# Nice Guys and Friend Zones



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

Pirate said:


> Yeah............................no. The internet is a real thing, as are hookers. If all I wanted was sex, lets be honest, there are of ways to deal with that.
> 
> I want a partner, intamacy (both physical and emotional) and acceptance, thus I make (unsuccessful) advances accordingly. I'm not asking for pizza if I want steak. If I'm told no, I respect that I'm told no and drop the issue. Why? because I show that I care by respecting their wishes, sometimes even at the cost of my own feelings. I want her to have what she wants, even if its not me. Only difference is, I cut my losses if I'm "friend zoned", because *I have no intrest in anyone who would lead someone on like that, effectively unmaking my feelings for them.*
> 
> Figured this thread could do with the perspective of a "nice guy," something I'm only ever called by girls I'm interested in who arn't interested in me btw.


Vast majority of actual "nice guys" right here. ^ Thank you for this. 



Borrowed Lunacy said:


> This version does sound terrible though, it's like the nice guy you've depicted wants a 1950s housewife, if you want something dependant on you then get a dog. On the other hand girls should take a little responsibility if they're using someone in this way infactuated with them, set some boundaries.


If you don't want to be in a 1950s style relationship, then don't be in a relationship like that. Someone's relationship preferences are not worthy of the kind of hate that the "nice guys" are getting.

However, you might have hit the nail on the head here. Maybe the problem is as simple as some guys have old fashioned expectations, and are trying to date women who don't, and what's really going on is these old fashioned guys are being mercilessly mocked for being old fashioned by the feminists on tumblr because it smells like "patriarchy". This would make a lot of sense since these public ridiculings always turn into accusations of being a sexual predator.

Come to think of it, the whole "nice guy" meme seems to be an illustration of what feminists consider wrong with the "patriarchy", like they've been looking for someone to pin it on. Well, they can't pin it on the hot guys they're attracted to, and they can't pin it on the guys who aren't attracted to them because there's no ammo to work with... but these "nice guys"... perfect chumps to be made an example of. 



Erbse said:


> Fortunately my mental state allows me to live without sex for all of eternity - which pretty much strips every ooze of power from the female gender it could have possibly had over me at any given point in time.


And this right here, I think, is the core of the issue that these women have with the "nice guys". Every woman knows that their primary power over men is their gender appeal. They know it, and use it to get what they want. This "nice guy" situation is so far biased toward the woman, and her ability to have power over a guy that it borders on voluntary slavery and sub play. These women get whatever they want from these guys for as long as they can get it, then when he finally breaks free of her hold on him and gets upset about it, all of a sudden he's a villain worthy of scorn and mockery. Guys like this are THE WORST! How dare they be unconditionally nice, then at some point stop?

These guys are volunteering for the position, but these women are using them. Worst of all, they're claiming the same innocence that guys who seduce and use claim. "I didn't take anything that wasn't offered to me freely. I'm the victim. I did nothing wrong." They feel entitled to what has been given to them, and when they stop getting it, they accuse others of feeling entitled.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

AriesLilith said:


> Hmm honestly I'm not really familiar with all the hate towards nice guys, I'm not from the US so I don't really know how far the hate is over there, but I guess that there are often "hates" towards many stereotypes and these "hates" are like trends.


It is a growing trend in the US, mostly on tumblr as a meme, and mostly by women claiming to be feminists, though the meme is gaining a lot of traction with the mainstream.



AriesLilith said:


> But I can understand how you feel towards the unfair treatments and why you'd want to change that (I just noticed you're an INFJ, maybe it's an INFJ trait to want to voice out unfair situations).


NF's tend to be idealists. INFJs do tend to champion social causes when they see injustice. I'm also an Enneagram 1, which motivates me to make things right. 

You are awesome, and I like you, by the way. ;-) It seems like we're both trying to defend people and that's always a good thing in my opinion.



AriesLilith said:


> Although I replied to your posts coz I think that your posts seems unfair as if the good guys are mostly victims and the women who rejects them are b*tches who are only using them, how the society standards seem to be harsher on them, and how women are not looking for equal partnership (your response to Torai's post) hence why I said "I don't really get all the fuss about nice guys being used by b*tches or how guys have it harder". There are good guys who are genuinely good guys that have fallen into such situations innocently and then got used by b*tches (specially if they are young and clueless), but then there are also "good guys" who are idealizing women and then when these women didn't reciprocrate, all they did was to blame them.


I would have taken that stance too, if I was not intimately familiar with this "nice guys" meme, and have several male friends who fall into this pattern of relationship abuse, which ends in further abusing the abuse victim. I've been there for them when they've recovered from the hurt. I've seen the parts of their pain that goes outside their rants when they're angry. Most of them don't even rant. They just become hurt, numb empty husks, devoid of hope that they will ever find love. I have no doubt that most women who have dealt with "nice guys" have dealt with their slow fade into depression as their 'friend' gave up hope. Instead of being there for their 'friend', they'd rather demonize them for how it made them feel. THAT is not being a friend much more than finally tossing a retaliatory rant on the internet. There is no empathy on the part of these women for how their 'friend' feels as they go through all the pain associated with losing someone they love. It's only how these 'friends' made these women feel by taking what they were giving them away that is of importance. Yet again, we see the double standard for gender expectations.

Another reason I am passionate about this issue is because I am a demisexual, and we have to establish friendship before we can establish a romantic attraction. It is my belief that a lot of these men are actually demisexuals who fall in love with their female friends after becoming friends with them (which is our natural pattern), and the term "friend zone" for us means "we became friends, but romantic attraction never happened". "Sexual" (as opposed to demisexual) women in modern US seem to demand that a guy express his interest immediately upon meeting them, and then get offended if a guy changes his feelings from not interested to interested, assuming that all people know when they meet someone if they are attracted and therefore assume these men were being deceptive about their feelings all along. This is very dismissive of our sexual orientation. 

However, as a demisexual female, I can get away with choosing to change how I feel, because women are afforded this luxury. Men are not. Men are expected to take all the initiative, know how they feel from the get go, risk rejection, and suck it up. That's gender bias, and is not equality. 



AriesLilith said:


> I don't see how not agreeing with the assumption that good guys are the victims and women who rejects them are the bad guys shows that women criticizing them are actually guilty. Not all good guys are real good guys, yet most of the posts if not all from the good guys defenders doesn't seem to cover that, and mainly focused on the woman being the mean one to blame.


