Look out! It's a Nice Guy! DESTROY HIM!!

Post Reply New Topic

<swoon>

It would remain an assumption tho, maybe she's nudist, maybe she sees as your teddy bear - at the end you can't have sex with her without consent even if she's walking nude.

Hang on. So, suppose a guy spent time being "nice" because he had unrequited feelings for her which for some or other reason he failed to communicate. Are you saying that you expect him to continue being "nice" the same way after he discovers that she does not feel the same way? He may continue to be friendly with her or even be close friends with her after that, but come on. Surely, you can't expect him to behave exactly the same way knowing that his feelings are not going to be returned?

Oh, I see where going with this now. Well, the point is that she can initiate sex but he has every right to refuse it. Same if it were the other way round.

You can try to if you wish, but you shouldn't expect your attempt to succeed. If the guy dances all night and the girl wants to go with him, good. If she doesn't, he shouldn't get angry or feel cheated about it. I'm a bit more knowledgeable with kissing, where similar principles apply. I can initiate a kiss without expecting it to succeed, sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes I just get their verbal agreement first. But there are never expectations, as women are their own persons with their own free will, among other things

Well, I'm not gonna leave that pass, because when talking about manipulation, this is the kind of post that is clearly manipulative.

We had a nice guy and a girl who doesn't want to be with him. OK. And now, suddenly, he's ranting and sulking.

You just dropt those two words there, as it were a fact.

And if I don't say anything, they stay there, as I was accepting that they speak the truth. And then suddenly this nice guy is ranting, and sulking, and, I don't know, whatever more.

Again, WTF.

WTF with the f*****g stories. This is not an argument, this is f*****g story in you mind.

The nice guy there, ranting at the inocent girl or whatever. And then, after the outburst, he stays sulking. You know, those nice guys...

Arguments??? This is f*****g movie script.

Nope. Real life experiences.

And what's the problem. Sometimes it succeeds, sometimes it doesn't. Period. But you have the right to try. And trying involves there's some expectations, unless you act ramdomly. Well, perhaps you do, but Ii don't. And I think most of people do. And this: having expectations, is UNACCEPTABLE according to Kjas. Yeap, unacceptable. So, if you don't have the right to have expectations, it means that (unless you're a ramdom machine) you don't have the right to try.

That's simple.

Simple things. Simple statements. I don't get the people here beating around the bust. Nope. Define. Things. Clearly. And apply.

But there's still the "nice" in your example. He may distance himself, but he's still being a decent guy despite of any discomfort. The change in attitude I was talking about was a drop in civility completely.

Seeing possibilities is different than having expectations. Trying does not mean expecting to succeed, it means seeing a possibility of success and going for it. An expectation means "if I do X then she MUST do Y" and yes, that would be unacceptable.

Well, then with regard to this 'life experiences' let me tell you something.

'Nice' means.... 'nice'. Yeap, that's it. A nice guy means... a guy who is nice.

I want to state that clearly, because I have realized that there's some problems here to get basic concepts. So, basic concept: nice + guy = nice guy.

Now we back to your story: a guy ranting, and sulking... and for whatever reason you call this.... 'nice'. Well, I have to confess that I have some problems getting why you call 'ranting' and 'sulking' a 'nice behaviour'. Perhaps my english is not that good because, well... I thought 'nice' had a different meaning, and didn't include ranting and sulking.

Anyway, I would suggest going even farther. Let's define 'nice' as 'somebody who not only rants and sulks, but who kills kittens too'.

Do you see? Nice guys kill kittens. It's all about redefining words, and you can make any statement you want to be true.

Lmao.

In that case there is a divide in my life between the people who don't think in terms of nice guy or bad guy and those who believe I kill kittens.

By having the guts to try, but being perfectly fine with it if you fail.
If you can't do that, by giving freely, or reciprocating freely while flirting, dating or in the first stages of a relationship, then it's probably a sign that you are not ready or comfortable with what you are doing and either need to work on yourself more, get more practise, or get more comfortable with the risk.




Not the same things he was doing before, of course not, but at least be civil and polite afterwards - but if somebody starts calling you names, acting outright like an assh*le or behaving childishly and can't be civil or polite - then they're not really "nice" as they claim, simply trying to manipulate you and reacting out of their ego because their expectations weren't met.

Last edited by Kjas on 29 Jul 2013, 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

The whole thread you are whining about the behaviour of woman in general, and about all the problems you have, that are caused by their behavior and that you had in your relationships, and how it would have been their fault, because of them misinterpreting you being nice as you being weak, and then the relationships end because of that? So tell me, how can it be a problem if you anyway know yourself, that you are not forced to have an relationship with all that problem-women? So if there is no one pushing you to have relationships with all that problem-women, how can there be all that problems you mention? I dont have problems with problem-men, simply because I decided as a teen not anymore to agree into relationships with these, and I live in a country, where I can freely do so. So if you still have problems with all that problem-womans, there seems something to be that forces you to have relationships with that problem-woman, because otherwise you simply could have freely decided on your own, that you dont want to have problems with all that problem.woman, simply by freely deciding not to be in relationships with them.

