Nice Guys Suck

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

It must be nice for introverted women to not have to be told to change their entire personality or die alone.

PhiMed:

And by the way, there's a reason these men are so timid. Young women, when they reject someone, are vicious. It's socially empowering for a women to publicly humiliate a male. Negative reinforcement is a powerful motivator. Women created these sissies.

Sorry boys and girls, there's a wall o'text comin' your way.

I don't agree with the rest of your post, you give off the impression that all women are implicit in some diabolical scheme to poison the world's supply of men. Either you're wrong and maybe a bit misogynistic, or you're right and you've just alerted the conspiracy to your presence - they could be coming for you next!

Joking aside though, you make a good point in the bit I've quoted here. I read a while ago that a young man either becomes a nice guy or a Nice Guy(tm) (to borrow Lara's term) based on the first time you ask someone out.

If the girl lets the guy down easy or says yes, then chances are he'll grow up with a healthy attitude towards romance. If the girl recoils like a rape victim, shriekingly digs up and exposes every one of the guy's flaws in front of an audience of laughing classmates, then that guy is gonna have some scars and maybe turn out to be a Nice Guy(tm) as he's described in this column.

This isn't a black and white issue, I think it's cynical and a bit dangerous to assume it is. Not all Nice Guys(tm) are living that way as a conniving attempt to get girls to sleep with him, some have to be just insecure and inexperienced with no way of properly dealing with their feelings. Kicking these poor bastards when they're down is only going to make things worse.

Plus, if these guys were really the master manipulators that Lara seems to imply they are, then they have to be a bit stupid in the bargain. I mean, if you're trying to trick a girl into sleeping with you - why use the Nice Guy(tm) method? It's almost always guaranteed to fail 95% of the time because it simply isn't attractive to most women.

But then there are the clear examples of Nice Guys(tm) that are just exploiting their friendships for sex. These guys are douchenozzles of the highest order and deserve your derision. Plus, like I said above - they're a bit stupid too.

I'm speaking as a reformed Nice Guy(tm) myself. It definately wasn't a calculated scheme on my part. I didn't feel like I was entitled to love or affection or anything, I just really wanted it and I didn't know any other way to get it. Plus I was the recipient of two of those shrieking, soul crushing rejections that I described earlier on and I was too terrified of putting myself out there all the way.

It took years of therapy and support and counselling just to get me to break the cycle. People kept telling me to 'be more confident' but gave me no clue as to how to do that. It's not about just being a 'supernova' and putting yourself out there, rejection be damned (although that's a good place to start). It's harder than that. You have to shift some things around inside yourself, find a way to constantly remind yourself of your good qualities and start off with small risks (i.e; talking to bus drivers and shop assistants) and build up to the harders ones (i.e; wearing a silly hat in public and asking a girl out).

Lara's article here, while entertaining, does the complete opposite. Same with the initial e-mail from the last article that provoked the discussion. Instead of trying to reform Nice Guys(tm) she's trying to punish them, essentially becoming just another peal of shrieking laughter. It's satisfying to strike people down if you think they deserve it, but it won't help them improve themselves. They'll be like Joe Pesci in Casino , they'll just keep getting back up.

I've rambled on more than I intended do (and I didn't think I'd be so sympathetic to the Nice Guys(tm) in my response), but I'll end by saying that I thought this article was entertaining. But if I'd have read it ten years ago at the height of my Nice Guyness, then it would've made me twice as bad. And that would be no help to anyone.

I dated a few Nice Guys™ and it never went to a second date. One of them I even screwed before I dumped, the rest got a firm handshake and a glimpse of me walking away

The Nice Guys™ I met tended to be little momma's boys who were constantly upset that they got rejected. You have more hair on your back than on your chest, you haven't seen the inside of a gym (excluding in specialty porn) and you whine about how all the hot muscular guys don't give you a second look... sigh.

For me the deal breaker was always the complaining, the feeling of being used, they would spend the date talking about the latest guy who hurt them and how they did everything for him:
"And then he photocopied my psych-evaluation and spread it around campus with my picture on it! He was such an asshole... I broke up with him two months after that."
"I payed for his Taxi to my place and he wouldn't even sleep with me! Too tired, liar." (Actual Quotes)

If I wanted something fuzzy, chubby and with a pathetic charm to it I'd take a puppy.

KaiusCormere:
It must be nice for introverted women to not have to be told to change their entire personality or die alone.

There are female Nice Guys™ you know...
I had one in the office next to me. She would go on and on about how X isn't being nice to her but he is being nice to Y. And X only likes her cos she is blonde and has big boobs. She is actually dumb and she didn't understand why a smart Nice Girl™ like her isn't getting any attention.
I (out of pure malice) would flirt with her all the time but never actually hit on her and I would pretend to be ignorant when she'd flirt with me. I told myself that the second she'd muster up the guts to hit on me I'd tell her I'm gay.
Two years later I gave up and told her I had a boyfriend.

Did I mention I hate Nice Guys™? Cos I do.

Isnt that exactly what a lot of women do, just on the other side of the specrtum?
Instead of giving you sex and demand attention, they give attention and demand sex(It wouldnt work the other way around in most cases anyway i guess).
While this is just a simple observation, why make such a fuss over it? Isnt that how its always been? Its what 90% of the teenie movies and books are about, they just dont show what happens after the end...And nobody who posts about this here seems to have noticed.

