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

Post Reply New Topic

I highly doubt you would have some of the most respected professionals in that specialization suggesting the same thing if there was not a reason.
And it was not one element but actually quite a lot, depending on individuals, enough to demonstrate certain similarities in the originals which I can't find online anymore.

I think it's probably a bit more complicated than that. What counts as an agreement?

The reason why I'm asking is that a in 2011 I started dating someone on OKCupid and I thought we had started having a relationship. The trouble is, we lived a bit far apart and since neither could drive, I only got to see her 3 times in total during the 6 months we were supposedly dating (that's like 3 dates). Most of our interaction was otherwise online. I was actually planning to spend the weekend with her in September, then she asked me to postpone it because her life suddenly got busy and she eventually sent me an e-mail by December that year to break up with me, saying that the long distance thing can't work. I think that WP members who were here then would know what I'm talking about because I posted about it here:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp4215661.html&highlight=#4215661

I thought about this further and I do see a flaw in my own logic. It assumes that sex and romantic relationships can be earned in the classical sense like earning a job, buying a house, a car or tangible property. A person is not property that can be bought and sold. I believe this would be considered slavery.

Both parties in a relationship have to be genuine in who they are and how they portray themselves. Of course, they do need to show and display respect and proper manners. Both parties have to evaluate each other in beginning to determine if they want to be in a relationship. It is wrong to pretend to have certain qualities that you know another potential person likes just to have sex with them or to gain anything from them. It is a form of deception.

In church, my pastor told us how he met his wife and eventually married. When he was single he was messy. He would have some clothes on the floor. He showed her the way he lives with the clothes on the floor. He was honest with her including his negative aspects of himself. He felt it was right to be honest with her about himself and to give her the choice to make an honest assessment of whether she wanted a relationship with him or not. She is married to him today so she obviously did.

If she doesn't want a relationship with you then more than likely she probably wasn't compatible for you anyway and it is the same if a guy doesn't want a relationship with a woman. More than likely the compatibility and chemistry was not there.

This doesn't preclude one from changing aspects of himself or herself that he doesn't like or if it is impacting others in a negative way. It has to be a genuine though and the change has to be truthfully desired. It is wrong to pretend to fake traits because not only are you deceiving others but you are deceiving yourself.

IMHO, one should not be living his or her life for the sole purpose of pursuing a relationship. There is a lot more wonderful things to life than just pursuing relationships and sex as well. I determined all of this based upon analyzing things, reading what others say especially women, what I personally can't stand and asking questions.

^ then you've learned a lot

Except for a minority of down to earth posts this thread really makes my brain hurt.

How several men here come across: So, some women don't want to date some men. *I* think their reasons are stupid. OMG this is the end of the world, I've just discovered that life isn't fair!! ! And I'll keep harping about it and try to change everybody else instead of cutting my loses and moving on. And *I* still don't understand why people don't see what a catch *I* am

And I'm sick of people who drop by a thread in which they're not interested just to hand out some insults to some people there. In the style "Hey, I drop by, I insult some people here, I leave. Wow, today was a thrilling and meaningful day for me!"

Why don't you make something beneficial to humanity with your life? Like skydiving without parachute, playing russian roulette with a full clip or hugging a lightning rod during a storm. The World would thank you for it.

Yet another knee jerk reaction, not that I'm surprised. I've been following this thread from the start and intended to post in more detail, but noticed how most replies just try to reinforce one's opinion, paying very little attention to what the others are saying (or actually trying to understand their POV not just fight it), basically turning into an "I'm rignt, you're wrong" kind of thing and both "parties" do it (with the notable exception of a few posters)


Grow up and stop making ridiculous assumptions. Since I have in my life all a few here whine is impossible to get, I wonder who's wasting their time on the internet instead of "doing something beneficial for humanity"

And if you find any "insults" in my post, by all means report them.

Great. You don't want to post in thread, and I don't see anybody asking you to do so, then.... don't post here. Do you see? Easy peasy. Farewell and good bye.

