Has this statement got a lot of truth in it?

Post Reply New Topic

I once heard someone say "you can be as picky as you want but don't b***h about how you can't get a girlfriend or that no girls will give you the time of the day".

Do you think that statement holds a lot of truth or not?

Goes for both genders as well. Also fits into just about every other aspect of life really.

The saying Beggars can't be choosers comes to mind too.

I can however still be grumpy when they have no Coke at the party and only Sprite. Just means I deal with the consequences if I start complaining to someone and they get annoyed.

Kind of reminds me of this statement by Eckhart Tolle, but I paraphrased a little bit

When a problem arises, you have three options:
1. Deal with the issue before moving forward.
2. Ignore the issue for the time being and deal later.
3. Remove yourself from the situation.

Don't complain about the consequences of your actions later.

Very much truth. You have the right to choose whether you want someone right now or if you want to wait for someone who is more suited to your needs. Whichever way you choose has its own form of consequences. You can either be alone and searching or with someone who doesn't meet your standards and miserable. Either way it is your own choice.

And technically you can b***h all you want, its just that no one wants to hear it when it is the result of your choice.

There's a poster here on WP who sometimes asks for advice on meeting girls. While reading his posts (it's happened twice now) I genuinely feel his distress and am moved to reply with whatever wisdom I can muster up. Then I get to the end, where he mentions he's ONLY interested in punk girls, immediately eliminating over 99% of available women. I'm so annoyed at this twist I don't even bother to tell him so. I think that should sum up your question, OP.

Yes, this is a good statement.

Being picky is good, but bitching about how you can't get a GF is victim mentality. It's sickening, and it's rampant. If you're not getting what you want, put the work into improving your skills so you can get what you want. Many people don't want to put in that work and instead just expect things to fall on their laps. This is fantasy!

The thing about picky is that it implies criteria that aren't really necessary or don't have a major effect on a relationship, so it's different than being discerning.

Want a dog? Not hard at all.

Want a small, cute dog because you don't have much room and want something to sit on your lap? Still easy.

Want a small dog that also has a rare and specific patterning, likes a specific kind of chew toy, won't turn down a specific pet food brand, with fur of a very specific softness? Now it's getting harder, and those are all your additional requests that you're going to have to put in the effort to find. Tough.

Same pattern of accumulating traits you want. I wouldn't be surprised if some people out there want a dog that walks itself and never barks.

you forgot to mention "doesn't shed either."

In my experience if you're happy in life you will be attractive to women. I'm working on it

Girls don't solve unhappiness. Or boys. If you're unhappy all you bring is a big pile of f-up to the relationship anyway.

As for pickyness? One of my newer mindsets is that people choose each other. You don't get girls at a grocery store, and you don't have to switch to the no-name brand.

If you're weighing the value of a girl, you've more likely than not missed the point IMO. The right girls should provoke an emotional irrational response. Something like that.

edit: oh, you were elaborating

I remember when I went scuba diving in the weekend I was on a buzz and I smiled at a girl and she could see it in my eyes I was happy and she smiled back

Yes, elaborating. And yes. NT's sense that shiz.

Sometimes i think we assume that 'a girl is the solution to not having a girl.'

The question and answer are not in keeping with reality. Its a statement from left field. Partly. People don't like being crutches... unless they want to. However there's a bazillion lonely dudes willing to dump everything on a girl. Competition is too high there

LeLetch, you seem hellbent on promoting irrational thought. I've explained thoroughly and rigorously why it's dangerous thinking. Promoting such a bold idea warrants equally rigorous justification. I also find it ironic, mainly because it seems self-contradictory, that you would attempt to defend irrational thought with rational thought. The latter opposes the former. Question: Do you have any background in philosophy? Your use of these concepts suggests you could find it useful to spend some time studying what rational and irrational thought is. As well as the concepts, "objectivity," "subjectivity," and "reality."

I agree with the_alchemist that being happy is attractive. Not just for women but for people in general.

(to leletch)

elaborating. That's rare, must be on WP

Improving our social skills and being happy for the win!

Why is "irrational" thought dangerous, might I ask? A lifetime of observation has taught me that, baffling as it is, human interaction is based on all kinds of behavior that can't be easily squeezed into linear models, yet is internally consistent and able to be explained by rational statements. (Kinda reminds me of the roots of the term irrational: unable to be defined by a ratio. Some numbers don't want to be fractions, man!) I know it's annoying that people (Aspies included) are such messy creatures and their behavior is so unpredictable; I'm sure if you wait 30-40 years we'll have that whole "how brains work" thing figured out and I could give you a perfect model to go off of. Until that point "winging it and trusting the apparatus evolution and life experience gave me, even if the results aren't all that rigorous" is a surprisingly effective strategy, even for non-NTs.

Also, "objectivity, subjectivity, and reality" are meaningless in a quantum world. If you're going to be a stickler, be a rigorous stickler.

Irrational thought is dangerous because it allows for dangerous ideas, and thus dangerous actions and events to occur. Dangerous ideas arise because of errors or rejection of logic. Irrational thought is the rejection of logic.


Difficult to fit into linear models (and what do you mean by "linear?") but you can because it can be consistently explained by rational statements...so what's the problem? This is a perfect example of why we need rational thinking to make sense of our complex world. Without it, we would not be able to fit difficult ideas into more comprehensible models. This is actually how knowledge is built--from basic ideas, we derive more complex ideas, and those complex ideas are fit into symbolic models, i.e. language. Imagine having a conversation about the planet Earth but the word, "Earth," did not exist.


You're thinking about a different meaning of "irrational." The meaning used in our discussion pertains to the faculty of reason/logic.


That is not an effective strategy because it's not effective and it's not a strategy. A strategy is a plan, and trusting something to fate is neither a plan nor effective.


Quantum physics is grossly misunderstood, and rife with philosophical errors:

http://files.meetup.com/1769665/End%2C% ... 10%29.docx

All knowledge begins with philosophy because philosophy is the foundation for ALL knowledge. Physics that dismisses philosophy is in serious trouble. And that is actually the state of much of today's physics, hence the contradictory theories and increasing pile of backwards rationalization in the field. Does it even need to be pointed out how self-contradictory it is to reject objectivity and reality through the use of objectivity and reality? Simply put, it's an invalid proposition.