What im trying to say is, it would be better not to make a fuss about it. Anybody in the bussines(which i hope are most of the people here) should have noticed that a while ago. Or maybe its just the guys who never noticed that they are like that themselfes...

PhiMed:
It's nice that everyone is showering you with praises, Lara. Unfortunately, it's completely unwarranted.

...

Women take. That's what they do. If a man doesn't demand some give AND take up front, then a woman will suck him dry.

Amen, brother.

KaiusCormere:
It must be nice for introverted women to not have to be told to change their entire personality or die alone.

This forum needs an upvote function, because I wouldn't be able to upvote your post enough right now.

FYI you are not nice.

KaiusCormere:
It must be nice for introverted women to not have to be told to change their entire personality or die alone.

There's a world of difference between 'introvert' and 'passive-agressive douchebag.'

The former isn't really going out of their way to meet new people, but that's okay because they're an introvert.

A passive-agressive douchebag expects people to go out of their way to meet them, and read their intentions, because they're pussies.

The term "Nice guys finish last" is an out-of-date term, ever since the work from R.Dawkins, the selfish gene. It is "Nice guys finish first".

trooper6:

GrandmaFunk:
oddly the clarification doesn't feel any less insulting and still amounts to : girls don't want nice guys, you're better off being a jerk than being yourself.

You misread it. Gals do want nice guys who are themselves...and those selves are interesting (which might be introverted or extroverted). What they don't want is jerks. Many of the so-called Nice Guys (TM) are not actually nice guys, but jerks...which is why women don't like them.

I don't think he missed anything. I got the same feeling by the time I finished reading page 2. I THOUGHT she was saying that too on page 1, but by page 2 it felt like the same insulting "nice guys are losers" stuff all over again.

I've always been described as a nice guy cause I can empathize with people's problems, I'm usually fun to be around/good at making people laugh (whether I'm trying to or not), and am one of the few guys most girls know who will actually discuss female problems and not cringe or cower. I've never gotten the impression that women don't like me for those traits and have in fact had some good friendships with girls in and out of relationships; a couple of married ladies in college liked talking to me, for instance. Hell, my ex-girlfriend and I first started getting interested in one another when she was in another relationship and realized that compared to me, her boyfriend treated her like a trophy or some to feel superior to.

Now, I've not read all the comments cause I don't really have the time so maybe some of this has already been said.. but in the past whenever I see or hear a girl remark on how she wants a "Bad Boy" I feel as though she's never actually had a guy who respected her before. Why in the hell would you want someone who didn't care about you and just wanted you for your body? Why would you be interested in someone who is a complete jerk to you? I could understand if they were just playing the part but were secretly compassionate, a facade to hide their true self.. but how often do I ever encounter guys like that? None that I know of.

Hiroshi Mishima:
Why in the hell would you want someone who didn't care about you and just wanted you for your body? Why would you be interested in someone who is a complete jerk to you? I could understand if they were just playing the part but were secretly compassionate, a facade to hide their true self. but how often do I ever encounter guys like that? None that I know of.

Bad Boy =/= disrespectful misogynist.
If you want a misogynist you can look in the previous pages and see quite a few of the "nice guys" here think of women as enemies who are hiding something from or will 'suck you dry' if you act too nice to them.

Bad boys often are confident and open minded which are the traits a lot of women (and men) find attractive.

Like Lara said, you can be an insignificant wimp who complains about women loving guys who disrespect them on online forums or you can get out of the house, meet new people, take the chance of getting hurt and be a happier person for it.

Life is hard for everyone, people.

Only you are in control of your actions. Bitchy women creating Nice Guys(TM) is just an excuse, and its really inconsequential. If nice fellas want a healthy relationship, they have to overcome their environment. Some have it harder than others, and they have my sympathy, but not my pity.

"If you can't understand something, try just accepting it." -Jecht

This entire article is blatant nerd-baiting. Let's see... an article writer who isn't very popular conjures up something that was certain to drum up controversy within the populace. Yeah, I don't see a problem...

KaiusCormere:
It must be nice for introverted women to not have to be told to change their entire personality or die alone.

Truer words have yet to be spoken before or since.

Ophenix:

Like Lara said, you can be an insignificant wimp who complains about women loving guys who disrespect them on online forums or you can get out of the house, meet new people, take the chance of getting hurt and be a happier person for it.

How the hell do I become a happier person by bagging a woman who loves me because I disrespect her?

You know, I've read this whole article through grimacing without realizing that it isn't even about nice guys. The author creates a type of guy, gives that group of guys the name "Nice Guys" and proceeds to criticize them. Why even use those two words when they have nothing to do with what you mean by them? Why not use the title "Love FAQ: Miserable Sulking Passive-Aggressive Manipulating Guys Suck"?

Because then you'd be lucky to even get one reader.

Here's an exercise for the reader - try to read the article imagining a nice guy who doesn't have any of the traits Lara mentions. You'll find it's pretty damn easy to do. Nice is just nice - not all those added personality bonuses that Lara links together with being nice.

Kevlar Eater:
This entire article is blatant nerd-baiting. Let's see... an article writer who isn't very popular conjures up something that was certain to drum up controversy within the populace. Yeah, I don't see a problem...

KaiusCormere:
It must be nice for introverted women to not have to be told to change their entire personality or die alone.

Truer words have yet to be spoken before or since.

I know, right?