So if nothing forces you to have relationships with that woman, HOW CAN THERE BE PROBLEMS? I dont have problems about my allergie with an certain herb, because noone forces me to eat that. So I can avoid that, so I dont neet to whine around a 17-page thread, how horrible that herb is. What you are doing the whole thread long... almost every post of you is filled with tons of really, really unacceptable prejudices, so that every woman with at least a bit of sense, simply should turn around and goes, the moment such prejudices are told. Including opinions that are simply absolutly shocking and would lead me to tell everyone of my female friends to avoid a person telling that stuff in a 100 meter range. I mean you are telling, that because of woman loosing the benefit of not being free, they now have to offer something else in exchange. God hell, a NICE guy dont needs to be exchanged for that, a NICE guy is cheering with his female partner with that, because of him liking her and so being lucky for her. Thats was a nice guy does. Do you think you are a nice friend if you would tell a black friend of yours: "So how do you want to exchange me, therefore, that I cannot own you any longer." Sorry, if you asked such a thing, the best thing that could happen, was him punshing you right in the face and turning away from you and telling you to never come close to him again. Do you think my partner has to exchange me in any way, because of him now no longer being forced to go to army "to protect me"? Or do you think, that I am to feel happy, because of that being an advantage for him?


Your first post after the threadstart "So this is the problem for decent guys. In order to justify the lack of attraction they're accused of points (a) and (b) you stated. It's understandable they get disappointed. ... ...Yeap. And that's OK. Everyone is free. The problem appears when: (1) To justifiy from an intelectual point of view her emotional choice, she needs to depreciate someway the guys around. (2) Besides that, to avoid, from the same intelectual point of view, the consequences of her choice (she's beaten) she has to blame those guys around, as a part of a 'patriarchal' conspiracy. So those guys around, who didn't beat her and didn't have any decision making authority over her choices, suddenly they're responsible of her abuse. Not nice."

Fourth post: "(1) They think they deserve it. And what's the bloody problem with that? ... ... I have seen nice guys working hard to get a career, with a clear purpose. They're friendzoned. At least, until they get money. ... ... Well, the problem with hidden intentions is that you can assign any hidden intention to anybody you want. There's no way to prove you wrong, to defend from this or to refute. After all, they're hidden."

Fifth post: "So now, let's see the typical nice guy. His minimum is a normal nice girl. Not specially beautiful, not specially successful, not a good job needed. Just a nice girl next door that cares for him. Now the question: why is this being way up over what he is offering?"

Sixth post: "So now, let's see the typical nice guy. His minimum is a normal nice girl. Not specially beautiful, not specially successful, not a good job needed. Just a nice girl next door that cares for him. Now the question: why does not show or has he no value for a next door girl that is in a similar level?"

Seventh post: "Now it has changed. Women are not locked anymore. They have freedom. But it means that at the same time they have lost their special status. So you either you offer anything else, or you give up marrying up. Equality goes both ways. Or it should. You can't move to a new social role, and keep the advantages of the previous one. That's the problem with women. They still don't have decided what they want to be: free, valuable objects, or a middle point. By now they want both of them full. And this is not possible.

Eight post: "So it means that a nice girl rarely goes out with a nice guy that is a her same level."


Ninth post: "And that's OK, you know, asking is OK. But if you want to ask, you have to give something in exchange. And you to give something that has the same value. Traditionally women were valuable because they were women. But now, well, now we're equal. So what exactly a woman offers in exchange?"

Eleventh post: "So it means that a nice girl rarely goes out with a nice guy that is a her same level."

Twelth post: " I don't see many men, in general, feeling that they have a duty to go to be killed to defend women in the rearguard that don't appreciate them. "

Thirteenth post: "PS By the way. It's always the same with this: 'oh, poor women that are forced to marry those guys and can't choose who they wan't to marry!! ! This is machism!! !. Oh, poor women. Except that... oh, wait... men are exactly in the same situation!! ! But well, they're men, they don't deserve empathy."

Fourteenth post: "That's why there's lately a tendency in men to avoid marriage. What you're asked, what you get in exchange... not a good deal."

Sixteenth post: "You don't have this 'female status' anymore, and you must adapt to it. In the possitive side, you have freedom. In the negative one, you have to offer more... to get the same."

Sixteenth post: "You can't have it all. You can't enjoy freedom and a special status at the same time.... ... But friends and partners are not equivalent. Usually there's no requirements for friendship. At least, I don't have them, as long as I'm having a good time with this person and he/she is treating me honestly. ... ... Partners are different. To be a partner, a man is generally required to have some attributes: self-confidence, capacity as a provider, status job, social status, some optional additional element (artistic skill, sense of humour, beauty, intelligence) and so. And the issue is: when you require something, you must offer something in exchange. Women are requiring specific attributes to date a man. It's fair to wonder what they offer in exchange. ... ... In the negative one, you have to offer more... to get the same. Women, in general, want to keep the privileges they traditionally had: marrying up, being the ones that decides house rules, and so. And here is where the deal becomes unfair. And when men start to go back.

