Nice guys REALLY DO finish last.

Post Reply New Topic

I do suspect that a lot of the bitterness often displayed is due to a difference between the 2 genders (perceived or actual) where the guy is saying:

- I've been putting in all this effort trying to meet a woman, any woman, yet I haven't gotten a single woman to go out with me, or even talk to me.

While the women is saying:

- I've made a UK cupid profile, and 0 GOOD men have contacted me, or asked me out.

timidity has a lot going for it, lol
just think of all those men paying child support
who wish they were not

I havent denied that at any point.

What I have said is that we have had several male members(theres one that was making a thread about this this weekend) that talk about being approached by women that they feel that are below them.
Same thing can be said about females.

That is the main problem with online dating. Most people determine wether you are worthy of being dated out of a picture that could be you several years ago and a wall of text not everyone reads.
Its a great concept in theory but most people dive into it with the wrong mentality(its not I need to meet the one and settle down asap, its more like I havent met anyone interesting in a while, lets have a look at this and see if anyone´s interesting at least for a first date/coffee)

I can think of a person who is very closely related to me who is in that position. That's what you get when you go bareback.

To be honest, in order to make it "fair" in a legal way, it should be the case that if the father does not want the child, and the mother doesn't want an abortion, she can keep it but he doesn't have to pay child support. I mean, they were both 50-50 in making the decision to go bareback, and keeping the kid was 100% her decision.

Aspie guys usually finish last because we have limited social skills and making friends and or attracting females is very hard for us. Being Aspie guys we are immature, emotionally/socially delayed. We are Peter Pan's, a boy living inside a man's body.

That's the best summary of our difficulty I have ever heard. It also explains why I can easily attract children's attention no matter where I go!

Just replace the word in bold with "mainly" and what he said is true for the most part and not a generalization either.

Just have a look at the tos reminder http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt136567.html please.

Take the seductive "cute" expression and pose off the nerd girl, and remove her makeup, also take the ruffles off the shirt, and it might be an even contest.

One thing you need to know about Wrongplanet is that anything that doesn't include the snowflake theory* of human beings or can be backed up by some external source will be labeled a generalization by a subsection of forum users (is this a generalization?).

gen·er·al·i·za·tion   [jen-er-uh-luh-zey-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the act or process of generalizing.
2. a result of this process; a general statement, idea, or principle.
3. Logic .
a. a proposition asserting something to be true either of all members of a certain class or of an indefinite part of that class.
b. the process of obtaining such propositions.

So basically, certain members of WP.net have started "outlawing" logical tools that they do not like. Of course, there is a hasty generalization fallacy, which is not correct argumentation, however a failure to distinguish between a hasty generalization (X is true for A, B and C, therefore true for D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z.) and a sound generalization (X is true for A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V) therefore a large majority of (22/26=0.8461) X is true for a majority of the sample base. Of course, one must also deal with a fallacy of exclusion (selection bias variation), small numbers fallacies and such.

*The Snowflake theory of human beings is an expression coined by TM to refer to a group of people who insist that all human beings are utterly unique and thus no common elements or characteristics can be extrapolated and discussed. It is also used to reference the fallacy of pointing out singular, usually anecdotal examples that contradict a stated premise, then acting as if that disproves the entire premise.

I thought it was a generalization because he said these are the "only" type of women that use dating sites which implies EVERY woman on there is like that. By the way the second statement he made is very accurate cause the man is usually the one required to have a nice car/house and stable well paying job among other things. Being attractive is only half the battle(for a guy).

My main reason for protesting, was that you can paraphrase the statement "no generalizations allowed" to also read "no statements which are not accurate for every member of a group allowed" which puts an insurmountable burden of proof on the person making a statement about group characteristics. So, you kill any discussion about population groups unless there are explicit statistics about that group, and even if there is there is always the "WP.Net out" where one disregards sources one does not agree with, argue that the statistics are not representative, not scholarly enough, use anecdotal exceptions and so on.

There is also a question of how thin-skinned someone should be allowed to be before one disregards them "taking offense". There is a matter of guilt distribution between the offender and the offended, on WP.net that tends to go uniformly and harshly to the person who offends someone, regardless of how "thin skinned" the person who got offended actually is. For instance, if I were to say:

"Every member on WP named TM is an a**hole" then it's reasonable that all members named TM were somewhat offended, but then if it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that there is at least one member named TM that is not an a**hole, the assertion itself is proven inaccurate and the "need" to be offended is gone.

On the other hand if I say

"Most members named TM are a**holes" then its less reasonable for members named TM to be offended, purely because there are members named TM who are not a**holes.

On the third note if I say:

"The member named TM is an a**hole" then its more reasonable for members named TM to be offended because its directly applicable to a single person.

Now, since I joined this board, I've been called a lot of things that bugged me, I've been branded as among other things a sociopath, a narcissist, a misogynist, a racist, an idiot, a "troll", a duplicate troll account, and while I found quite a few of these infuriating, offensive and multiple times quite hurtful, I have yet to report a single person for making these statements and I have yet to see a single person be reprimanded for making these statements. Even though, as they are directed at me personally (as opposed to being directed at a group) they should be deemed a lot more offensive and problematic in the context of behavior on this board.

I do find it interesting that an offhand generalization along the lines of "all women on X dating site are Y" which is obviously an inaccurate statement garners more offense than someone openly calling someone a hateful misogynist, racist, sociopath or being openly sarcastic with the intent of being hurtful, but that's just me.

the incorrect element in this discussion is the notional definition of "a nice guy".

obsequiousness and servility seem to be the elements that define "nice guys" in popular parlance. those qualities are not well suited to any type of success in the world.

one has to impress upon the world what they find to be imperative otherwise they may as well shrivel up and blow away in the wind.

someone who has no anchor will be buffeted around and eventually be wrecked on the rocks lining of shores of life because competition and steadfastness is a primary factor in natural selection.

there is a saying that "the meek shall inherit the earth", and whilst i do not want to impose my own sentiments about that, i will nonetheless present a view that i agree with in a musical form.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbvVZpJgJb0[/youtube]

some take the bible
for what it's worth
when it says that the meek
shall inherit the earth

well, i heard that some sheik
has bought new jersey last week
and you suckers ain't gettin' nothin'

is hare rama really wrong
if you wander around
with a napkin on
with a bell on a stick
an' your hair is all gone...
(the geek shall inherit nothing)

you say yer life's a bum deal
and yer up against the wall...
well, people, you ain't even got no deal at all

'cause what they do
in washington
they just takes care
of NUMBER ONE

An' NUMBER ONE ain't YOU
You ain't even NUMBER TWO

those Jesus freaks
well, they're friendly but
the s**t they believe
has got their minds all shut

and they don't even care
when the church takes a cut
ain't it bleak when you got so much
nothing

(so whaddya do)

eat that pork
eat that ham
laugh till ya choke
on billy graham

moses, aaron 'n abraham...
they're all a waste of time
and it's your ass that's on the line
(IT'S YOUR ASS THAT'S ON THE LINE)

do what you wanna
do what you will
just don't mess up
your neighbor's thrill
'n when you pay the bill
kindly leave a little tip
and help the next poor sucker
on his one way trip...

SOME TAKE THE BIBLE...
(Aw gimme half a dozen for the hotel
room!)