Although I don't appreciate much people chiming in a thread strictly to say how stupid it is, if Bender has actually been following it and has something to contribute then it would be good to hear about it.

Greb, I posted a definition of nice guys two or three pages ago, yesterday. I have yet to receive an answer from you.

I'll post exactly where and what I want within the rules of the forum. You can't control what's happening in this thread and you can't control who women choose to date. Getting angry about it won't help.

Sure, that sounds reasonable, I'll get back with a more detailed post later today My post might have been sarcastic (for good reasons, I feel) but I never said the thread is stupid, I do see it as redundant and sterile though.

Quoted everything already three pages before, but no problem I will anyway quote it again and again and again below, until you give up pretending you wouldnt remember me already quoting it. How old are you exactly?



Theoretical question: Do you think a child, lying on the floor and screaming as hell, offending people around him, repeating prejudices all the time, only to get his mum buying him chewing gums, would have given up? And that his mom could have some problems if he said "Ok, I give up." and then starts that behavior again? ^^

So then you are free of your problem, and happy. So whats all that aggressivity of yours about, if you are free of problems?

Normally its because of psychical problems they denie themselves, and because of them trying to solve that problems by repeating the situations that caused that problems, seeking partners with additional behavior then the one causing the problem in origin, to try to solve the problem that time on their own. If your father was an abusive, physical threatening bastard, they tend to seek such guy again to proove themselves, that they can be loved by such kind of people, and that the fault because of their father not loving them, was not their own.

Normally that really doesnt work, and they only repeat and repeat again their problems, until they finally face, thats its that psychical problems inside of them, causing to be attracted by that kind of guys, and trying to solve that by professional therapy. If not, they tend to get into thinking, that only because of their psychical problems, they always have relationships with a certain kind of men, all men would be like the one they seek because of their psychical problems.



As promised above, again everything I already quoted. For the ones having such deep problems, and having such a wrong worldsight as a south african Nazi around 1970, speaking about "Bimbos and n****rs" and dont understanding why he gets blamed for being offensive against black people, because of him being so totally weird, I helped.


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." So according to you woman rather like to blame decent guys for having negative attributes, then simply telling "Sorry, I am not in love." Thank you, very charming. Beside, believing in that nonsense is sure a nice excuse for having an explanation, why every woman blames someone for the same stuff. No it cant be because it may be simply truth... no all woman need either to justify her emotional choice (Why? Why do I need to justify myself, for something that doesnt need to be justified? O_o Either you are in love with someone or not. You dont need to justify that, and the last one you would need to justify that, was I myself. From all stupid theories thats really should be crowned as king of stupid theories. Justify, because of not being in love. Yop sure, and after that I will try to find an intelectual justify for myself, why I need to go on the toilette and have hair. O_:o) or because of believing in a "patriarchal conspiracy". Please dont think of yourself, when judging other people. Is that an prejudice? - Yes, absolutly. Is this a blame? - Yes, absolutly.

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?" Oh, is it? So why the hell do I know nice guys, that have nice girls? How can it be, if that were so way up then what they are offering? Could it be because of you repeating, and repeating something untrue...untrue because of it being an prejudice of yours? Oh, yes. ^^ Thank you as well for the blame, that nice girls wouldnt be interested in nice boys.

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?" And again we have the prejudice and blame, that nice girls would see no values in nice boys."

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. Ok, so you offend me and all woman, by telling us that our worth would have depended on being the ownage of a men. And you are not even understanding, why woman think that as offending? Sorry, thats as "not explainable", as if I would spit in your face, and ask, why you think that would be offending. If you are not able to see how offending it is to tell someone, that his worth would depend on him being your ownage, I cant help you. Only an professional can cure that. Added by another load of prejudices and blame about what they all want. Thank you for asking as all. Maybe next time you could all go for political voting for us, if you know that well, what we all want anyway. Either you have superpowers and can mindread the thoughts of all woman of the whole world, or this is nothing but blame and prejudices.

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

Either no nice girl on the whole world ever went out with a nice guy on her same level, or this is blame and prejudice.


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?"