True, but I'm addressing a specific issue and trend. I'm not speaking for the general population at large. I'm focusing on the populations involved in the "nice guy" situation - which are the kinds of guys who are not especially assertive about forming relationships (whether or not they're demisexuals), and the women who tend to use them (whether consciously or not).



AriesLilith said:


> IMO, if you really want to post something that is fair and about good guys, it would be better if you cover more cases instead of just a particular possibility (since the term of good guy is more board). Or else it would seem that you are mainly defending that good guys are victims and the women who rejects them are the ones to blame, making them seem more like blamers incapable of taking responsibility and move on.


This is a brilliant idea. A compare and contrast of a "nice guy" and a "good guy" might be very helpful.


----------



## remMUS (Dec 28, 2012)

I have decided that the solution to this is to become gay...the bros were always easier to understand anyway.


----------



## AriesLilith (Jan 6, 2013)

@*Nobleheart*, I hope that your friends can have better luck, as real nice guys doesn't deserve to suffer at the hands of such women. I believe that it's important for the innocent nice guys to have more self confidence and not allow abuse, but I certainly dislike those who takes advantege of people, women or men. Also, it's important for them to stand up for themselves, so that they would rather focus on the women who truly deserve them.
It's such a shame that society often confuses and blurs what real relationships should be, with all those idealizations and unfair judgments...

(by the way, I think that I have swtiched "nice guys" to "good guys" accidentally during my posts)


----------



## EllieBear (Nov 8, 2012)

Nobleheart said:


> Dear Dr. NerdLove,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't know. I'm a lesbian and my friend is male. He's truly my bestie, and I'd do anything for him. However, I had no idea until recently that he's in love with. He's never going to have sex with me - am I friendzoning him? Just because I don't want to have sex with him and he's my friend am I supposed to give him up?


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

EllieBear said:


> I don't know. I'm a lesbian and my friend is male. He's truly my bestie, and I'd do anything for him. However, I had no idea until recently that he's in love with. He's never going to have sex with me - am I friendzoning him? Just because I don't want to have sex with him and he's my friend am I supposed to give him up?


Not at all. The ideal situation would be to be upfront about each others' feelings, and move from there to maintain the friendship. 

Most of the women I've talked to about this situation seem to be under the impression that they can't be friends with a man who wants them sexually, and somehow when a man reveals his romantic feelings that this ends the friendship. I'm confused by this, but from your statements, I would assume that you're okay with being friends with him even though he has feelings for you.

Very few of the men I've talked to that have been in these situations have ended the friendship when they found out that their feelings were not going to be reciprocated. However, some have ended friendships because it's painful to be around someone they love that they can never be with. Others end it when they realize they've been used, but you don't seem to be using him or else your perspective would not be one of concern for your friendship. If he's still willing to be friends despite his feelings, then there is no reason to end the friendship. 

To be honest, one of the mysteries surrounding this issue for me is why when romantic feelings are revealed that the friendships are considered invalidated and must end. Seems arbitrary and based on something outside the friendship if the friendship is sincere, but that adds further weight to my statements about people who are clearly not you and your friend.

I am assuming he was aware that you are a lesbian before he fell in love with you, so I don't think he entered into the friendship with romantic expectations or ulterior agendas. That implies that he fell for you in the process. (You must be pretty awesome.) If he can handle staying friends with you, despite his feelings, and you can also stay friends despite his feelings, it is likely that you can both continue to be friends as he gets over his feelings. If you'd be willing to help him in that process and understand it will take some time, then everything should work out since you've already established that your friendship can work. I know from experience that no one is a better 'wing man' than a woman, so I'm sure you can help him find someone else to develop feelings for and find the love that he's seeking to expedite the process.


----------



## EllieBear (Nov 8, 2012)

Nobleheart said:


> I am assuming he was aware that you are a lesbian before he fell in love with you, so I don't think he entered into the friendship with romantic expectations or ulterior agendas. That implies that he fell for you in the process. (You must be pretty awesome.) If he can handle staying friends with you, despite his feelings, and you can also stay friends despite his feelings, it is likely that you can both continue to be friends as he gets over his feelings. If you'd be willing to help him in that process and understand it will take some time, then everything should work out since you've already established that your friendship can work. I know from experience that no one is a better 'wing man' than a woman, so I'm sure you can help him find someone else to develop feelings for and find the love that he's seeking to expedite the process.


Ah, you see that's the issue. he didn't know. We'd been friends for a while and the day I came out to him he'd planned to ask me out.

I love him to death, he's my rock. I'd be a mess without him - he's been there through some damn hard times. Just as I have been there for him. But I do wonder, due to the fact he liked me romantically before he knew I'm a lesbian that it could be seen as ... leading him on (for lack of a better term).


----------



## strangestdude (Dec 8, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> A compare and contrast of a "nice guy" and a "good guy" might be very helpful.


As a recovering 'nice guy' I'll give it a quick try.

Nice guy - Lacks internal validation and boundaries. Will do things against their own values and sense of self-worth to please women. Compliant. 

Good man - Has deep internal validation and boundaries. Will do things out of kindness or care, but won't go against their own values and sense of self-worth. Centered.

Bad boys - Narcissistic. Unpredictable (may be caring, neglectful or abusive).

Any 'nice guys' lurking please read; 'no more mr nice guy by Robert Glover' to help yourself to change.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

EllieBear said:


> Ah, you see that's the issue. he didn't know. We'd been friends for a while and the day I came out to him he'd planned to ask me out.
> 
> I love him to death, he's my rock. I'd be a mess without him - he's been there through some damn hard times. Just as I have been there for him. But I do wonder, due to the fact he liked me romantically before he knew I'm a lesbian that it could be seen as ... leading him on (for lack of a better term).


Only if you knew he had feelings for you. It sounds like you didn't. There is a huge difference between suspecting someone likes you and using it to get what you want, and having no idea.

My personal opinion on this matter is that if you two can continue to be open and honest with each other and still maintain your friendship, even though there might be awkward moments from time to time, I think you should. I'd even go so far as to assume you both have an obligation to the friendship to try. But, if it's too difficult for either of you, then it may be for the best to get some distance and reset your feelings before potentially picking things back up in the future.


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

Nobleheart said:


> They just haven't figured out that they're not hot because men have a lot of trouble seeing what it is that makes them attractive, especially when so few women agree on what that is, leaving these hyper logical creatures with no standard by which to measure themselves other than "how it works in the movies" and "what women say on Oprah".


