Nice Guy Syndrome and Misandry

[Revoltingest]

I like guys like Thor. Yes Thor! Thor is strong but yet vulnerable, he is sweet but can get nasty when threaten. Thor isn't too bright intellectually but when it comes to saying the right things he is a pure poet. And Thor even though he is a god doesn't mind humbling himself to his lady, in fact he likes his lady to be strong minded and a challenge.

I figgered out your true identity!
You're this gal.....
[youtube]vEU_5lVjRFQ[/youtube]
Julie Brown -

 

[Penumbra]

What if they start a conversation, be friendly etc. and after a few days perceive you to be gentle - and then start mocking you?

Then they're ugly people. There's little reason to stay with them, and one can perhaps learn to identify such people earlier.

What I mean is, you don't know their true colors initially, so you interact with them. Then they hurt you.

People can only hurt you (verbally/emotionally) if you let them.

I too am an aspie. It is not that we don't recognize emotions. We can't act in that regard, it feels awkward. We just can't read the signs - body language, facial expression. This in turn leads to a lot of misunderstanding, and in the end we're called rude and snobbish.

Well, seeing this post, I can see how that makes things more difficult. It could be that some people that are perceived as mocking or rude, are just being defensive, if they feel that they have been treated rudely or snobbishly.

I think most people can learn to express themselves better, though some people are a naturally a bit more advantaged or disadvantaged in that particular area than others.

I also find and observe that, generally, we attract the sort of company that ends up being around us. Outgoing, happy, confident, people often do little complaining about the people around them, or being mistreated, etc. But on the other hand, if we complain that people we don't like keep coming into our lives, then potentially there's something to fix in our lives, not their lives. Sometimes we're forced to be with someone we don't like, such as in a workplace, but then there are ways around that, too.

 

[Penumbra]

Women don't want a nice metro guy - they prefer something more rugged and masculine.

Money is a key motivator as well, so sadly, personality trails in a distant third.

Just a fact of life.

Why all this idealistic talk of 'it's the personality that matters' - pure nonsense.

So if you can speak on the facts of life, and for what all women want, I take it you must be exceedingly experienced in the art of long and rewarding relationships, right?

The problem, of course, is that anyone who is good at forming long relationships, naturally has a small sample size of long relationships. And a wise person of course wouldn't want to make too many broad proclamations based on a small sample size, since that would be bad methodology! At most, he could say, "this is what works for me".

On the other hand, there may be people that have had numerous short relationships, and few or no long relationships, and so anyone who is seeking a long and rewarding relationship would do well to avoid the advice of this sort of person. These people may be good at advice for certain areas of initiating a relationship, but if they go on and on about the type of people to look for in a substantial relationship, then they're likely speaking outside of their circle of competence. You wouldn't speak outside of your circle of competence, though, right?

Third, there could be some people who are neither particularly experienced with long term or short term relationships, and just like to speak about that which they don't know. They might add to their limited knowledge with a few observations of other couples, but then they're basing claims on only superficial information rather than deep experience. I'm sure you wouldn't be that type, though, since that would be unfortunate.

So from what I see here, there is practically no way to acquire the experience for what all or most women want in a long term relationship. Maybe you should shed some light on what sort of relationship experience you have, to show how these claims are supported through your experience?

 

[dawny0826]

Women don't look at "nice guys" because the "nice guys" are typically gutless. Their schtick is just an expression of weakness because they're too afraid to ever take charge in their relationships with women. Unfortunately for such guys, most women want a man that can take charge

Some women naturally navigate towards men that project kindness and genuity, even if they aren't outwardly aggressive in pursuing women.

A girl can take risks too. Granted, there's really something to be said about a guy who steps outside of his comfort zone to a take a risk on a girl that he's into.

But "nice guys" can certainly be worth the risk.

 

[dawny0826]

Nothing makes the ladies swoon like ordering them into the kitchen to make you a sandwich.

Oh yeah. With a nice smack on the rear, as you're sent on your merry little way.

 

[painted wolf]

So if you can speak on the facts of life, and for what all women want, I take it you must be exceedingly experienced in the art of long and rewarding relationships, right?

The problem, of course, is that anyone who is good at forming long relationships, naturally has a small sample size of long relationships. And a wise person of course wouldn't want to make too many broad proclamations based on a small sample size, since that would be bad methodology! At most, he could say, "this is what works for me".

On the other hand, there may be people that have had numerous short relationships, and few or no long relationships, and so anyone who is seeking a long and rewarding relationship would do well to avoid the advice of this sort of person. These people may be good at advice for certain areas of initiating a relationship, but if they go on and on about the type of people to look for in a substantial relationship, then they're likely speaking outside of their circle of competence. You wouldn't speak outside of your circle of competence, though, right?

Third, there could be some people who are neither particularly experienced with long term or short term relationships, and just like to speak about that which they don't know. They might add to their limited knowledge with a few observations of other couples, but then they're basing claims on only superficial information rather than deep experience. I'm sure you wouldn't be that type, though, since that would be unfortunate.

So from what I see here, there is practically no way to acquire the experience for what all or most women want in a long term relationship. Maybe you should shed some light on what sort of relationship experience you have, to show how these claims are supported through your experience?

I'm willing to bet he's a "nice guy".

wa:do

 

[waitasec]

I'm not talking about being a bully. She just has to know that you have the capacity to take charge if necessary

people respect people who respect themselves.

 

[Debater Slayer]

People can only hurt you (verbally/emotionally) if you let them.