So because of woman now being equal to you, they have no worth? Get yourself some self esteem. Beside that you are again repeating that offending prejudice, that a woman would have loosen worth, because of her not being a slave. If someone would tell me that in live in front of me, that I , because of not being a slave, I would need to proof my worth to him, he could afterwards go to castrate opera singers. Or simply go, so that you can start again with your "So why do nice girls dont want me nice guy." Nonsense.

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. "

In which century have your mind been stuck? Men and women both dont have th feeling anymore, that men have the duty to go getting killed for something. Thats why most countries dont have "forced army years" anymore, but professional volunteers from both sexes. Men dont have that duty anymore, its free up to those who LIKE to go there. Just as it is for women. Do you live in an afghan cave? Thats not even full of blame and prejudices, its even by reality completly outdated blame and prejudices.

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." So its ALWAYS that? How can that be? I am a definitly a woman and cant remember me telling that? And why should I have told that as I must have when its ALWAYS that way, when I married a partner I chose my own? So why should I ALWAYS say that? Oh, I didnt, because its only a blame and prejudice you invented on your own...now I see...

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."

I think you would be the first to feel offended if I said that having relationships with men, would be no good deal, because of the bad exchange. So I hope you allow me that feeling about that "weird stuff" as well, even when I am only a being of lesser worth because of me being no ownage to someone.

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."

So few sentences and so many offendings. So my female status is bound to being a slave? And if I am not a slave, I loose that. Thank you for telling me that being a slave would be a part of me, because of me being female. Because I definitly still have my female status as a female. And again the offending stuff, that my worth would depend on being the ownage of someone, and if I cant "offer" that anymore, I would be less worth and needed to exchange something, because of my lesser worth. To say it in absolute clear words. TO TELL SOMEONE HE WAS LESS WORTH THEN YOU, IS OFFENDING. NO DISCUSSION. Telling someone to be of less worth because of "something of your physical status" is simply according to the nonsense you choose either greatest racistic offending s**t nonsense or greatest sexistic offending s**t nonsense. Its simply something that as*holes do. Not nice guys. To explain it clearly: People with brain, simply dont need to be worthy in the eyes of "really weird" people. We simply dont want contact with such people, so there is absolutly no need to be worthy for "those kind of people."

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. [u]And again you are telling offending theories about what woman are and what woman do, according to you. Woman require this and that, according to you. Blaming that Woman want this and that. Either you are Dr. Xavier, that has mindreaded all woman in this world, or someone simply telling a bunch of nonsense blames and prejudices.

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."

Dance? At my wedding rarely of 25% of the couples could still dance? So, nonsense blame and perjudice. Play a music instrument? What for? Do you live in midi-age and singing serenades in front of towers with princesses? O_o And why the hell should I, yes I am still a woman, insist my partner to do travelling, when I absolutly hate travelling, because of it massively disturbing my routines, and it so being a complete nonsense to pay lots of money to feel uncomfortable? Yes, even with Aspergers I am a woman, and my partner is a man. So according to you, he must learn to dance, learn to play a music instrument for me, and do travelling, if this wasnt simply a blaming nonsense and prejudice of yours. And a sixpack he hasnt got either. I think I know better than you if my partner has an sixpack. And I dont know I think about 75% cant dance, cant play a music instrument, and dont have sixpacks, but have relationships. And yes, I agree that every sixpack and loan on earth wont help you to lobotomize a woman for you, so that she would endure all that blaming andprejudices all day. Maybe a 18th pack can help.

Oh, and there are indeed some nice girls over 30. So all other girls on the whole world are not nice, because of them not being 30? And you ask me, where your nonsense blames and prejudices and offendings are? And blame dancing, music instruments and sixpacks for being responsible, that you offend woman, which causes them naturally to avoid people that offend them? And dont even realize it?

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."