Great advice that I think many people in the gaming community need to hear.

Now, that's my first thoughts out of the way, time to actually read this thread... This should be good...

Ophenix:
Bad Boy =/= disrespectful misogynist.
If you want a misogynist you can look in the previous pages and see quite a few of the "nice guys" here think of women as enemies who are hiding something from or will 'suck you dry' if you act too nice to them.

Bad boys often are confident and open minded which are the traits a lot of women (and men) find attractive.

Like Lara said, you can be an insignificant wimp who complains about women loving guys who disrespect them on online forums or you can get out of the house, meet new people, take the chance of getting hurt and be a happier person for it.

Somehow I still think you're missing the point. In fact, you're just making it worse. I certainly didn't complain that some women love guys who didn't respect them, I questioned on it. You must be projecting or trying to establish yourself as a guy who doesn't respect people since that definitely seems to be where you're going.

Lemme add that I ALSO didn't say anything about women being enemies, either, so again I have no idea where you're getting this stuff from unless you're projecting your own issues.

DefZeppelin:
Wow, definitely a hot subject. This is the first time a LoveFAQ article has hit triple-digits in comments.

So the gist of the article is that being nice has no value in dating? That a man can only enter a meaningful relationship if he has exceptional qualities to flaunt? That the only way for a man to get laid is to pretty much say from the very beginning "Hey, let's hang out so that I can try to bang you next month"? I'm calling total bullshit on that.

...

A hint to ALL women: If a nice guy approches you, just freaking go on a couple dates with him! If you don't like him, be honest and respectful. If he gets clingy and stalkerish, help him out by introducing him to some of your friends you think he might like.

Hoo boy, where to begin.

Okay, well, pardon me for overstretching my job analogy, but I just thought it up, and I'm rather enamoured of it (also, a warning, as with all analogies this one should be used for clarification, not "proof" of anything):

1. Let's start with the general and move to specifics. First
You are not entitled to a job.*
You are not entitled to a woman.

2. If you do not have any special qualities beyond "nice", you are unlikely to get a job and have, in fact, vastly reduced the number of jobs available to you (like, maybe some minimum wage customer service stuff).
If you do not have any special qualities beyond "nice", you are unlikely to get a date, and have, in fact, vastly reduced the number of women who could possibly be interested in you (basically just the blandly polite who also have nothing else to offer).

3. If doesn't matter how many applications you send out (hundreds, thousands) if you're sending it to jobs you're not qualified for; you will be rejected. You'll have to stick to jobs you're actually qualified to do, which are very few because you offer nothing beyond the bare minimum of value to anyone (you don't get to be a CEO by possessing nothing beyond "nice").
It doesn't matter how many women you ask out (hundreds, thousands) if you they are, in fact, too good for you. Why should a funny, charming, pretty girl with an excellent education settle for a nice lump?)

4. Almost anyone can outcompete you for that job because almost anyone is better qualified for it.
A woman is going to choose almost any guy over you because almost any guy is more attractive (not just in physical terms) than you.

5. While your circumstances may be unfortunate, it's still not the company's fault that you lack essential things like education, experience, and special skills, and it's up to you to obtain those things, not up to the company to feel sorry for you and give you a job anyway.
Again, it's not the woman's fault that you can only offer the bare minimum step above total asshole (I mean, way to shoot for the moon with that goal). It's also not her responsibility to take pity on poor you and date you anyway.

6. When applying to a job, it's up to you to demonstrate value. The company isn't psychic.
When asking a woman out, it's up to you to demonstrate value. The woman isn't psychic, and it's not her fault for not seeing how you're such a nice guy deep down inside, no really.

7. So you fear rejection? Not the company's problem, and the fact that it stops you from ever applying to the company is not the company's fault.
Not the woman's fault you fear rejection, and it's not their job to help you get over it or their job to accept you anyway for fear of hurting your feelings. Also not their fault if they pick someone else over you because that person actually asked (have you considered that the other guy also fears rejection but was brave enough to take it on the chin anyway?).

8. Companies don't like desperation.
Ditto women.

9. No company is going to knowingly hire someone who acts in a manipulative, stalkerish, delusional, fanatical, deceptive manner, no matter how "nice" he claims he is on the inside and how much he says it's the fault of other companies.
Man, ditto women. It doesn't matter that you say "I'm totally not like that on the inside, really!" If you act like a stalker, hey presto you're a stalker.

10. Just to sum up: Companies don't owe you a job. Women don't owe you a date.

Now to drop the analogy before it snaps from being overused and overstretched.

Now, going back to your first paragraph, I think it's quite telling that you seem to feel the only reason to enter into a long-term romantic relationship is to have sex. Anyway, if all you want is sex, you can, indeed, enter relationships purely for that, or simply have a one-night stand although, again, honesty is key here. But if you are actually interested in a long-term romantic relationship then, no, "let's hang out so I can bang you later" would never actually cross your lips because that's not why you're dating. So yeah, that's total bullshit. And it's your bullshit since I don't recall this article ever proposing that. That seems to be purely your interpretation of the reason people enter into long-term romantic relationships.