I do agree with most of what you are saying, and really applaud you for saying it. But men hyper logical? Lol, I _wish_. (If we are, it's in a worst-of-both worlds kind of way - in a way that leads to more weaknesses than strengths.) Men have poor impulse control (compared to women anyway...at least my experience has led me to think that), and are known for being overly keen to take risks (too much investment, too little chance for gain). In all situations, not just this one, but definitely including this one. It can lead to us making very desperate and stupid decisions (including staying forever with a woman who is using us a lapdog, kowtowing to her when there is no logical reason to do so).

Though relationships are generally a must for someone to be happy (since friendships often don't offer the same emotional intensity or commitment - I'd skip on romance altogether if they did), sex isn't...and it's no secret men tend to want more sex than women. It's just an urge, and an annoying one at that. Barring the fact it's essential for reproduction, I think sex (with women) is actually an illogical thing for men to want (considering all the hooplah we have to go through to get it) and in my estimation it isn't worth it in most cases. Sure, it feels good, but so do a lot of other things. Things that are much more lasting and rewarding. And yet men sacrifice so much to pursue it.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

nevermore said:


> I do agree with most of what you are saying, and really applaud you for saying it.


Thanks.



nevermore said:


> But men hyper logical? Lol, I _wish_. (If we are, it's in a worst-of-both worlds kind of way - in a way that leads to more weaknesses than strengths.) Men have poor impulse control (compared to women anyway...at least my experience has led me to think that), and are known for being overly keen to take risks (too much investment, too little chance for gain). In all situations, not just this one, but definitely including this one. It can lead to us making very desperate and stupid decisions (including staying forever with a woman who is using us a lapdog, kowtowing to her when there is no logical reason to do so).


Yes, this is what I meant by hyper-logical. Perhaps I should have used the term hyper-literal. Even F type men tend to do this. 



nevermore said:


> Though relationships are generally a must for someone to be happy (since friendships often don't offer the same emotional intensity or commitment - I'd skip on romance altogether if they did), sex isn't...and it's no secret men tend to want more sex than women. It's just an urge, and an annoying one at that. Barring the fact it's essential for reproduction, I think sex (with women) is actually an illogical thing for men to want (considering all the hooplah we have to go through to get it) and in my estimation it isn't worth it in most cases. Sure, it feels good, but so do a lot of other things. Things that are much more lasting and rewarding. And yet men sacrifice so much to pursue it.


And this is my point exactly about these "nice guys". If they were only after sex, they'd have a different strategy.


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

Nobleheart said:


> Yes, this is what I meant by hyper-logical. Perhaps I should have used the term hyper-literal. Even F type men tend to do this.


Thanks for the clarification; I thought you probably did.



> And this is my point exactly about these "nice guys". If they were only after sex, they'd have a different strategy


For sure, I was more using that to elaborate on how men are not always more rational than women (I think we might even tend to be less, at least in a lot of ways).

I've been thinking about the thread's subject in general lately, and have noticed a pattern in my own life. I've been on the other end of non-requited love thing quite a bit, and a number of women have read this into my lack of romantic interest in them. They grew bitter against _me_ because _they_ fell in love with me, even though I made it clear I never wanted it to be anything more then friendship. Not that we choose what to feel or anything. Not that our feelings make sense. But the whole thing hurts still, especially when the (platonic) relationship ends. (That hurts on my end too...)


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

nevermore said:


> I've been thinking about the thread's subject in general lately, and have noticed a pattern in my own life. I've been on the other end of non-requited love thing quite a bit, and a number of women have read this into my lack of romantic interest in them. They grew bitter against _me_ because _they_ fell in love with me, even though I made it clear I never wanted it to be anything more then friendship. Not that we choose what to feel or anything. Not that our feelings make sense. But the whole thing hurts still, especially when the (platonic) relationship ends. (That hurts on my end too...)


Would this justify vilifying them, even if they ranted about their frustration with the situation on the internet?


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

Nobleheart said:


> Would this justify vilifying them?


Of course not. It's not admirable behavior, but if there is anything that anyone can be faulted for, it's not tempering unchosen impulses. I'm sure they thought they could do that. They probably thought they could transcend themselves and get over their feelings even though I wasn't interested in a relationship with them. And in the end, it hurt them as well as well as me, which naturally elicits some sort of sympathy.

(Do you think I am vilifying them? I couldn't tell by the way you asked the question. I don't think I am...but like I said I couldn't help but be hurt by the situation, just as they couldn't.)


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

nevermore said:


> (Do you think I am vilifying them? I couldn't tell by the way you asked the question. I don't think I am...but like I said I couldn't help but be hurt by the situation, just as they couldn't.)


Not at all. I was posing the question to further illustrate the gender discrepancy with this issue.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

Maybe this will explain why I'm sticking up for the men out there who aren't attractive, assertive, or otherwise able to present a woman with the sort of relationship approach she's come to demand.






Maybe they have reasons for not believing they deserve love, being hesitant to risk even more rejection, and more than anything just wanting to be loved. Maybe they have reasons for being willing to accept, or even preferring, a slowly growing friendship so long as they have hope that someday they can eventually be loved, and maybe they have reasons for feeling utterly devastated when it becomes clear that they never will. Maybe they have reasons for finally lashing out after their one last hope for love had been dashed. Maybe they have wounds so deep and so ingrained in them that they can't even acknowledge them without fear of more rejection and abuse. Maybe the object of their love is the one person who ever made them feel like there was even a chance that someone someday could truly love them, and maybe the reason they're so willing to adore them and treat them like gold is because no one ever treated them that way. Maybe the reason being friend zoned is so crushing for them is because they've never been on the other side of it.

Maybe they have reasons for acting the way they do that don't simply involve pitching a fit because they didn't get sex.

And just maybe this can help you see why I am so against further bashing these guys.


----------



## AriesLilith (Jan 6, 2013)

@*Nobleheart*, if you don't mind me asking, how old are your friends? How many times have each of them been used? Also, what do they love in each woman they came to fell in love with? And how long did it take for them to fall in love with them, since knowing them? Are these women physically very attractive, maybe even much more attractive then them?
Did they ever have their feelings reciprocrated? Or someone else that had a crush on them?

Also, are they really not attractive at all?


----------



## amanda32 (Jul 23, 2009)

It's the same theme -- she should get with him just because he's a "nice guy".

No. no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THAT IS NOT HOW ATTRACTION WORKS!

NO ONE would tell a guy that he should get with a woman that he wasn't attracted to -- why in the world do people try and force women to do the same?