[u]Yes sure, we are all like that. Just like all men watch football. Seems I dont have a man, mine dont like sports, so if dumb perjudices must be true by all means, that would mean that he cant be a man. Or that its a dumb prejudice that all people of a sex would be the same way. If thats the case: Then as a free being, simply dont agree in relationships with that kind of persons. And dont blame a whole sex, for the behaviour of that person. Because thats offending to everyone else and people dont accept that and dont want that kind of offending people around them. No f*****g way. [u]



[quoet]

Avoiding? What makes you believe that I could even be interested in you or your female friend so you need to avoid me? [/quote]

Your thread in which you explained very extreme, how frustrated you are, and how much effort you showed to convince a girl to endure your behavior, and blamed everyone else but you therefore, that rather few girl, have that "endurance". ^^



No, I am not confusing an average nice guy for being stupid. I think its rather stupid to tell black people, that they would have to offer something in exchange, because of them now being less worth, and then invent crazy theories why all kind of black people rather spit me in my face, then inviting me to their garden parties.

Yop, thats the things my friend exchange me. And you think, you cant have that with someone, only because of him/her having the opposite sex? There is nothing physical preventing, having common interests, learning, good conversations with someone of the opposite sex. Prejudices can prevent that.



"I don't blame women. Do I? Can you quote me, please?" ---> "so let's say most of women that are single) are basically selfish, careless and unempathic." " I have the right to express this." - Sure you have a right to express your prejudices. "What it's not the same as blaming." - But people have as well the right to use the word blaming for someone expressing prejudices.

[quoet]

Sorry???? You said that I was blaming. I asked you to quote me. Simple. Where's the problem? [/quote] I already did. The long post, you even answered with something like "Thats a long post or thats much to read, so I need some time for it." But no problem, I quoted it again, so you can denie further to be blind. Exactly how old again were you?

You were not giving an opinion about forced Afghanistan marriage being good or bad. You blamed me, for doing that, as you remember. Then I told you, that I wouldnt have made such a thing, as you can read above: "Made opinion about forced Afghanistan marriage (= good or bad) None, because of not being part of topic. " - Because of that you asked me, where you would have accused me of doing so with the words "Again, about quoting me where I said that and well, you know." as you can read from above. And so I showed you, where you accused me of having made an oppinion as you can read from above " 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

To be exact for the rare case that someone totally drunken, drugged, living in a psychical dreamworld or otherwise not fit might read this and could have problems understanding it. You saying "But you say that 'the problem' is arranged marriage. So I suppose that the rest is not." (End of page 16, your post to remember.) means, you accusing me, that the problem about mistreated afghanian woman were only arranged marriage, when you exactly knowing that the problem was, that your example of unfree afghanian woman, cant be compared to you being a free person, making dumb desicions, and so being responsible on your own for it.

Again, page 16. All of it. If its again to hard for you, maybe ask someone for you, to practice together, until you can do that on your own.

Nope: YOU stated that they would not have been worthy, I have written nothing of those. YOU simply fantasized that meaning in YOUR post, by simply inventing that "not deserve" would automatic mean not worthy. Which simply is not true with something that cannot be deserved or not deserved. You know, like the Mars, the planet. YOU were the one, fantasizing in YOUR post that if an relationship rather cant be deserved or not deserved, this would mean that this would mean that they were not worthy. I am not responsible for your fantasies or using the word deserve in an context with other words, that have together no meaning at all. I am also not responsible for your fantasies or using the word deserve in an context with other words, that have together no meaning at all, and YOU simply inventing an own context, and blaming other for nonsense YOU invented.

Because of you having memory problems, and me alread knowing that you will ask "Where, where, I cant remember a context more then 24 hours..."

Did I say "Noone deserves an relationship, because of that being something that cannot be deserved, and it not being something that can be deserved by doing this or that." YES, good boy, thats what I said.

Did I say "not being worthy of having a relationship". No, you dont find that nonsense in my post. Even if you write "Repeat: not being worthy of having a relationship" its still nothing I wrote. Because YOU wrote that nonsense. Repeat: You wrote that nonsense. After that hard lection, do you rather want a bonbon or an icecream as goodie?



I want to state a few facts: [/quote]

Oh, facts. No opinions? Please, could you post links to the scientific proofs? If you meant opinion, an opinion is no proof.



