The Nice Guy Dileema

Post Reply New Topic

Agree.

And you can ask why jerks get women because they aren't nice either, so i've devised a list for people.

Confident, well adjusted man: Will always get women because of their guenuine respect for women, and their dominance/confidence

jerk: A non well adjusted man, often has a huge ego - no respect for women. Will mostly get women due to the confidence aspect.

nice guy (pushover): Less likely to get women, but there are some who like to boss guys around. Liked for their respect for women but not often "datable"

"nice guy" (wolf in sheeps clothing): The last guy to get women. Uses the whole nice thing to try and get a girlfriend, then goes nasty with a rejection, showing true colours. Uses being nice as a cover up pretending to respect women when he doesn't, it can be easily seen through and never works. This guy is like a non confident version of a jerk.

Last edited by hale_bopp on 30 Aug 2010, 5:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.

If their friends are off limits then clearly your only option is to shack up with one (or maybe all?!) of their mother's.

You might think I'll pounce on you for your pro-hooker stand but I won't. I think your stand about preferring hookers is totally honest and I respect that. You want sex- not a romantic relationship- so you pay with an acknowledged currency. She knows she is exchanging sex for money and for both of you it is a straight business deal.

What drives me crazy about "nice guys" is that they act as though all women are hookers but the currency for some is "nice". If they just pay out enough "nice", they think they have purchased a romantic relationship just as your $$$ purchases sex. You and the hooker are seeing eye to eye and have agreed that there will be this exchange. "Nice guys" act as though they have made a similar agreement with whatever women they are interested in to exchange niceness for a romantic relationship. But the women are not on board with that the way hookers are on board with your $$$. At least your way is more honest.

If they have a lot of female friends, the odds are that they aren't jerks. I know men like that. They have female friends. Their female friends introduce them around. Before long they have a girlfriend they met through a friend. I don't see anything jerky about that.

Just because a man is an extrovert does not automatically make him a jerk.

+1

at this point i will just admit to being baffled by the desire to displace "being oneself" with "learning how to play games better" that i often read here.

it is unfortunate that men with asperger's would resort to douchebag pickup maneuvers thinking this is the answer.
if there is an answer it is persistence, and accepting that rejection is part of the process, not an indicator that women who are disinterested in you are terrible people for it. because once you enter this bitter phase, self-respecting women will sense it and steer clear of you, causing further rejection, and further bitterness.

also, you will be rejected less when you look for more appropriate options, as:



i disagree with this. for all you know girl #11, a shy and reserved person herself, is sitting nearby quietly, disinterested in the game playing she is witnessing.

remove your focus from the circus act and look for her.

unless you would prefer someone superficial. then, you will have to learn to be superficial yourself.

That is why I do what I do. I have no illusions about what
the vast majority of human relationships are really about. I treat the girls I hire well because they treat me well. It is a far more honest arrangement than Mose "real" relationships are. It also takes away that reek of desperation that so many guys have. I make no bones about being interested
Only in sex because that is really what it all boils down to in the end.

It's funny how all these "nice guys" on the internet are always complaining about how they can't get laid when most of the [genuinely nice] nice guys I knew in college never had any real trouble with girls. In fact, most of them are happily married to the girls they were dating in college (I should know, I've facebook-stalked them). The few who did have trouble probably had trouble because (1) they were physically unattractive, (2) weird in a bad way (i.e., had Asperger's syndrome), and/or (3) were starting to play the "nice guys" card and annoy the hell out of the girls they were attracted to. Fortunately I have always been considered unattractive by these nice guys' strangely high standards, so I never did become the object of their lust/obsession and I never had to feel bad for dumping someone because he was oh-so "nice."

My thoughts? Stop being so concerned about attracting girls. Stop taking so much pride in being "nice." Work on your social skills instead. Work on whatever interests you had before being the last virgin on earth became the number-one problem in your life. And don't do it because you think it'll make you more attractive either, because once you start thinking that chances are it'll backfire on you--especially if what you want is a relationship and not just sex. (I mean... if you're a nice guy what you want is a relationship, right? And not just sex? Amirite or amirite?)