Seventeenth post: Well, the answer is they are not good enough. It looks hard, but that's the truth: they're not good enough. They to try harder, they have to be even better: learn to dance, learn to play a musical instrument, get even a better job, dress better, get a expensive car, be more interesting, be cooler, get more life/travel experiences, get a six-pack, and so. And I think, it would be reasonable for them to wonder: all this effort, for what, exactly? ... ... But it is not. And that's the problem. ... Let me give an example: If you ask too much, people will wonder what they get in exchange, or they can say 'fine, I did enough, I got a good job, I brought money, I went to the bloody gym every day, I overcome my shyness, I learnt to be self-confident, I got a good car, I learnt to dance, I played in a band, I become successful, so now... now I want to sit down in the couch with some chips and beers and just don't bother me'. ... ... Anyway, my experience is that indeed there's nice girls over 30, though not many, and they're all commited. What's your case, no surprise here. But the majority of women out there are not like that."

18th post: "It's like saying 'hey, I'm arriving 40 minutes late' 'nope, you're kidding me' 'I'm serious, I can't be on time, I'm arriving late' 'naaaa, you're not fooling me' 'damn, listen to me, I'm gonna be 40 minutes late' 'yeap, yeap, of course, if you say so...'. And then, when you arrive 40 minutes late, what you get is 'hey, you're an as*hole!! you're late!! ! I have been waiting here for 40 minutes!! !'. No f***ing way."


I am willing to accept, that this really may rely on all the personal experiences with women that you have made in your life. But I mean there might be a reason, why these kind of woman, are the only ones you know and meet, and that agree to have relationships with you. If someone would be full of prejudices against black people, as americas biggest wastewater treatment plant is full of s**t, and blame them all the time to be horrible beings that need to exchange society for them no longer being slaves, I mean dont you think that every kind of black person, that had the possibility to do so, would run on sight of that person, to avoid contact and that only the few ones, that are having no other chances of personal contact, would agree to spend time with you?



You are quoting MY quote, and quote it even in a way so that is written before the quote "Schneekugel wrote" and ask me where you would have written that? I feel curious too.



If you mean, where you would have accused me about having made an oppinion about afghanian marriage, wouldnt have thought you forget your own post so fast: " If you say that the problem is that they are not allowed to freely choose their relationship, it's fine. I thought that they way they treated women, once inside the marriage, was a problem too. But you say that 'the problem' is arranged marriage. So I suppose that the rest is not. " End of page 16, where you accuse me of having the oppinion that the way they are treated would be no problem for me, if you want to proofe it.



Whats "it"? You are again posting something I wrote. Why should you have written something about my nephew, you dont even know, and why should I accuse you of writing something about my nephew. If you mean my accusion of you trying to manipulate others, by telling me, that because of me they would be forced to feel bad "'they're crap, they're sh***y, they're just subhuman beings, not deserving to have a relationship with a normal person, they're just scoundrel' - "Do we make them walk in the street looking down because they don't deserve to have human contact with the other human beings. Better, let's take them to a gas chamber. " - "wonder if they deserve to be alive or to walk down the street, as the rest of the word. Not sure, though." According to the stuff you wrote, only because of them living in a world, where people dont deserve relationships acording to my opinion I wrote, I seem to be responsible for them feeling so bad because of that, that it would be better to kill them.Never thought such nonsense, sorry, blame the one, that wrote that weird "they're crap, they're sh***y, they're just subhuman beings, not deserving to have a relationship with a normal person, they're just scoundrel" nonsense stuff.

If I think you are cute, is easily proofed. I still think you are not cute in any way. I also dont think you are nice. I hope you dont need an explanation for that after 15 pages full of posts with prejudices, general blamings and at least one silent excuse for your behavior telling "At least some woman beyond 30 are nice," Oh cool, thank you, great Bhwana that needs to be exchanged for his lost right to own a woman.

[/quote]

If you are doing so anyway, then please them as well, that he needed to live for a complete day without his dearest plush-toy, because of me violently washing it.



You are psychical extremly violent. Dont mismention violence as something that only can be done physical.

Maybe try to work on your behavior and your opinion. If you maybe would stop to think (I dont say "say", I say "think".) that a woman doesnt need to exchange you for her freedom, but are able to be happy about it, there will be a broader range of woman be attracted to you. But I think you are wrong about the facade thing, so I dont even see a facade of a nice guy.

What about less giving up, and more trying to see and treat woman simply as equal beings? (I mean really think like that, not behave like that. The problem is, most humans are NT, so they simply get it sooner or later if we lie about our intentions.)

I thought that you were digging on your own dignity, so I wrote it. I thought that people are not thinking that you wouldnt know the difference, so I wrote it. I thought that you are simply trying to argue around and around so I wrote it.

Did you as well behave like this in your relationships?

Barring any exceptions that would take an Aspie to both conceive and consider, lol...

Having read through this thread, I can't help but think it falls down to basically this:

"I'm a woman, and will get all worked up by any suggestion of sex from an unworthy male because getting pregnant with unworthy seed is an evolutionary disaster!"

I mean, I see them saying all these words, but between the lines that's all I'm hearing. Not that I blame them, but why aren't women just honest with themselves? Nobody wants an evolutionary disaster.