You are right about you being able to make me more happy, when reading your posts, but I dont know if we have the same meaning behind it.



You did not write that I was a lesser being, because of me being a woman, and that I would have loosen my worth, because of me not being a slave anymore to men. You did not accuse me of wrong stuff, like that my partner would have need to have sixpacks, and play music instruments for me? You did not say, that before I was 30, I couldnt have been nice? You did not accuse me of writing stuff, I never wrote in one of my post, like people being without worth and blaming me then for that nonsense I never wrote? And you did not even repeat that with the word "repeat"? You did not tell, that because of my sex, I would be unable to simply say, if I was not interested in an relationship, but because of my sex I needed to justify that by myself, by telling bad stuff about that boy, or needed to accuse him of being part of an patriarchy conspiracy? You did not say three times in this thread, that I would expect from a guy to offer me tons more, then I would be willing to offer myself? You did not accuse me, that a nice boy = my partner, would have not an value to me? You did not say, that I wanted to be "free, valuable objects, or a middle point." and that "By now they want both of them full." You did not accuse me, that I would not appreciate my partner? You did not accuse me that I would blame men, for me being not allowed to marry, when I am allowed to marry? You did not acuse me of thinking that men would deserve no empathy? You did not say, that my partner was dumb, because of him not thinking that it was an misadvantage, that I love him as a free being? You did not mention, that as a woman I need to offer more then a friend does, because... yeah, why exactly? Simply out of no cause? You did not tell lies, that I would expect my partner to waste our money for an expensive car, and would force him to have an sixpack and other nonsense?

Yop sure, I could instead of talking to you directly, simply blame the whole MANkind for your behavior, and then tell myself, how nice I am because of not talking to you directly, but instead blaming all men of earth in general for the nonsense you write. But they are not responsible for you and your behavior. To make my blame not general I could as well write: And thats what ALL men do! They create threads full of nonsense, show absolute unacceptable behavior, insult and offend woman again and again in this thread, dont even realize when they do so, and invent themselves excuses that blame woman for being normal people, that avoid other people acting like that.

But they simply dont do that, so why should I blame then for that, only because of you having a penis as well? O_o

So then show me, where I wrote, that man would be worthless, because of them deserving no relationship. I am still waiting now for more then 24 hours.

Does my partner have a sixpack?



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

So you are telling us fairytales in this thread, and tell us stuff, that you yourself dont even think, could be true?

Which personality of yours, was it then always referring, that because of woman now being of lesser worth, they would have to exchange men for that lesser worth, they have? How many people are there in you? I respect that, nothing else then aspergers, but if different personalities of you post, could you mention that, so we know, with which of it we are writing right now?



Deserving is as well about something that can be deserved, by something you do. Not by something that simply a matter of chance. A human is something with an free will. No matter what you do, you cannot force another human to do something, only because its comforting you, by referring again and again "But I deserve it!" "But I deserve it!" "But I deserve it!" Nothing on earth gives you the right to make another person your slave, what it would be if you would force another person to be in an relationship with you, not out of that persons free will, but because of you "deserving" it. So if no person has the right to force another person to agree into an relationship with him, then its something that is not influenced by will, like a job, but something that simply is something not to be influenced. I deserve tomorrow cool weather, because its really f*****g hot, I got a lot of work to do, and I cant sleep because of it being to hot. But the weather f***s about, what I deserve, because its the weather. Only because the weather f***s me about me deserving cool weather tomorrow, this isnt linked in any way with my worth.

[quoet]

I don't get what you say here. Mars? the planet??? [/quote]

Yop, or the roman wargod if you like, Its as well as comparable stupid as deserving an relationship or deserving good weather, so you are free to use every word you want, as long as its completely meaningless in the combination with deserve.

Nope, it was you who wrote that. It was in your post. "I just made the logical deduction from your words." = So you admit, that this nonsense was nowhere to find in my posts, but in yours?