If she's not attracted to you and just wants to be your friend, and you can't handle it -- be honest and move on. End of story.

Granted, some bitches will use you so protect yourself and move on.
Some women -- who are not bitches are genuinely naive about these things when they're young.

Guys go for the hot, bitchy, bimbo all the time while the smart, sweet girl sits on the sidelines -- the only difference is women don't feel entitled. Get over it. Let people choose who they want and make their own mistakes. 

JUST. BECAUSE. YOU'RE. NICE. TO. HER. DOESN'T. MEAN. SHE. IS. OBLIGATED. TO. BE. ATTRACTED. TO. YOU!!!!

Just because you're attracted to her doesn't mean she's obligated to be attracted to you.

Accept it and move on.


----------



## Falling Leaves (Aug 18, 2011)

Yeah, your argument lost some credibility when you pulled a caption picture off of the internet and used your (subjective) reading into its context. That shit don't fly. 

In truth, the term 'friend zone' pisses me off because it implies that I can't be friends with a male without giving something in return (be it emotional or sexual), and if I don't, suddenly I'm a world class bitch. I don't see why that's unreasonable. 

...besides, what alternative do you suggest? Because he bought me a coffee once, I should throw him a pity fuck? I should just string him along? Pretend to have feelings I don't? To me, that sounds like a far more cruel thing to do than being clear about not reciprocating; to me at least, honesty is the best policy.

Having said that however, in no way do I condone the girls attitude in the OP. Taking someones feelings and knowingly using them is wrong. 

...just please don't tar all 'friend zone' haters with the same brush. Some of us really are just normal folk who want to call a spade a spade, or an entitled, shallow attitude out for what it is - entitled and shallow.


----------



## DefLeppardTShirt (Oct 22, 2010)

I'm ok with the friend zone where we still hang out and do fun activities together, or in a group. What doesn't work is where I get texted at 1am because the psycho boyfriend is acting up again. Friend zone to me means you're a friend, not an acquaintance who'll dump emotional problems onto me just because you know I want to get in your pants.


----------



## Coldspot (Nov 7, 2011)

amanda32 said:


> JUST. BECAUSE. YOU'RE. NICE. TO. HER. DOESN'T. MEAN. SHE. IS. OBLIGATED. TO. BE. ATTRACTED. TO. YOU!!!!


Calm down, nobody is saying that a woman is obligated to have a relationship with a guy she isn't attracted to. What is being said is that men shouldn't be seen as villains because they fell in love with a friend that doesn't love them back. It is perfectly normal to be upset when you are shunned, but by no means does that justify demonizing someone because you saw them in the throes of anger.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

If someone chooses to be someone's bitch, that's their fault, honestly. You can't expect someone to want to be with you just because you put so much effort into being nice to them in order to buy their affection. The problem I have with all of this is that in my experience on the internet, guys seem to look at girls in overly simplistic ways. Like there's a set of rules they need to follow. Like they need to be 'nice' and if the girl doesn't want them, then fuck the girl, there is something wrong with her.And not only her, but a whole group of women by extension


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> However, I'm quite convinced that a lot of women who are offended by the phrase "Friend Zone" are not so much offended by the fact that a man wants sex as they are offended by the fact that their lapdog has broken off the leash.


WOAH, looks like we've got a woman hating sissy - I mean a badass. Because men who devote themselves to bitchy self-centered women who use them because of their attraction are obviously some kind of badass.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Coldspot said:


> Calm down, nobody is saying that a woman is obligated to have a relationship with a guy she isn't attracted to.


Op suggested it at the end of their first post.


----------



## chaoticbrain (May 5, 2012)

devoid said:


> WOAH, looks like we've got a woman hating sissy - I mean a badass. Because men who devote themselves to bitchy self-centered women who use them because of their attraction are obviously some kind of badass.


The only thing in this area you could deduce from nobleheart is that she thinks men who get used by women shouldn't be made fun of in memes. And you somehow took her post to be an attack on women ?


----------



## chaoticbrain (May 5, 2012)

android654 said:


> Op suggested it at the end of their first post.


Yep if I say to someone "you shouldn't date this person for this reason" I'm telling you your OBLIGATED to date someone.


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

chaoticbrain said:


> The main thing that you could deduce from this thread is that nobleheart thinks men who get used by women shouldn't be made fun of in memes and you somehow took her post to be an attack on women ?


I think men who get used by women are no better than women who get used by men. Is that so hard to digest? If there is such a thing as "friend zoning" then it should apply equally to both genders. And yet somehow when a man doesn't want to have a relationship with a woman it is perfectly okay, not worth making DOZENS OF FUCKING THREADS ABOUT.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

chaoticbrain said:


> Yep if I say to someone "you shouldn't date this person for this reason" I'm telling you your OBLIGATED to date someone.



That's not what she said .



> Trust me, younger ladies, when you get to my age and your _real sex drive_ kicks in around 30 and you realize all of those guys who also want relationships are actually stronger than the self absorbed pricks you're chasing because they're just as much men but are able to control themselves, you'll wish to all goodness you'd married that "nice guy", but by then it will be too late. One of those self absorbed pricks you let use you will have knocked you up, and you'll be chasing him and likely a few others like him for child support as you struggle through life as a single mom. Meanwhile, that other girl who married the "nice guy" is still with him. They have a model family, and he still does anything he can to make her happy, including holding down a good job, because that's how he's wired for relationships. And, because she meets his sexual needs, he will never stop being that guy for her. Meanwhile, those self obsessed assholes you were so attracted to when you were younger are no longer hot, but they're still self obsessed assholes, because that's how _they _are wired for relationships. Congratulations on your poor life decisions and demonizing the one guy in your life that would have loved you unconditionally.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

AriesLilith said:


> @Nobleheart, if you don't mind me asking, how old are your friends? How many times have each of them been used? Also, what do they love in each woman they came to fell in love with? And how long did it take for them to fall in love with them, since knowing them? Are these women physically very attractive, maybe even much more attractive then them?
> Did they ever have their feelings reciprocrated? Or someone else that had a crush on them?
> 
> Also, are they really not attractive at all?


I don't mind you asking. The ages of my male friends who have been in these situations range from 20s to 30s. The ones in their 40s or older have either given up on love or realized how to avoid this trap. Most of my male friends either have relationships or have little trouble dating, so I am not saying that all of my male friends have had this problem. Also, the men who don't have this problem never really had it from what I can tell. Even the shy ones had the ability to quickly jump into a relationship when they found someone they wanted.