And now to the last paragraph--What the hell is wrong with you? You are not entitled to a woman's affections! And you give no reason for why any woman would ever want to enter a relationship. You're a self-professed clingy, misogynistic stalker! That is not the other party's fault, and they are absolutely right to reject you. If you want to date a woman, clean up your act first. They don't owe you a couple dates (I love that you demand not one, but a couple!) just because you want a date. That sentence also flies in the face of your second one since the honest and respectful thing to do is to reject you and someone like you straight away. And introducing a stalker to your friends is a terrible, terrible thing to do.

*I hope I'm not blowing anyone's mind here.

Hiroshi Mishima:
Lemme add that I ALSO didn't say anything about women being enemies, either, so again I have no idea where you're getting this stuff from unless you're projecting your own issues.

I didn't think you said some women were enemies but some of the Nice Guys(TM) here did just a page ago.

PhiMed:
It's nice that everyone is showering you with praises, Lara. Unfortunately, it's completely unwarranted.

...

Women take. That's what they do. If a man doesn't demand some give AND take up front, then a woman will suck him dry.

KaiusCormere:
It must be nice for introverted women to not have to be told to change their entire personality or die alone.

(This one is my faiv, its like a QQ to God asking him to patch society)

Like I said earlier, I don't do women, but I did date a few Nice Guys(tm) and even got an inflammatory email after that telling me I should "date dumb gym rats since I obviously don't know quality when I see it." Needless to say I got it from a guy whose back looked like a carpet, was steadily developing a beer gut and had over 40 board games in his trunk "just in case". And I can promise you he went home and called his BFF telling her gays just like muscular guys who will sleep with them and dump them but no one wants a nice guy like him...

Blood Brain Barrier:

Ophenix:

Like Lara said, you can be an insignificant wimp who complains about women loving guys who disrespect them on online forums or you can get out of the house, meet new people, take the chance of getting hurt and be a happier person for it.

How the hell do I become a happier person by bagging a woman who loves me because I disrespect her?

You know, I've read this whole article through grimacing without realizing that it isn't even about nice guys. The author creates a type of guy, gives that group of guys the name "Nice Guys" and proceeds to criticize them. Why even use those two words when they have nothing to do with what you mean by them? Why not use the title "Love FAQ: Miserable Sulking Passive-Aggressive Manipulating Guys Suck"?

Because then you'd be lucky to even get one reader.

Here's an exercise for the reader - try to read the article imagining a nice guy who doesn't have any of the traits Lara mentions. You'll find it's pretty damn easy to do. Nice is just nice - not all those added personality bonuses that Lara links together with being nice.

Out of curiosity, where did you get "be disrespectful to women" from " you can get out of the house, meet new people, take the chance of getting hurt and be a happier person for it"?

Also, the Nice Guy is not the article writer's neologism. You can google it for more information. She actually describes in this article what the difference is between a Nice Guy and being nice. I guess you were too busy clenching your teeth to notice ;). The reason they are called "Nice Guy" in this article is because that's what they call themselves as an excuse to hide their wimpy, misogynistic, cowardly, dishonest behaviour and because anyone who does manage to enter a healthy relationship with the Nice Guys' object of choice or who is capable of leaving the house and meeting people in an honest way automatically becomes an Asshole Who Disrespects Women. Hope this cleared things up!

KirbyKrackle:

Blood Brain Barrier:

Ophenix:

Like Lara said, you can be an insignificant wimp who complains about women loving guys who disrespect them on online forums or you can get out of the house, meet new people, take the chance of getting hurt and be a happier person for it.

How the hell do I become a happier person by bagging a woman who loves me because I disrespect her?

You know, I've read this whole article through grimacing without realizing that it isn't even about nice guys. The author creates a type of guy, gives that group of guys the name "Nice Guys" and proceeds to criticize them. Why even use those two words when they have nothing to do with what you mean by them? Why not use the title "Love FAQ: Miserable Sulking Passive-Aggressive Manipulating Guys Suck"?

Because then you'd be lucky to even get one reader.

Here's an exercise for the reader - try to read the article imagining a nice guy who doesn't have any of the traits Lara mentions. You'll find it's pretty damn easy to do. Nice is just nice - not all those added personality bonuses that Lara links together with being nice.

Out of curiosity, where did you get "be disrespectful to women" from " you can get out of the house, meet new people, take the chance of getting hurt and be a happier person for it"?

Also, the Nice Guy is not the article writer's neologism. You can google it for more information. She actually describes in this article what the difference is between a Nice Guy and being nice. I guess you were too busy clenching your teeth to notice ;). The reason they are called "Nice Guy" in this article is because that's what they call themselves as an excuse to hide their wimpy, misogynistic, cowardly, dishonest behaviour and because anyone who does manage to enter a healthy relationship with the Nice Guys' object of choice or who is capable of leaving the house and meeting people in an honest way automatically becomes an Asshole. Hope this cleared things up!

It did indeed, though I still think the use of the words Nice Guys was a sneaky and unnecessary way to attract readers' attention on this site, considering the article is about something completely different.

KirbyKrackle:

Cephei Mordred:

KirbyKrackle:

Well, one is deceptive, and the other isn't, so it's not actually quite the same. Also, might I add that it's a bit much to expect unconditional love while being a worthless human being? Talk about unrealistic expectations, not to mention an entitlement complex. Lay off the Bronte, CM ;)

[quoteOkay, Kirby, that was uncalled for.

To say that I have to be of value in order to receive love is the same is saying that I have to justify my existence on earth to others.

To say that it's 'entitled' of me to actually believe in unconditional love, which necessitates actually being unconditional and not contingent on being awesome or great, is simply ridiculous.