If I was steril, I simply was steril, and because of that I cant have a son. Thats not related in any way to my worth? As you say yourself, the cause why I could have no son, would be, because of me being steril, not because of you saying I wouldnt deserve it. If you said, I couldnt have a son, because of me not deserving it, when in reality I cant have a son, because of me being steril, you would simply say completely nonsense. Its as if I had no watermelon in the fridge, and you telling me, I cant have one, because of me not deserving it according to your opinion. O_o

Last edited by Schneekugel on 30 Jul 2013, 10:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

You copypasted like a whole page of sentences all together without any order or reference. I don't have to guess what you're trying to show which each sentence. It's up to you to link each sentence to what you said that I said, not up to me to guess it. Quoting is writing: you said that and here is the quote. Do I have seriously to say this?

You kept putting words in my mouth without quoting. Instead of it, you insulted me. Great.



And more insults. Well, at least it's a change. Now instead of putting in my mouth words that I didn't say, you insult me.



And? Everybody has problems.



The prejudice of nice girls not seeing values in nice boys. Prejudice. This is prejudice. Saying that girls do not use to find attractive nice guys is a prejudice.....

Ahem....



Ok. I basically said is: if you move to a new social role, you can't keep the privileges of the previous one. Is it not true? Is it a offense? Why is it a offense, do you have to keep the privileges of the old social role not to feel offended?

Those are interesting questions that you didn't face because... well, you were too busy insulting me. Again.



Well, here there is a good combianation of your previous debating methods. You combine insulting and putting words in my mouth that I didn't say. I said 'you have to show your worth' what you magically transformed in 'you have no worth'



Well, remain me which was the last war where every women went to the war massively as part of the army as men did...

Oh, wait. There's none.

But you keep insulting me. Well. It's good to keep traditions.



Nope. I don't feel offended. Neither I insult you or put words in your mouth.



Well. Let's talk slavery. When you're slave, like in the traditional slavery, your owner is supposed to provide food and shelter.

I'm not discussing about if this is fair or unfair or whatever, or the moral issue of slavery. I'm just stating: if you become a free man, you can't to go to this guy and say 'keep giving me food and shelter'... because now you're a free man!! !

So, when you move to a new social role you can't keep the privileges of the old social role. This is not saying that the whole balance of the old social role was possitive. This says exactly what it says: when you move to a new social role you leave behind everything, liabilities and privileges, whatever the whole balance is. This is not a menu.

But saying this is offensive. Fine...

With regard to the 'TO TELL SOMEONE HE WAS LESS WORTH THEN YOU, IS OFFENDING. NO DISCUSSION.', I didn't say such a thing. But well, I suppose that you're talking about me saying 'you have to show your worth' (as everybody else, by the way) that you magically transformed before in 'you have no worth' and now in 'you have less worth'. I feel curious to see the next mutation of what I said, this is better than Spore....


[TO BE CONTINUED]

So, you're saying the confusion comes from the fact that "Nice Guy™" is actually used for not so nice guys and it has very little to do with guys who actually are nice and decent (and who might rightfully take offence if they end up being confused with the "Nice Guys™")? This could explain some of the anger in this thread.

We didn't have such terms back in my day so in my post I'll accept your premise. Now isn't it self explanatory why most women won't want to date such guys?



Now, being good, loving, caring and generous is great but put together with the rest definitely turns things around. I can't possibly imagine who except maybe a very selfish or controlling person would want a relationship with someone like that, man or woman. It sounds like they have no identity of their own and strictly exist and define themselves in relationship to others. Seeking meaning and self worth ONLY outside yourself or even expecting others to give them to you can screw you up just as much as being a selfish, ruthless a***hole. As a result, they also seem (by this definition) too needy, dependent, possibly passive-aggressive and you admit yourself that consciously or not they expect "good, caring, generous" behaviour to be rewarded with affection and sex, bringing things very close to emotional blackmail. How could this not be a recipe for disaster? I never wanted to be with a woman who can't stand up for herself, pull her own weight when necessary or who would live just to please me and be dependent on me in every way, it's dehumanising and as someone mentioned boring. I certainly couldn't blame any women who would find this a turn off.