I just wanted to point out that the term "friend zone" seems to be invented by nice guys (TM). As such, whatever implications the word has are probably as valid as the niceness of "nice guys."

Just for the record, I never claimed to be a nice guy. I'm a good person, but not having a criminal record and not being psychotic doesn't in and of itself entitle me to get laid.

In fact, if people saw the things I had to say, about unattractive women in particular, among my guy friends, they would hate me.

The original post twists facts a bit too much for comfort. It's particularly Orwellian that it invokes entitlement - the main reason why every single woman rejects great numbers of men over the course of her life.

If they work against you, they're not your friends and may well never be. It would be best to look for new friends, who will work with you from the very beginning.



The poster above refers to these men's ability to dominate people; inimidate them, abuse them; assume "high" positions in hierarchies etc. It's one reason why I have a strong dislike for these men and the women who are attracted to them. As a good guy, when I find out that a certain woman is attracted to "confidence", I sincerely wish the world would be rid of her and her mercenary attitude.

When a nice guy learns that a woman doesn't want to date him, he can either accept the stated reason (which may be true in a few cases, but certainly not in the majority) or take on the very reasonable belief that she's not after genuine qualities; that she actually wants to side with the guys who seek to intimidate him etc. If he loves freedom and dignity, he recognizes that she loves those who would seek to strip him of other people's freedom and dignity. Of course he becomes upset - who wouldn't?

Wouldn't the world be nice if everyone was equal? Well, when I see a woman reject a nice guy, then side with another guy for his "confidence", it becomes obvious she wants a world organized as a pyramid scheme, in which she can jockey for the men "at the top", breed with those who naturally climb up pyramid schemes and perpetuate pyramid schemes for all time. Someone who takes pleasure in the existence of such pyramid schemes, in the existence of "winners" and "losers"... Is that really a woman worth respecting? I wouldn't be surprised if anyone became upset after seeing someone get rejected by her. Indeed, I would not blame anyone for becoming misogynistic if, when he or someone else he knew were rejected for this reason, the rejecting woman's female friends would not desert her and condemn her.

After all, try telling someone "Haha, you're such a wimp, I want to watch someone crush you and I want to comfort him when he's done.". Yes, that does make men upset, and my hat is off to those men who have reacted successfully to this kind of insult. My opinion of the women who condone this sort of statement cannot help but be abysmal.

Or better yet, try telling someone "I want to have your babies because you can beat up and subjugate other men.". I'm not sure about everyone else, but it would certainly make me upset. What person in their own right mind would ~want~ someone to beat up and subjugate other men?! Would there be any place for this sort of behaviour in an ideal world? For that matter, would there be any place for the woman's desire in an ideal world?

I do think one test of quality for a man is whether he is willing to dislike a woman equally when she rejects him as when she rejects another good man, particularly when that woman decides to go hit on the former instead. By some great fortune, I am happy to say that I did have the opportunity to take this test once and, through my actions, passed with flying colors.


Bear in mind that, if 5% of women accept, 65% offer excuses that may or may not be true and 30% offer excuses that later prove false, then with no way of clearly distinguishing between the three categories, the man will be biased to cultivate the same overall attitude towards all 100%.

I do think one problem that people with Asperger's have is the impulsive sense of trust, of expecting others to be good. I think what I see on the forums is an inability to fully extinguish that impulse. Taking a more healthy attitude in regards to trust (i.e. that women aren't automatically entitled to it) can certainly make one more capable of shrugging off previous rejections, though the idea that each of these rejections likely involves stroking some very unsavory person's ego might cause someone to abandon dating altogether.


I have heard one woman talk about how she has a "friend bin" and "boyfriend bin"; she was shit-testing me at the time. I forgot to mention this sort of lies as another reason why I dislike most women.

The OP will likely end up making a fool out of himself trying the Mystery Method and other pick-up tactics. Not only do women see through that stuff, they'll be able to tell there's someone socially wrong with you to begin with and make fun of you or feel sorry for you.