[quote]I considered writing a full response to this, but I think Athinira covered it pretty well. Adding anything else would likely be redundant on my part. Let me know though if there is anything you would still like me to clarify that you feel Athinira did not discuss or that you feel pertains particularly to my comments.

Well, at least Athinira didn't outright use the slur 'entitled.'

Seriously, what the heck?

Cephei Mordred:

KirbyKrackle:

Cephei Mordred:

[quoteOkay, Kirby, that was uncalled for.

To say that I have to be of value in order to receive love is the same is saying that I have to justify my existence on earth to others.

To say that it's 'entitled' of me to actually believe in unconditional love, which necessitates actually being unconditional and not contingent on being awesome or great, is simply ridiculous.

[quote]I considered writing a full response to this, but I think Athinira covered it pretty well. Adding anything else would likely be redundant on my part. Let me know though if there is anything you would still like me to clarify that you feel Athinira did not discuss or that you feel pertains particularly to my comments.

Well, at least Athinira didn't outright use the slur 'entitled.'

Seriously, what the heck?

Oh, well as far as I'm concerned, thinking that you're owed the privilege of unconditional love without doing anything to earn it is pretty damned entitled. I mean, if you're of a particular religion you want to believe God loves you unconditionally, sure, go for it, but from other people, here on earth? Nope, that's you acting entitled, plain and simple.

Blood Brain Barrier:
You know, I've read this whole article through grimacing without realizing that it isn't even about nice guys.

I highly doubt you did read the whole article without realizing it.

The entire first fucking page consists of nothing but comparing actually nice guys to Nice Guys(tm) outlining the differences and how they are not the same.

The entire first page.

All of it.

The letter was calling her out for refering to Nice Guys in the past. The entire article was about her clearing up the misconception between a nice guy and a Nice Guy. She didn't write ANYTHING ELSE.

The fact that people walk away from it 'reading' the article and claiming the article is being misleading or somehow NOT about this astonishes me. I am absolutely dumbfounded. The ONLY two ways I can actually see someone walking away from it with that conclusion is if they're either not reading the article, or strictly ignoring any part that doesn't offend them.

GrandmaFunk:
oddly the clarification doesn't feel any less insulting and still amounts to : girls don't want nice guys, you're better off being a jerk than being yourself.

Hiroshi Mishima:
I don't think he missed anything. I got the same feeling by the time I finished reading page 2. I THOUGHT she was saying that too on page 1, but by page 2 it felt like the same insulting "nice guys are losers" stuff all over again.

You should try reading what people say, not what your persecution complexes compel you to hear. Read words on the screen, not voices in your head. Cause you're being delusional.

The article is explaning being nice is expected, it's the baseline. It's not saying 'be a jerk' it's saying that 'If all you have is being nice, that's not good enough.' She then goes on to try to remind you that people have qualities, interests, and quirks that set themselves apart. The truly nice guy isn't just nice... he's also got talents that make him well rounded. Perhaps he's funny. Perhaps he likes that thing she likes, and has common ground. Perhaps he knows the right thing to say to make someone smile. Perhaps he's a really good cook. Perhaps he doesn't have talent but he has courage and explores new experiences anyways.

None of those things involve being a jerk. Not a single thing she said was 'be a jerk.' What she's saying is 'Be awesome.' Being nice is only a PART of being awesome. You need to be more; you need to be a man.

KirbyKrackle:

Cephei Mordred:

KirbyKrackle:

[quote]I considered writing a full response to this, but I think Athinira covered it pretty well. Adding anything else would likely be redundant on my part. Let me know though if there is anything you would still like me to clarify that you feel Athinira did not discuss or that you feel pertains particularly to my comments.

Well, at least Athinira didn't outright use the slur 'entitled.'

Seriously, what the heck?

Oh, well as far as I'm concerned, thinking that you're owed the privilege of unconditional love without doing anything to earn it is pretty damned entitled. I mean, if you're of a particular religion you want to believe God loves you unconditionally, sure, go for it, but from other people, here on earth? Nope, that's you acting entitled, plain and simple.

Seriously, this. Entitled isn't a frikken slur. No one is owed anything. Unconditional love doesn't just HAPPEN. That's an unrealistic expectation, and borderline insane.

You EARN unconditional love. It's hard fought. It's not something you just dole out one day thinking 'man, unconditional love is great!' Because love isn't that fucking easy.

Okay, so I'd like to clarify the 'Why don't girls date nice guys' meme. I'd like to explain that, while it's an unpleasant and probably inaccurate generalization, it has not been addressed by Lara.

For the most part, the 'why don't girls date nice guys' meme is brought up when a really nice girl is seen dating an inconsiderate douche who does not treat her well.