And why this focus on the extremes, either a doormat or an abuser (wrongly identified as an alpha male)? I admit I always lived in big, diverse places and in my experience the norm is represented by more balanced people, the extremes are the exception.

I've also noticed reading what some these self professed "Nice Guys™" have to say (not necessarily on this forum) that many seem to prefer a more "traditional" (politically correct for submissive) kind of woman. Good for them, but isn't it absolutely obvious how this kind of woman in particular will go for a dominant male to balance out the relationship? How could someone who cannot even stand up for himself give that woman the security she's after? And why would an independent woman go for anything less than she is or can do, unless she just wants to completely dominate and control or even humiliate her partner? (Of course, some people just fall in love and manage to stay out of power games and pissing contests. It's great when it happens but very rare I think).



Dating and finding the "right" partner has never been easy (and in my experience it's much easier to find someone more or less compatible than it is to maintain a good long term relationship) so yes, why make it even harder on yourself? What's more important, establishing who's to blame and who has it "easier" or finding solutions within your control?

And actually these posts made by Fnord are both spot on, yet went mostly ignored
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5524069.html#5524069
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5524611.html#5524611

CubeDemon also made some good contributions and I notice without surprise they are both (happily) married.

Some people seem to think there's a magic formula or set of rules that will make you successful with women or that such rules are supposed to be "fair" or level up the field. Yet in reality things don't go like this at all and they are indeed only screwing themselves. Concentrating on how things "should be" instead of how "they are" is one of the fastest ways to frustration and failure.

You can't rationalise, control or dictate what people are attracted to or what they expect and appreciate in a relationship. You (generic) might think you have great things to offer and others might not be one bit interested in them. Do you think it's in any way reasonable and lucrative to resent them or try to change what they want? Why not just move on and look for someone with similar values to yours?

Rejection sucks, especially if you get it a lot, but rejection also works as a good selection mechanism. I've discovered that many of the women who rejected me weren't that good of a match for me any way and in time ended up being glad I didn't wasted my time and avoided a potentially bad relationship. It also taught me to take rejection less personally, as it can sometimes be a blessing in disguise.

The hostile and aggressive attitude some of these "Nice Guys™" have is also making things at least twice as hard for themselves as they only seem to manage to make women even more wary of them (I haven't seen even one woman changing her opinion after such interactions) and set themselves into conflict with them right from the start. This "us versus them" attitude doesn't just disappear once they actually get into a relationship and unless both sides are the kind of people who thrive on conflict, it will soon lead to disaster. I've been both single and in a bad relationship and hell, I'll take the first any day, as constantly being at war in my own home and bed was one of the most miserable things I've ever experienced. This is once again self sabotage, as it's kind of obvious that the vast majority of women are repelled by angry lecturing and blame assignment.

Hence my initial reaction to the thread: even if you're rejected for irrational or "stupid" reasons, how exactly does it help to keep brooding about it, blame others and demand them to change? Yes, a lot of people are stupid, entitled, unreasonable etc, both men and women, and some even manage to get things we consider we're more deserving of. Complaining won't change a thing and certainly not human nature or the "unfairness" of this world. Isn't it more constructive to move on, find someone more suitable or work on yourself where necessary and re-examine your expectations and attitudes? Or even learning to be happier by yourself and not obsess about finding someone, anyone? Fair or not, people want to be around others who make them feel good, radiating anger and resentment (even if they are justified!) will just make most of them avoid you.



Another excellent point going unnoticed.

Well. Putting words in my mouth again. Until now, basically insults and putting wors in my mouth. Nothing new? No offense, but it's becoming a bit repetitive... At least you should try with new insults. To keep some variety



When I talked about black people????? Oh, sorry, I forgot that you basically have been inventing what I say during the whole thread. I shoud be more used to it, by now...



Did I say that you can't have it with the opposite sex???? Oh, ok, putting more words in my mouth and invented stuff, as usual... nothing new...



Blaming??? Well, blaming. Oxford dictionary.