While I agree with the rest of your points, I respectfully disagree here. People don't willfully choose to be hurt (at least not in a lot of cases, I would think); they can only choose to avoid the people who are hurting them.

 

[painted wolf]

wa:do

 

[Viker]

So you call yourself a "Nice Guy". You are nice to women, you treat them with respect and try to do your best to impress them with your kindness and general niceness. You believe that you are not like those other guys, you know those guys who aren't "nice", you go out of your way to be the exact opposite!

But yet, women continue to reject you? But how could that be? With you being such a "nice guy" and all who respects women they be glad to be friends or more with you. But that doesn't seem to be the case. So there must be something wrong with them and not you.

So whats wrong with these women? How can they be so disrespectful? Well, they must hate men. Yes! That's the ticket! The reason why women continue to reject is because these women hate men. It has nothing to do with the kind of guy you are, now does it?

Well, maybe it is you? Have you ever thought about it? Maybe there is something fundamentally wrong with you. Maybe instead, you are a misogynist. Yup that could be it! Maybe women reject you because you don't look at us as fellow human being but objects.

Nice boys don't play rock n roll and girls love rock n roll.

 

[Viker]

wa:do

And the chips
And the mayo.
And the bread.
And the meat.
And the plates.
And the beer.

(Hint hint)

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm willing to bet he's a "nice guy".
wa:do

Geeze....this thread is really turning the language upside down.
Now "nice guy" means a vindictive insecure little cad?
No, we cannot let innocent words be twisted by pseudo-feminist redefinitions designed to make even admirable male qualities suspect.
But I don't just carp about the problem....I offer a solution!
I propose an acronym.....call these little boors who blame their rejection on the rejector:
Mewling Arses Revealing Their Inadequate Nature.....or "MARTIN"

 

[Penumbra]

While I agree with the rest of your points, I respectfully disagree here. People don't willfully choose to be hurt (at least not in a lot of cases, I would think); they can only choose to avoid the people who are hurting them.

I think with the right sort of mindset, people can avoid being emotionally hurt by things.

That's what half of these religious or philosophical systems on this site are about anyway- avoiding suffering through right belief, effort, rationality, etc.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think with the right sort of mindset, people can avoid being emotionally hurt by things.

That's what half of these religious or philosophical systems on this site are about anyway- avoiding suffering through right belief, effort, rationality, etc.

Maybe people can minimize being emotionally hurt by things, but eliminate the effect altogether? I'd think that's quite difficult. Then again, there are many people who are pretty good at controlling their emotions, although I doubt that nothing at all could hurt them.

 

[painted wolf]

Geeze....this thread is really turning the language upside down.
Now "nice guy" means a vindictive insecure little cad?
No, we cannot let innocent words be twisted by pseudo-feminist redefinitions designed to make even admirable male qualities suspect.
But I don't just carp about the problem....I offer a solution!
I propose an acronym.....call these little boors who blame their rejection on the rejector:
Mewling Arses Revealing Their Inadequate Nature.....or "MARTIN"

Mr. Scorsese and a few other gentlemen would like to have a word with you about that.

wa:do

 

[Penumbra]

Maybe people can minimize being emotionally hurt by things, but eliminate the effect altogether? I'd think that's quite difficult. Then again, there are many people who are pretty good at controlling their emotions, although I doubt that nothing at all could hurt them.

I think with sufficient experience, a person could be emotionally unharmed by things. It may be hard, but if one gets like 80% of the way there, which is likely much easier (due to the idea of diminishing returns and so forth), then they've already acquired much of the benefits for most situations they'd ever experience.

A person who's emotional state can be quickly changed for better or worse by words, ideas, criticisms, attacks, etc, is like a leaf on the wind. Not really in control of their self, easily manipulated by their surroundings, unstable, prone to suffering, prone to blaming others or not taking responsibility, etc.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

here is an article that is perfect for this topic:

Marcia Sirota: The Difference Between Being Nice and Being Kind

I got it from this den of lionesses this articles is talking about. HBI rocks!:

RELATIONSHIPS / No Whining on the Web / One tough cookie @ Heartless*******.com

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think with sufficient experience, a person could be emotionally unharmed by things. It may be hard, but if one gets like 80% of the way there, which is likely much easier (due to the idea of diminishing returns and so forth), then they've already acquired much of the benefits for most situations they'd ever experience.

A person who's emotional state can be quickly changed for better or worse by words, ideas, criticisms, attacks, etc, is like a leaf on the wind. Not really in control of their self, easily manipulated by their surroundings, unstable, prone to suffering, prone to blaming others or not taking responsibility, etc.

I agree. I also think that past experience with being hurt, verbally/emotionally abused, etc. can help a person develop more control over their emotions over time, if they have the right mindset to be able to learn from their experience(s) rather than being negatively affected by them in the long run.

(That's not to say that it's not hard, though.)

 

[painted wolf]

here is an article that is perfect for this topic:

Marcia Sirota: The Difference Between Being Nice and Being Kind

I got it from this den of lionesses this articles is talking about. HBI rocks!:

RELATIONSHIPS / No Whining on the Web / One tough cookie @ Heartless*******.com

thanks for the links!

wa:do

 

[CynthiaCypher]

thanks for the links!

wa:do

Put a "-" between Heartless and the B-word

HBI

TinyUrl Preview of HBI

"I'll leave a sniveling girly-girl cowering with a glare, but a man? I've offered on several occasions to hold a guy's jockstrap while he tries to figure out where to stick the tampon I've just handed him. "
-- HBI Member Chris