After seeing this phenomenon often, we might remark: 'Well this isn't an isolated case. I've seen it more than once.' We (unfairly) assume that it's not a case of some nice girls falling for some unpleasant guys. No, we start to think maybe - just maybe - it's not a coincidence that they're all bell-ends. Maybe that's what attracts the girls. Because they're really annoying people. And no, they didn't wear a funny hat or sing in Rock Band or do something extravagant. They were just obnoxious tools

Hence the 'women don't date nice guys' meme. Once again, it's a stereotype and an ugly one at that. Women aren't stupid and they're not all dating morons. And maybe we pass judgement on a girl's boyfriend without knowing the full story. But sometimes you'll see a smart, attractive and interesting girl going out with a loud, annoying ass. And you won't think, 'God, she should date me, I deserve sex because I listen'. You'll think, 'I just wish she'd stop dating losers. For her own sake'

Lara addressed the idea of 'nice guys' and so did Belle Du Jour on her blog, but they both missed the point. They both go into this tangent about real nice vs fake nice (which is not really just an overlong way of saying some people are only outwardly nice). As for that line of reasoning, it's incredibly cynical. Sometimes a guy is just shy. He doesn't have a twisted mind that demands sex in exchange for basic decency; he's just shy. And you can't exactly call niceness a duplicitous way of getting things. That's more a discussion of kindness itself. Can we judge any act as being kind? If we try hard enough, can't we find fault with any kind action?

Niceness shouldn't be taken lightly. Yes, being nice is a basic social requirement - in an ideal world. Here on planet Earth, you may be surprised at how many people are bastards, especially where dating is concerned. So if you're a good person, that should count for something. More than a hat, at least.

Okay, wait...really?

How in the world are "unconditional" and "earned" anything but the exact opposite?

And yes it is a slur, I use it all the time against Nice Guy(tms).

Cephei Mordred:
Okay, wait...really?

How in the world are "unconditional" and "earned" anything but the exact opposite?

And yes it is a slur, I use it all the time against Nice Guy(tms).

Because unconditional love still requires trust, friendship, honesty, and a lot of other traits that you simply cannot find by looking at someone across a room. These are things that have to be shown, displayed over a long period of time, before love blossoms from conditional to unconditional.

Love does not -start- unconditional. Attraction does not -start- unconditional.

To believe love can start unconditional means that who you are when they meet you is unimportant. They're not in love with -you- because who you are is meaningless, they're only in love with what you represent.

And that, good sir, is not love. That's infatuation.

Not to mention that while love may exist, unconditional love is a foolish romantic (and Romantic) fantasy that doesn't exist, and you will only harm yourself and others by believing in it.

EDIT: Although I thought I should add that what DracoSuave wrote about love needing to be earned is still correct without the "unconditional" tacked on.

Thank you for posting the article I really enjoyed the read. Some of the responses were pretty insightful too.

Really give a rat crap about women anymore. Everyone is so worried about dying alone and all that jazz. I have seen so many relationships go to shit that I don't see how its worth it. Not really nice to women, nor am I rude, to me, they are just there taking up space like me.

KirbyKrackle:

DefZeppelin:
Wow, definitely a hot subject. This is the first time a LoveFAQ article has hit triple-digits in comments.

So the gist of the article is that being nice has no value in dating? That a man can only enter a meaningful relationship if he has exceptional qualities to flaunt? That the only way for a man to get laid is to pretty much say from the very beginning "Hey, let's hang out so that I can try to bang you next month"? I'm calling total bullshit on that.

...

A hint to ALL women: If a nice guy approches you, just freaking go on a couple dates with him! If you don't like him, be honest and respectful. If he gets clingy and stalkerish, help him out by introducing him to some of your friends you think he might like.

Hoo boy, where to begin.

Okay, well, pardon me for overstretching my job analogy, but I just thought it up, and I'm rather enamoured of it (also, a warning, as with all analogies this one should be used for clarification, not "proof" of anything):

1. Let's start with the general and move to specifics. First
You are not entitled to a job.*
You are not entitled to a woman.

2. If you do not have any special qualities beyond "nice", you are unlikely to get a job and have, in fact, vastly reduced the number of jobs available to you (like, maybe some minimum wage customer service stuff).
If you do not have any special qualities beyond "nice", you are unlikely to get a date, and have, in fact, vastly reduced the number of women who could possibly be interested in you (basically just the blandly polite who also have nothing else to offer).

3. If doesn't matter how many applications you send out (hundreds, thousands) if you're sending it to jobs you're not qualified for; you will be rejected. You'll have to stick to jobs you're actually qualified to do, which are very few because you offer nothing beyond the bare minimum of value to anyone (you don't get to be a CEO by possessing nothing beyond "nice").
It doesn't matter how many women you ask out (hundreds, thousands) if you they are, in fact, too good for you. Why should a funny, charming, pretty girl with an excellent education settle for a nice lump?)

4. Almost anyone can outcompete you for that job because almost anyone is better qualified for it.
A woman is going to choose almost any guy over you because almost any guy is more attractive (not just in physical terms) than you.

5. While your circumstances may be unfortunate, it's still not the company's fault that you lack essential things like education, experience, and special skills, and it's up to you to obtain those things, not up to the company to feel sorry for you and give you a job anyway.
Again, it's not the woman's fault that you can only offer the bare minimum step above total asshole (I mean, way to shoot for the moon with that goal). It's also not her responsibility to take pity on poor you and date you anyway.

6. When applying to a job, it's up to you to demonstrate value. The company isn't psychic.
When asking a woman out, it's up to you to demonstrate value. The woman isn't psychic, and it's not her fault for not seeing how you're such a nice guy deep down inside, no really.

7. So you fear rejection? Not the company's problem, and the fact that it stops you from ever applying to the company is not the company's fault.
Not the woman's fault you fear rejection, and it's not their job to help you get over it or their job to accept you anyway for fear of hurting your feelings. Also not their fault if they pick someone else over you because that person actually asked (have you considered that the other guy also fears rejection but was brave enough to take it on the chin anyway?).