However, I've seen this pattern repeated in the men who fall prey to it. But they're sincerely trying to create relationships. Some guys are wired to take a slower approach to relationships. In child psychology we would refer to this personality type as "slow to warm". When a man goes a long time without sex, they do tend to start to feel a sense of urgency for it, but in my experience these men pine about the lack of reciprocation of their romantic feelings a lot more than not getting laid. However, I think this is why the "didn't even get laid" comments come out when they're frustrated. It seems like they're saying, "she knew full well she was using me and she didn't even have the decency to let me use her back" than "all I was after was sex and didn't get it".

What attracts them to these women seems to vary, as well as how long it takes them to fall for them. It looks to me like they were interested in these women from the beginning, as I've heard many stories about how they were taking these women out on dates. I assumed things were going well (though slowly) from what they told me about how things were going (nice dates, long talks, cuddling, etc.), and then a few weeks to months into them dating, these guys finally pushed for more serious affection, and got shot down, usually with the "we're just friends" speech. I find it very difficult to believe that these women didn't know that these guys had feelings for them. When a guy asks a girl out and spends time with her exclusively, it's a date. I've even girl talked with some of them, to which they explained that they knew but had no intention of "getting serious". I suppose they assumed I'd be more loyal to another girl than my actual friends who happened to be guys. It is very rare that I hear about a situation where a woman is genuinely surprised to find out that a guy has feelings for her. We are very keyed into who has feelings for us, even to an extent that we often know before the guy figures it out, especially when guys ask us out and pay for everything.

Some of these women are a little more attractive than the guys who are chasing them. Then again, I tend to think women are more attractive than men, and how attractive I think someone to be is based largely on how much I like them as a person, and I don't like people who treat my friends badly, so maybe I'm not a good judge of that. What I have been able to figure out is that these women usually say these men are not "their type" and are almost always under the impression that they can "do better" than these men, whether or not they can, and these men are usually under the impression that they couldn't do better than these girls, even if they could. I think that's the root of the dynamic right there - how the people in these situations feel about whether or not they can do better. One thinks they can, and takes the relationship for granted. They other thinks they can't, and therefore gives disproportionately. The problem is, when it's the girl who thinks she can't do better than the guy, no one bashes her for being upset about that, but will bash the guy for using her. When it's the guy, no one bashes the girl for taking everything the guy gives her knowing full well she doesn't reciprocate the feelings that are causing him to treat her that way. In both cases the man is responsible for what happens in these relationships. If he uses a woman, he's an asshole who only wanted one thing. If he is used, he's a bitch and deserved it. 

This is not equality.



Coldspot said:


> amanda32 said:
> 
> 
> > JUST. BECAUSE. YOU'RE. NICE. TO. HER. DOESN'T. MEAN. SHE. IS. OBLIGATED. TO. BE. ATTRACTED. TO. YOU!!!!
> ...


This ^



lycanized said:


> If someone chooses to be someone's bitch, that's their fault, honestly. You can't expect someone to want to be with you just because you put so much effort into being nice to them in order to buy their affection. The problem I have with all of this is that in my experience on the internet, guys seem to look at girls in overly simplistic ways. Like there's a set of rules they need to follow. Like they need to be 'nice' and if the girl doesn't want them, then fuck the girl, there is something wrong with her.And not only her, but a whole group of women by extension


And apparently girls look at guys, especially the ones who approach relationships by becoming friends first (for whatever personal reason) in overly simplistic ways. No one is saying that anyone is obligated to be attracted to anyone. We're saying people are obligated to be decent. If someone is upset because a friend isn't treating them like a friend, maybe they should consider how they're not treating them like a friend by using them then vilifying them for their feelings and getting hyper-defensive when someone is hurt?



devoid said:


> WOAH, looks like we've got a woman hating sissy - I mean a badass. Because men who devote themselves to bitchy self-centered women who use them because of their attraction are obviously some kind of badass.


WOAH, looks like we've got another ENTP who didn't bother to actually read the thread and jumped to a conclusion. I'm a woman, hun. Men who devote themselves to bitchy self-centered women who use them because of their attraction are not exactly villains either, even if they do vent about it when they finally reach their limit. They are idealistic to a fault, and unfortunately needy. This isn't worthy of the hate or bad wrap they're getting from this meme.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

android654 said:


> That's not what she said .


It pretty much is, actually. You're applying intention to it that isn't there. That's part of the issue with this whole meme. It keeps applying intention where it isn't.


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

@Nobleheart
Don't care if you are a woman, you're still degrading women by putting the man's needs/wants far ahead of the woman's.


----------



## Death Persuades (Feb 17, 2012)

Take it as a compliment! I realized not so long ago that if a girl friendzones you after showing interest in you, it means you're too good to risk losing.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

devoid said:


> @Nobleheart
> Don't care if you are a woman, you're still degrading women by putting the man's needs/wants far ahead of the woman's.


I'm trying to equalize them. The fact that this is being seen as putting the man's needs / wants far ahead of the woman's when all I'm doing is insisting that men not be treated like crap and mocked on the internet for their approach to relationships kinda proves just how much more weight women's needs / wants in relationships actually have.


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> I'm trying to equalize them. The fact that this is being seen as putting the man's needs / wants far ahead of the woman's when all I'm doing is insisting that men not be treated like crap and mocked on the internet for their approach to relationships kinda proves just how much more weight women's needs / wants in relationships actually have.


The solution to unfair mockery is not to turn the tables.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

devoid said:


> The solution to unfair mockery is not to turn the tables.


No, that will only serve to escalate things, and likely backfire. It will stop a lot of those unassertive guys from bothering to even try being friends. It will stop the hot guys from pretending to be nice. The end result will only be another degree of resentment between the genders, which will only bolster the growing sense of entitlement across the board.

The answer to this problem is understanding and awareness. There is nothing that helps defuse an emotional misunderstanding like the realization of why the other person thinks and feels what they do, rather than assuming and reacting.

Currently, there are a crapton of "dude, she's not a rent to own plan that you put payments on" threads and articles. That's a good thing. However, no one is addressing this side of the issue, and I chose to fill this void.