My way of living is to realize, for a number of the reasons the last poster mentioned, that women are the f***ed up ones, and in their quest for confidence, would rather have a douchebag/abuser that has confidence than a good person (much different than a whiny nice guy) that isn't dominant or particularly confident, but is a "what you see is what you get" type of person and doesn't emotionally or physically abuse them.

I don't have any respect for most young women and they're pretty much only good for their looks until proven otherwise on a case-by-case basis.

Last edited by foreveryoung on 30 Aug 2010, 10:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That's not a numbers game, it's a masochism game. A numbers game is waiting until the probability of acceptance approaches 1 before making your move. You're describing a constant stream of emotional torture with all those rejections and failures...

The people seeking less serious relationships have an advantage in that they don't have to emotionally invest (allowing them to endure more rejections before completely breaking down), but that won't cut it for me. I'm one of those guys that believes that a strong relationship requires a strong foundation of friendship underneath it. And to be honest, that friendship is what I need more than sex or romance. But I can't just get a friend because my experience shows that friends drift away over time; over the past 4 years, all of my friends have just gradually dropped off the radar entirely, and I can't confide in them the way I used to. And the worse part is I can't do a thing about it: people move on with their own lives, and their paths diverge from yours. I'd want someone in my life who won't just drift away into the void like that, and finding a significant other to build a life with seems like the only possible solution...

OddFiction,

I'm not interested in short relationships, and sex is not the objective for me. In fact, I'm abstaining from sex for religious reasons, the Bible clearly states that it is God's will that everyone should be sexually pure (Thessalonians 4:3-6, Matthew 5:27-30, 1st Corinthians 6:12-20), although most people just ignore it and do whatever they want, because it is easier to engage in sexual immorality than it is to avoid it.

I may bring up this Mystery Method stuff, but don't be so quick to judge me as a sex-seeking maniac that is out to manipulate women for the fun of it. I'm more moral than most of you will give me credit for being.

I bring up the words "Mystery Method" and just by saying these two words, a lot of you assume "oh, this is a guy who is out to find a girl to fool around with and have meaningless sex with. That's immoral and I have to assume the worse of this guy". No, this isn't about having sex, this isn't about being a player, this isn't about any of that. It is about having the confidence and social skills to go up to a girl you are attracted to, and being able to hold your own and build value in her eyes of you, to the possibility that you might ask her out and she might say "yes".

Do I want a meaningful relationship? Do I want someone to be my friend and companion. Yes, I do! I don't care about sex, it isn't my motive. A relationship to me is about friendship and companionship, and anything else is extra. There is no guarantees that a girl you are attracted to will be compatible with you, and if that it the case, you can remain friends still. But the whole idea is to be able to be social, instead of being reclusive and shy. That gets you nowhere.

The whole reason why I think the Mystery Method is good is because it teaches you how to be social with women, how to read their body language, and how to tell when they are interested in you. It teaches you how to start conversations and get people interested in you. Whether you use it or not, knowing such things is an asset.

I never said I've used the Mystery Method, and I haven't used it, and that is the honest truth, yet the thought of some guy learning about it irks a lot of you. Well, you are respectfully entitled to your opinions.

Last edited by AutisticMalcontent on 30 Aug 2010, 10:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Don't ask for set ups; set ups are awkward. If the female friends are putting up barriers they may already know that the friend you are interested in, is not interested in you and, so, they are protecting you from being rejected. Or they think the two of you are not a match for reasons that may not be obvious to you. Allow the process to happen naturally. When there is someone they think you are a match with, they'll insure you have a chance to meet and get to know each other.

I'm a female and I have NEVER heard of any of those terms. Granted, I try not to hang around people who I've noticed are possibly jerks. In my world, male jerks as well as female jerks are out.

I thought it was weird that you dislike "most women" for what "one woman" has done, but to each his own

i think you are confusing "confidence" with "dominance"




i.e. "women lie"

or:



"women like ***holes"

so if i'm interpreting you correctly, there is no reason valid to you why a woman might reject any man who wishes to have her.





^ this kind of stuff is exasperating. i'm sick of reading it, and i can't respond to it anymore.

if you guys want to have women in your lives, learn to like them.

This fails if you're a match for nobody, though...