8. Companies don't like desperation.
Ditto women.

9. No company is going to knowingly hire someone who acts in a manipulative, stalkerish, delusional, fanatical, deceptive manner, no matter how "nice" he claims he is on the inside and how much he says it's the fault of other companies.
Man, ditto women. It doesn't matter that you say "I'm totally not like that on the inside, really!" If you act like a stalker, hey presto you're a stalker.

10. Just to sum up: Companies don't owe you a job. Women don't owe you a date.

Now to drop the analogy before it snaps from being overused and overstretched.

Now, going back to your first paragraph, I think it's quite telling that you seem to feel the only reason to enter into a long-term romantic relationship is to have sex. Anyway, if all you want is sex, you can, indeed, enter relationships purely for that, or simply have a one-night stand although, again, honesty is key here. But if you are actually interested in a long-term romantic relationship then, no, "let's hang out so I can bang you later" would never actually cross your lips because that's not why you're dating. So yeah, that's total bullshit. And it's your bullshit since I don't recall this article ever proposing that. That seems to be purely your interpretation of the reason people enter into long-term romantic relationships.

And now to the last paragraph--What the hell is wrong with you? You are not entitled to a woman's affections! And you give no reason for why any woman would ever want to enter a relationship. You're a self-professed clingy, misogynistic stalker! That is not the other party's fault, and they are absolutely right to reject you. If you want to date a woman, clean up your act first. They don't owe you a couple dates (I love that you demand not one, but a couple!) just because you want a date. That sentence also flies in the face of your second one since the honest and respectful thing to do is to reject you and someone like you straight away. And introducing a stalker to your friends is a terrible, terrible thing to do.

*I hope I'm not blowing anyone's mind here.

Just a simple thumbs up for this response :)

PhiMed:

I think your analysis leaves out something critical: female responsibility. You're correct that Nice Guys TM have an agenda. And EVERY FEMALE ON EARTH OVER THE AGE OF 14 knows that, too.

And don't forget that they're all members of the Illuminati and secretly rule the world.

Or wait, we can be reasonable human beings and realize that you're just being ridiculous.

But they are frequently content to play innocent, as if they have no idea that the guy living in abject poverty, who works two jobs in addition to attending school, who bought them a $200 gift "as a friend" might have something else in mind.

Or they could assume that the person is a friend instead of a douche who thinks money can buy a gf. Oh no, alternate possibilities!

Yes, these guys are passive-aggressive, unassertive wimps. All the more reason not to allow them to convince themselves that there is a chance. Ever. These guys continue their behavior because women make the conscious decision to allow them to do so. Because they enjoy the attention, because they are craven, small, insecure people themselves. Not all women. Just all the women who allow this to continue.

You're just as bad. Instead you'll whine about how they're all wimps. they're not hypermasculine enough! Get a real complaint, srsly. Dishonesty, entitlement. But no, they're... wimps! Learn to leave the schoolyard taunts behind and grow up.

So stop pretending that you didn't know, and that the Nice GuyTM always brings this up as a complete surprise. You know. 95% of the women this has happened to know. You just wrote an entire article detailing your extensive knowledge of the phenomenon. Accept a little responsibility for enabling these pansies, and shift a little responsibility to those without a Y chromosome.

I bow to your psychic expertise. Or I laugh at you for pretending you think you know that 95% women involved know. But for those who talk about 'pansies' etc... well they're the kind of people who despise actual intellect and reasoning so taking a step back and realizing you don't know everything would be uncharacteristic. Admitting that you don't know would be showing weakness and Thog can't show weakness!

And by the way, there's a reason these men are so timid. Young women, when they reject someone, are vicious. It's socially empowering for a women to publicly humiliate a male. Negative reinforcement is a powerful motivator. Women created these sissies.

Yes, just like your degree is pseudopsychology says.

I was one of them, briefly. Then I realized that there are two options that will result in a woman finding a male attractive (not every woman, mind you, but probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 1/3): 1)Treat her as if you are GOING to sleep with her. Even if you don't use explicit terminology, become almost TOO affectionate, as soon as you meet them (warning: use only if at least moderately physically attractive). 2)Treat her as if you find her to border on being repugnant.

Did you know 103% of people like you make statistics up based on nothing? Isn't that just stupid?

Stop saying women like nice guys, but don't like Nice GuysTM. Women like jerks. It's well-established.

By the font statistics made up on the spot? Why yes, that's true.

DefZeppelin:
Wow, definitely a hot subject. This is the first time a LoveFAQ article has hit triple-digits in comments.

So the gist of the article is that being nice has no value in dating?

Only if the gist of your post is that understanding has little to do with reading an article...

Or we can instead decide that the article is saying that being nice is basic. It's kind of like saying "But look I'm not a rapist!" Well, duh, you'd better be nice, that's kind of expected. It's not much of a point for someone to meet basic requirements.

That a man can only enter a meaningful relationship if he has exceptional qualities to flaunt?

Exceptional? How about... more than just a bland blob of 'nice'. Hyperbole isn't something to jump on if you want to make a real point. The point is that striving for nice is striving for something basic. It doesn't make you interesting, it doesn't make you material for dating. It's what it takes to make you likeable maybe. But hardly enough to make someone love you.