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> No, that will only serve to escalate things, and likely backfire. It will stop a lot of those unassertive guys from bothering to even try being friends. It will stop the hot guys from pretending to be nice. The end result will only be another degree of resentment between the genders, which will only bolster the growing sense of entitlement across the board.
> 
> The answer to this problem is understanding and awareness. There is nothing that helps defuse an emotional misunderstanding like the realization of why the other person thinks and feels what they do, rather than assuming and reacting.
> 
> Currently, there are a crapton of "dude, she's not a rent to own plan that you put payments on" threads and articles. That's a good thing. However, no one is addressing this side of the issue, and I chose to fill this void.


Explain how accusing all women who do not have sex with their nice guy friends of being shallow bitches is promoting understanding or awareness. I really want to know.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

devoid said:


> Explain how accusing all women who do not have sex with their nice guy friends of being shallow bitches is promoting understanding or awareness. I really want to know.


I have never once said that. I have consistently said that women who know full well how a guy feels, use that to get what they want out of him, then accuse him of wrong doing when he stops letting her use him or dares to get upset that he was used is a shallow bitch. 

Are you really telling me that you don't think women can tell when a guy likes them, nor is accountable for using a guy that does?

*Edit:* Actually, I was just playing off your statement. I haven't accused anyone of being a shallow bitch specifically. I have accused them of being entitled and feeling entitled to this treatment from their guy friends.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Nobleheart said:


> And apparently girls look at guys, especially the ones who approach relationships by becoming friends first (for whatever personal reason) in overly simplistic ways. No one is saying that anyone is obligated to be attracted to anyone. We're saying people are obligated to be decent. If someone is upset because a friend isn't treating them like a friend, maybe they should consider how they're not treating them like a friend by using them then vilifying them for their feelings and getting hyper-defensive when someone is hurt?


It seems like a lot of guys get frustrated when they see that girls are more complicated than that when to me, it's just human. Attraction is never that simple imo for either sex unless they're in the sector that isn't looking for a deeper kind of relationship. But then even that takes more conversation than assumption. Mostly my point is that I don't think every woman is bothered by the whole niceguy thing because they want a bitch, it's not that. It's the implication that all a woman is good for is sex or a relationship for a guy, not a friend. So when they're "friendzoned", it's horrible. At least, that's why I hate the nice guy thing and just don't understand it. Plus that implication that it just takes niceness...and boom, attraction. Granted, I'm not straight, I don't have friends, I also don't think I represent the general population of girls so I really can't say anything about looking at them as bitches. And a lot of the things you're bringing into the nice guy thing in your OP I just don't see, so maybe what i say won't make sense. But I see this way too often...Guys getting pissed because they tried to be the nice guy and they didn't get the girl, and they're not pissed at the situation, but pissed at the girl, which is where it starts to seem like there was some obligation for the girl to be with them and be attracted to them because they put so much effort into getting them...which they chose to do when there was never any guarantee of anything. To me, it just seem irrational

Personally, if a guy started buying me things and paying for everything for me, a friend, it would make me terribly uncomfortable knowing the only reason he's doing it is because he wants to try and buy me and I would not know what to say. Using it would obviously lead to some messy situation I don't want to be in. But if you're trying to buy someone, that's not being a true friend


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> I have never once said that. I have consistently said that women who know full well how a guy feels, use that to get what they want out of him, then accuse him of wrong doing when he stops letting her use him or dares to get upset that he was used is a shallow bitch.
> 
> Are you really telling me that you don't think women can tell when a guy likes them, nor is accountable for using a guy that does?


Don't know about you, but I can't always tell when a guy likes me, and I sure as hell don't feel accountable for what he does. If a guy feels like doing something nice for me, I appreciate it, and often try to do something nice for him in return. I have a lot of male friends, none of whom I use for any selfish purposes, and I can't keep track of who does and doesn't have a crush on me at any given time. But yes, I do get pissed off when a guy friend suddenly tells me he has a crush on me, I say I'm not interested, and suddenly he gets pissed at me as if I did something wrong. From my perspective, I had a friend who I was fairly nice to and never used selfishly for anything, and because I refused to have a relationship with him he became hostile. How is that my fault?


----------



## chaoticbrain (May 5, 2012)

Your personal experience has nothing to do with what's being talked about devoid. Your just complicating the debate when you KNOW she doesn't mean that. Why can't you respond to posts directly ?


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

Strife said:


> In my view, the 'asshole' and the 'nice guy' is a classic false dichotomy. They are on two opposite ends of the spectrum that not everyone falls under.


These two descriptors are not on the same scale. Anyone can be any measure of either, neither, or both at any time, depending on their mood, circumstances, and inherent disposition. The assumption that being nice precludes being an asshole at times is like assuming that a lady can't be a bitch, and if she is ever a bitch, she's not a lady. Both of these approaches to the opposite gender objectify them into what they can provide, without looking at them as human beings with feelings. Once someone becomes an object, it is a simple thing to start hating them for 'malfunctioning'. It only proves just how entitled to emotional supremacy a woman feels when she reacts to her friend's pain by asserting that her feelings are more valid than his, and that her feelings must be accommodated and his must be scorned.

The reality however, is that these two titles ("asshole" and "nice guy") are names that two different sexual-romantic orientations have given each other because their approaches are toxic to the other. 



Strife said:


> I also disagree with women wanting a nice guy as they grow older. I find it difficult to accept that anyone would want to partner with someone who essentially acts like their lapdog.


You're probably right. Women with the orientation to want an "asshole" are not going to want a "nice guy", and vice versa. Also, keep in mind that most of the men who act like "nice guys" are not unassertive in other areas of life. They're under the impression that they should treat a woman with a degree of respect and kindness that comes off as unassertive in a day and age when those sorts of behaviors are no longer seen as ideal - unless the guy is hot and confident, then it's romantic. This approach to relationships makes these guys comfortable and happy, or else they would approach them differently. 



Strife said:


> The person in the example actually made a good point ("If he loves me as much as he says he does, then he wouldn't treat me like this"). That's the problem, the guy doesn't love her as much as he says he does. Love isn't getting to receive, that is duplicitous, and so because of this I believe it is unjustified for the man to get angry considering he acted under false pretenses.


If she's as good a friend as she says she is, she wouldn't have used him, and understood when he did get upset. She would have tried to save the friendship instead of getting indignant over losing the benefits she felt entitled to.

Making the assumption that when a man has an old fashioned approach to relationships, he has duplicitous intentions, is like making the assumption that a woman didn't know when a guy is pursuing her romantically. In both cases, it would be an assumption about a relationship that you know very little about. Jumping to conclusions is highly illogical.

