is very connected to the weakening sense of masculinity and how that ripples throughout the broader fabric of culture right now.


I think that could certainly be the origin regardless that it has spilled well past that. Stop teaching one side how to dance the other side forgets too, it takes two to tango.


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

strangestdude said:


> Neuroscience and genetics beg to differ.
> 
> We can see this with brain damage - if your brain (a part of your biology) is damaged then aspects of your personality can and do change.
> 
> http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/professor-cromer-learns-read/201201/after-brain-injury-learning-love-stranger


I don't think snails point is one of mechanics but more one of the driver in the car. The car having damaged parts will not function the same and neither therefore will the driver function the same within that car, yet that doesn't mean the driver is effected directly.

Pardon if that seems like a butt in but I love metaphysical theory.


----------



## strangestdude (Dec 8, 2011)

Mountainshepherd said:


> I don't think snails point is one of mechanics but more one of the driver in the car. The car having damaged parts will not function the same and neither therefore will the driver function the same within that car, yet that doesn't mean the driver is effected directly.
> 
> Pardon if that seems like a butt in but I love metaphysical theory.


----------