Blame: verb [with object]
feel or declare that (someone or something) is responsible for a fault or wrong: the inquiry blamed the train driver for the accident
(blame something on) assign the responsibility for a bad or unfortunate situation or phenomenon to (someone or something): they blame youth crime on unemployment



Prejudice: noun [mass noun] preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience: English prejudice against foreigners



You can use the word 'blaming' to describe someone who is playing darts, if you want. And I will keep telling you that you're manipulating words. Besides putting words in others people mouth. And insulting them. You're a jewel, really

By the way. Prejudices are, according to the definition 'preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience'. No reason? Besides personal experience, let's me put an example

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/britis ... 1997-11-25

So they're not even prejudices, since there's reasons that suggest that it can be perfectly true.



Yeap, the long post that needed a GPS to navigate inside. Sure it's quoted. Somewhere. Over there. Over the rainbow or over whatever. But instead of saying here: here is the exact sentence, you keep insulting. As usual, by the way.

You're quite predictable, indeed. Either you insult either you make up things.



More words in my mouth, without quote, as usual. This is quite repetitive, to be honest.



Don't write a movie script. If you say that I said something, quote the exact sentences where I said so. And don't tell again about looking in the middle of a messy paragraph. Quoting is as easy as: Here. Is. The. Bloody. Sentence. Then you write quote, and after the sentence, /quote. Easy peasy.

And about the insults.... oh, well, more insults. This is the default mode. Nothing new.



True. You wrote 'not deserving'. The problem is that 'not deserving', according to the dictionary, means 'to show qualities worthy of'. Don't blame me. Blame the Oxford dictionary. Well, whatever 'blaming' means for you now... I'm not sure, since you said before that you can use this word for whatever for want

And yeap, I quote you. Here. Is. The. Bloody. Sentence. You said: 'But people have as well the right to use the word blaming for someone expressing prejudices. '. That is something that has no relation with the meaning according to the dictionary.



Me and the Oxford dictionary. You know, these guys

[/quote][img][800:768]http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/oxford-dictionary1.jpg[/img]

But well, one of the guys who made the Oxford dictionary of the English Language was Tolkien... So sure, Oxford dictionary... pure fantasy



Indeed, all this discussion about 'guys deserving' or 'gusy not deserving' came after the first one who used this word, Kjas. By the way, a woman. And I used these words in my post answering to her. I didn't invent anything, I just answered using the same words. You have transformed my post answering a post with the same words she used: "a guy deserving", in me inventing and fantasaizing. And well, whatever



Again. Look the dictionary. You know: dictionary, definitinos. Check what the words you're using mean. Supposed that you're not inventing their meaning again, as you did before.



Well, I'm talking about sense of humour. You don't have even a word for it in German



I described this most of the women that remain single after 30. Not all. And you're not supposed to be single, at least you're stating that you have a partner (and a long relationship) quite often. Why you take the hint about something that I said about single women? Why you think it includes you?

Are you faking a relationship on internet??? Dear god...



how nice you are... basically you're constantly insulting me and putting words in my mouth... and... well, then you tell yourself 'oh, how nice I am'.

ahem...... what to say......





Dictionary. Oxford. How many times do I have to write the definition of the words you used????

Well, whatever...



First question: is your partner real or imaginary? I'm starting to doubt it...



You have been insulting me aaaaaaall along. Again. And again. And again. And again. Putting words in my mouth I didn't say aaaaaaall along. Again. And again. And it's me the extremely violent.... Perhaps you shoud read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection



More insults. And bald assertions. Whatever. Nothing new.



More insults and bald assertions.



Deserving is what the dictionary defines as deserving. Nothing less. Nothing more. Period. A word can be used with a different meaning in a communication as long as there's an agreement between the different agents in the comunications to do so. In absence of this, the standard definition, what means, the dictionary, has to be used.

With regard to the words you have put in my mouth that you don't quote because I didn't say them... well, it's the usual stuff you do...



More insults here... skipping to the next paragraph.



If you say 'all the french speak french' and then 'marie is french' and then you apply logic, it's equivalent to say 'marie speak french'.... eh well, forget it. You're directly inventing things. Why I'm talking to you about logic?

By the way, why have been one of my last posts here deleted????