Currently, due to these memes and articles surrounding them, many people are making this assumption as if it is a fact in all cases where a guy fell in love with a friend, and then stopped being friends when she revealed her lack of interest in a relationship. These memes make a good case for this argument based on a few examples of guys who spun out and said awful things. The problem is, while there are situations where men who are only out for sex, it paints a picture that includes all men who approach relationships in a 'slow to build' manner, whether or not they had sincere intentions, and removes all blame from the women who use these men. The problem with this meme is that by creating a believable explanation for some instances, it poisons the well for all similar situations with an assumption that is just not valid - which then further vilifies people who did no wrong.

This is exactly how prejudice works, and that is wrong.



Strife said:


> The phrase you used, 'reclaim their manhood' is particularly telling. Bottom line is that a woman wants a man, and manhood is the what the nice guy is struggling against.


No, the nice guy is struggling against having relationship development expectations that are slow to build romantic intimacy in a day and age when the general perception is that men should be extremely direct and upfront about their intentions. We live in an instant gratification world, and a lot of people want instant relationship status. The nice guy is also struggling against the expectations of society from the other direction that tell him that when a man is pushy, assertive, or otherwise treats a woman like anything other than a highly sensitive treasure, he's a misogynistic sex crazed monster. Trying to make everyone happy, including himself, in the current climate is no easy feat for these men. There is a lot of pressure from all directions, and eventually that kind of pressure can cause someone to say some hurtful things in a moment of reaching a limit of frustration.

The only solutions that keep being offered are "stop being a wuss", and "stop approaching relationships like this". Both of these things are counter to the nature of their love needs. It would be like vilifying gay men for their orientation and demanding that they stop being gay. But, this is the greatest part of the problem - the assumption that these men aren't operating within their orientation. Their love needs don't include behaving differently, otherwise they would. And when these love needs come into conflict with a woman's love needs, all of a sudden they're villains because of how they made that poor girl feel by being nice to her then suddenly stopping when they realized she wasn't interested.

Most people, men _and women_, who approach relationships like this don't flip out or say mean things when they end. They simply feel hurt and move on. There are also many people in the world who have this approach to relationships who find other people who have this approach, and have relationships blossom out of them. There are even people with this orientation, mostly women, who constantly rail on guys for not sharing it. This isn't as cut and dried as "men and women should act like this in relationships". The assumption that this approach to love and relationships is universally wrong is as offensive as telling people it is wrong to be gay.

What's going on in the "nice guy" hate memes is an attempt to correct someone else's approach to love because it made a woman unhappy at some point. As a civilization, we always side with the woman when emotions are involved. It's hard wired into us. It's so hard wired that we jump to conclusions to take her side before we stop to think about it. The problem here isn't getting these guys to "man up". The problem is that people need to be aware that there are many approaches to love, romance, sensuality, and sexuality - and this will inevitably cause problems when people with differing approaches interact. 

The only viable solution is awareness and tolerance. Trying to shame people into having different feelings is wrong when its done to any other group, and its wrong when its done to men with this approach. The first step in this is to acknowledge that these *people* have their own orientation and approach to relationships. The next step is to identify it and explain it to people so they understand what it is, and can more easily find other people they're compatible with. 

Men with this orientation tend to see the sort of men you're implying they should be as "assholes" because these men approach relationships with behaviors that are toxic to their own needs. When a woman is attracted to "assholes", the men with this orientation are genuinely offended because it means the woman is not attracted to their orientation. "Friend zone" means a woman is not receptive to a relationship, not just sex.

The inverse is also is true. Men with the orientation you are promoting tend to see these guys as weak, deceptive, doters who need to man up because you guys don't have this orientation and therefore find it toxic.

One of the most important parts of this situation will be to come up with terminology that is less offensive for all parties involved. Currently, that responsibility is on the "nice guys", but what is the responsibility of everyone else is to become aware of the fact that we don't all love the same way, and accept it, rather than bash people for it.



Strife said:


> OP, you seem to be a very empathetic person which I commend you for, but often times what these guys really need is a swift kick in the ass. And maybe a beer. Haha.


Yeah, I'm sure that would cure homosexuality too.


----------



## nuklear (Jan 9, 2013)

Ok, I have a theory.
There're people whom in their gene happy at acquiring wealth through creation.
There're people whom in their gene happy at acquiring wealth through redistribution.
There're people whom in their gene happy at acquiring wealth through exploitation.
etc, etc.
A person whom enjoys exploitation will be attracted to others with similar value.
As they appreciate this trait.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

nuklear said:


> Ok, I have a theory.
> There're people whom in their gene happy at acquiring wealth through creation.
> There're people whom in their gene happy at acquiring wealth through redistribution.
> There're people whom in their gene happy at acquiring wealth through exploitation.
> ...


I love this.


----------



## Strife (Aug 25, 2010)

Nobleheart said:


> These two descriptors are not on the same scale. Anyone can be any measure of either, neither, or both at any time, depending on their mood, circumstances, and inherent disposition. The assumption that being nice precludes being an asshole at times is like assuming that a lady can't be a bitch, and if she is ever a bitch, she's not a lady. Both of these approaches to the opposite gender objectify them into what they can provide, without looking at them as human beings with feelings. Once someone becomes an object, it is a simple thing to start hating them for 'malfunctioning'. It only proves just how entitled to emotional supremacy a woman feels when she reacts to her friend's pain by asserting that her feelings are more valid than his, and that her feelings must be accommodated and his must be scorned.
> 
> The reality however, is that these two titles ("asshole" and "nice guy") are names that two different sexual-romantic orientations have given each other because their approaches are toxic to the other.


We are in complete agreement here.



Nobleheart said:


> Making the assumption that when a man has an old fashioned approach to relationships, he has duplicitous intentions, is like making the assumption that a woman didn't know when a guy is pursuing her romantically. In both cases, it would be an assumption about a relationship that you know very little about. Jumping to conclusions is highly illogical.
> 
> Currently, due to these memes and articles surrounding them, many people are making this assumption as if it is a fact in all cases where a guy fell in love with a friend, and then stopped being friends when she revealed her lack of interest in a relationship. These memes make a good case for this argument based on a few examples of guys who spun out and said awful things. The problem is, while there are situations where men who are only out for sex, it paints a picture that includes all men who approach relationships in a 'slow to build' manner, whether or not they had sincere intentions, and removes all blame from the women who use these men. The problem with this meme is that by creating a believable explanation for some instances, it poisons the well for all similar situations with an assumption that is just not valid - which then further vilifies people who did no wrong.
> 
> ...