That the only way for a man to get laid is to pretty much say from the very beginning "Hey, let's hang out so that I can try to bang you next month"? I'm calling total bullshit on that.

I hope you're calling bullshit on that strawman of yours there, because she didn't say that.

Some men are actually unlucky enough to have no special qualities, talents, or abilities. This could be because of a poor education, unlucky job history, unconventional upbringing, some kind of disability, whatever. How are these men supposed to show off to women?

Why do you think it's someone else's problem? If you lack anything to make people interested in you, then that's your problem. You're not entitled to a girlfriend.

When a man truely has no outstanding skills above other men, then being "nice" IS the only thing they have going for them, since it is the only thing that distinguishes us nice guys from the hoards of womanizing jackasses that give men a bad reputation.

Then too bad for you? If nice is all it takes then the girl ought to be falling in love with every nice person she meets. Just 'nice' is such a low standard that she'd be in love with quite a few people at once.

Nice guys have more respect for themselves and the women they seek to enter a relationship with than that.

You mean they don't expect 'nice' to be all it takes? Because I have to say, if you think that's all it takes for a woman to want to be with someone you don't think very much of their standards.

You tell us to "be a supernova". This is about the most unrealistic expectation you could possibly have of a nice, quiet, shy man. Some men don't want to stand out, but rather have a quiet uneventful life that they can share with a woman who equally desires a quiet uneventful life.

And if that's your defining traits, then what do you expect to attract a woman? "I'm nice and want an uneventful life". How interesting. /sarcasm

But really, if all you have is 'nice' then what separates you from any of some girl's friends? I would hope they're nice to her at the very least.

And some men are so shy around new people (especially women) that it takes them months, sometimes years, before they warm up enough to them to engage them on a personal level. And unfortunately, by the time that happens, the poor guy has long been friend-zoned.

This is someone else's problem... how? Your love life is your concern, not that of whatever girl you're interested in. Friend-zone is just a stupid excuse btw. It really means she wasn't interested in the first place and you need an excuse. And she was likely not interested because a big bland blob of nice is not interesting as much more than a friend.

Being a "supernova", doing something stupid to stand out, to make us attractive, directly contradicts the whole "be yourself" principle that most people give as dating advice.

Well if being yourself means jumping to conclusions like assuming 'supernova' means do something stupid, then perhaps you shouldn't be yourself.

For many men, just approaching a woman to begin with is far out of their comfort zone, and should qualify as being a "supernova" compared to their normal routine of hiding in fear of rejection.

Lolwut? How about no. You're being self-centered here. Stop thinking so much about how hard it is for you, and look at how it appears to the person you're trying to attract. Sorry, but talking to her isn't going to impress her no matter how hard you find it.

Also, have you ever considered WHY some Nice Guys(tm) are the way they are? Well, when a man goes for years or decades without having a single successful date while all his friends around him have gotten laid thousands of times over, then he starts to get delusional and fanatic about the few women who do show him some sliver of attention.

How they got there is irrelevant. It doesn't justify it.

It is ***NOT*** because he is naturally a bad person!

How one reacts to problems does say something about how they naturally are as a person.

It is ***NOT*** because he is manipulative or deceptive for his own personal gain!

Actually, yes. He has chosen to react with manipulation and/or deception. For... his own personal gain. Who else do you think he's trying to help with deception?

It is because he is getting desperate to find a mate because he is so far behind his friends.

His problem. And trying to find a 'mate' is personal gain, dude.

A man whose been rejected hundreds or thousands of times consistently over the course of many years will obviously have self-esteem issues, and is going to become a little stalkerish!

Or he can show some self-control.

And every time a woman rejects him, it only makes things worse.

Because he lets it. Personal responsibility. Show some.

He grows to hate women because he feels that women hate him, and feels that showering them with attention and buying them things will remedy that mutual hate.

His problem for hating them. Bad reasoning is his own fault.

You see that as creepy. The man sees it as trying to mend a broken relationship.

He is creepy. An insane person seeing themselves as sane doesn't make it true.

A hint to ALL women: If a nice guy approches you, just freaking go on a couple dates with him!

How the hell does it benefit them to go on dates with a 'Nice Guy'? That's not a hint, that's fucking begging.

If you don't like him, be honest and respectful.

Let's ignore how honest and respectful he is.

If he gets clingy and stalkerish, help him out by introducing him to some of your friends you think he might like.

You're quite a few cards short of a full deck. If he's fucking creepy and stalkerish, WHY inflict him on her friends? Why? This is a big example of 'Nice Guys' being self-serving and NOT nice. Pretend her duty is towards the creep to help him find a girlfriend instead of her friends to keep awful creeps like him away.

MasochisticAvenger:
"but if you're ever going to find love, the kind that changes your life and makes you the man you were meant to be"

That's right, guys. If you don't go out and find love you're not the man you were "meant to be". It doesn't matter if you're not interested in love... that just means you are a worthless human being because apparently you're only worth a damn if you have someone who loves you.

I'm sorry that was probably a bit harsh, but that line really rubbed me the wrong way. I am someone who isn't really interested in love, relationships and all that crap, so does that make me less of a man in your eyes?

I think the Love FAQ is kinda geared towards people who are interested in love. With that in mind it would make sense to talk to people who do consider it important to their lives...

Ophenix:
(This one is my faiv, its like a QQ to God asking him to patch society)

Whatever dude. I don't like society, yeah. Why should I?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here