We are talking about two different things, men who approach courtship in an old fashioned manner aren't labeled as nice guys by default, neither are men who want to take the process slow. Nice guys are people like the example that you gave in where he spent his time, energy, and effort on a girl for over a year without her having reciprocated the affection that he wanted in return. We are talking about the guy who puts the girls needs over his and then gets frustrated because she doesn't do what he says because he gets a sense of entitlement from HIS investment. Nice guys have a fundamental lack of self respect, as that person exhibited in that situation, and put themselves in those situations. If you want to blame society and use that as a scapegoat for them then so be it, but personally I don't buy that. You don't have to eat what's put on your plate. Everyone has a choice as to what we want to believe and how we choose to interact with the world. I also don't see how comparing it to homosexually is at any way applicable. Being a 'nice guy' isn't an orientation like you are making it out to be, its a set of shame based behaviors and mindsets. If anything, I would say it actually inhibits who you are as a person. Also, people can act outside of what is natural to them. People do it all the time and this case is no different, so to say that they are acting a certain way because that's what they need doesn't take into account the social constructs they have adopted through their lives that may or may not be natural. Funny enough, you acknowledge this as a factor for why they have outbursts, yet fail to understand that these constructs can also inhibit natural behavior in terms of courtship, instead you opt to look at it as an orientation issue. I fundamentally disagree on this.

It seems we have pretty different views on it so this will probably be my last post in this thread, but I do want to clarify that the only thing I am promoting is people being honest with themselves and going for what they want without pretense. What I see as duplicitous is not being congruent with who you are and putting yourself in situations where you bend over backwards for someone without any reciprocation on their part. How can any truth come from a situation like that?


----------



## nuklear (Jan 9, 2013)

Nobleheart said:


> I love this.


Actually, don't have to be same value attraction.
It's more like what quality do you want to have in your offspring?
It totally makes sense!


----------



## Nick Carraway (Feb 11, 2013)

Finally, a woman that tells it like it is. Yet I have another perspective on it but before I share I want to introduce myself. 

I am a 20 year old guy who hasn't had sex due to a strictly religious upbringing (strict Christians) and going to a school where I was not attracted to most of the women I ran into (it was a very small high school without much variety and I will leave it at that). Yet, at first (right out of high school) I fell into the nice guy trap and had the same thing happen to me. I was nice to this girl but then I started to pay less attention to her and she lost it, I get touchy with her one day and I tell you I get the whole world of insults hurled at me behind my back. 

Now I feel like men these days are born to be "nice guys" as in pushovers (in that sense) or actively chase after a girl even when she never rewards them sexually for it. When I say born to be nice guys, it starts all the way in Elementary School. Boys are pushed to be overly nice to girls and be the Prince Charming but the girl is never asked to be Cinderella. All of this translates into the adolescence and even early college. 

Again, there is nothing wrong with being a nice guy as long as you aren't a pushover but I feel that men are pushed into being the type of nice guys who try to please a girl throughout their lives because of current schooling.

After my experience with the girl who I failed with, I broke out of the nice guy zone FAST. I realized I was never meant to be the guy who will please her every need. I have been WAY TOO TIED DOWN with school work to even pursue women but I have had a date and I have had make outs. I would have lost my virginity a long time ago (had the chance) if my parents were not constantly patrolling me. 

If I was to give guys advice, it would be to put yourself FIRST. Do not go out of your way for a girl, EVER. You don't need to be the guy who falls at her feet, just be the guy who worries more about himself before he worries about her (again, this is if you are NOT dating her and you two are not romantically involved). 

*Regardless, good post!*


----------



## redballoon (Oct 19, 2011)

I appreciate your analytical ability and emotional vocabulary @Nobleheart.

Nice guys who aren't that way by some kind of oddly unique explicit choice have to do some growing up. I know I did. I wasn't just in it for the sex. Its amazing how small changes in presentation bring such different levels of success. But behind that presentation is a lot of introspection.

I think you are getting at some kind of fascinating issues of evolved biological/social inequalities for men (read: your discussion of mate-protectors, etc). Being a man has always struck me as a lonely, unempathetic experience. Of course, given the advantages men have acquired for themselves over the ages, it has been unimportant and irrelevant for quite a while. And now that things are becoming more equal between men and women, not to mention that sexual assault is now much more illegal, this old inequity has some power again. Luckily men have the easiest response to this power play, which is to stop giving a shit about her and her pussy, since options are effectively unlimited. Its so simple. There's not even a scarcity anymore as there possibly may have been in caveman times.

I say bring on the ignorant meme makers, because it screens the unempathetic bitches for all of us. Before I get some uninformed flame based in (pointless) personal anecdote, I'm not saying all people upset at friend zoned guys are necessarily unempathetic bitches. But they probably are. ;D

I second reading that book, no more mr. nice guy, or whatever it is, as recommended by whoever it was in the thread. I read that after getting friendzoned a few years ago, and it was quite helpful.





People like this song because they are naive and relate, or because they are not naive and have suffered through this kind of insipid nonsense. Haha, look at me, reminiscing.


----------



## qingdom (Apr 5, 2011)

Nick Carraway said:


> Finally, a woman that tells it like it is.


 @_Nobleheart_ is a guy. But I believe you did make him blush with the flattery. :wink:


----------



## strangestdude (Dec 8, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> The nice guy is also struggling against the expectations of society from the other direction that tell him that when a man is pushy, assertive, or otherwise treats a woman like anything other than a highly sensitive treasure, he's a misogynistic sex crazed monster.





Strife said:


> We are talking about the guy who puts the girls needs over his and then gets frustrated because she doesn't do what he says because he gets a sense of entitlement from HIS investment. Nice guys have a fundamental lack of self respect, as that person exhibited in that situation, and put themselves in those situations.


I agree with both of you.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

qingdom said:


> @_Nobleheart_ is a guy.



Oh, he's a guy. Well that explains a lot.


----------



## petite libellule (Jul 4, 2012)

I don't trust the "nice guy" anymore than I trust a woman who is overly accommodating and forgiving. 
I'd rather deal with a decent guy who chooses to be nice. 

curious if I'm alone in that belief.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

qingdom said:


> @_Nobleheart_ is a guy. But I believe you did make him blush with the flattery. :wink:


News to me.


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

Nobleheart said:


> News to me.


Or perhaps qingdom knows something you don't. :laughing: :tongue:


----------

