Unwritten rules

Post Reply New Topic

There are many posts where men claim that women only want jerks while women say that yes they want genuine guys. I think that the problem here is that they are talking about two different things.

Here is the thing: women have "unwritten rules" that dismiss men from Category X. So whenever women say "we want guys who are genuine" what they really talk about is "we want guys outside of category X who are genuine", but "outside category X" is so obvious to them that they don't even acknowledge that this is part of their criteria. But, as a man who is "outside category X", I find it quite frustrating that I can never qualify despite being genuine.

And this is where this debate emerges. Men kept complaing that women overlook genuine part in favor of "category X" (true, as evidenced by how they treat "genuine men outside X"), while women are insisting that they DO prefer genuine men (also true, as evidenced by them selecting "genuine men that fall in X" over "gerks that also fall in X"). But we are talking about different things!

Here is a post in another forum that illustrates my point.

Sounds fair so far. I would have totally admired this criteria if it did not make a "switch" it is about to make.




Okay, now the "switch" was made. The underlined part of the above quote admits that not all "genuine" men qualify. You also have to be "string, firm and capable". Now, I am an example of a man who IS genuine but is NOT strong. So I immediately noticed that I was "disqualified" in the above. Yet, other people who don't have to face the problem of "not being strong" won't even notice it. After all, the words "firm, strong, and capable" were just thrown in along with long essay about being genuine. So the reader only notice "genuine" part but not that "additional" qualifying criteria.

And no, I am not saying she is trying to deceive the reader. Rather, its how her own mind works. When she thinks within herself about the men she wants, she only consciously thinks about how genuine they are. Why? Because she has already dismissed in her mind all the weak men. She is only choosing between different strong ones, so "genuine" is all she thinks about. But my question has nothing to do with how she makes the choice between the strong men she is considering. My question is: why did she leave all these weak men completely out of the picture? And she doesn't even realize she left them out because she no longer remembers they even exist.



Now it got even worse. So after all that long discussion about wanting genuine men, she admitted that she DOES want a jerk after all (except that the jerk has to be jerk towards others while being nice to her). Well guess what. Even if he is nice to you, the fact that he is jerk to others is NOT genuine. So she doesn't TRULY want a genuine man. She just wants him to be genuine in some aspects (namely, in terms of how he treats her), while she implicitly wants him to be a jerk in other aspects (namely how he treats others). She only notices the first part and not the second part; yet, the second part "disqualifies" the nice guys who are nice to everyone (her and others) but the said nice guys never enter her mind, hence she doesn't have any examples to point yourself towards when you are told that you don't like nice guys.

Or here another example of a response on that same thread (by a different person)



Actually this only confirms the reason why I, as a man, feel frustrated. The very fact that women want to find "someone" so badly and yet AT THE SAME TIME dismiss me in their search implies that somehow they KNOW that I am inappropriate FOR SURE, so that they wont even test their assumption DESPITE their desire to find someone. Now, how do they just KNOW that I am nappropriate from the fact that first 5 minutes of conversation didn't "hit it off"? You can't judge someone based on 5 minutes! Or even more common scenario: they somehow "know" without even exchanging one word with me!

So you see, we are actually talking about two different things. When she, as a woman, have stated that she has difficulty finding men, what she implicitly was talking about was appropriate men, while she was making [/u]implicit[/u] assumption that said guys that approached her are inappropriate, so they are not even under discussion. On the other hand, when I, as a man, talk about my frustration, I am saying that none of the girls at all approach me, whether they be appropriate or not. In fact, if I were in her place, I would have taken the offer from these 20 men that she is "not considering" and it puzzles me why is it she is not considering these 20 men despite her desire to find someone?

Women know. As unfair as it sounds, they judge guys who approach them as potential future boyfriend material. This is why it's critical to spark and amplify attraction as soon as possible.

As far as being approached, would you like to be approached by a bunch of fat and ugly women? That's how women feel about unqualified men approached them.

www.coalpha.org

Those Co-Alpha guys have some interesting ideas, it's plainly obvious throughout the Natural world that cooperating organisms outcompete everything else (Take a look at ants, humans, and colonial microbes, for example).

I draw a bit of skepticism about some of the sociological aspects of their beliefs, though.

I think you are putting too much value in the "genuine" quality, when you talk about what women want? It's just one possible quality a woman might look for, among many. I don't think it would be the only quality a woman consciously acknowledges she is looking for. It might seem to be the holy grail because it is what gets brought up a lot in discussions such as those on this forum.

Ok, a further look into the forums, and I have changed my mind dramatically: These guys are all a bunch of nutjobs, and very recently, religious ones.

http://www.mikraite.org/

After having observed women (not in a creepy way), I can genuinely say that the can decide very quickly whether or not they would get involved with a guy. This time period is far too short to gain anything but a first impression, so it is her perception of a man's character that decides things.

With the 'genuine' and 'nice' categorisations, men see them entirely different from woman. I'm not an expert on women's points of view, but I do know that the behaviour men describe as nice (being polite and courteous, giving compliments, always being there for emotional support, randomly buying small gifts) is not the same as what NT women call nice. I have never lied to, withheld information from, or acted falsely to any prospective partners. Would I be called genuine? I don't know, but I think not.

I also believe in the theory, though, that none of us truly knows what we want or need, just what we think we want, or what society tells us we should think we want.

...especially since that group seemed to have a real dislike for Omega males...


I really like this thread, OP! Good analyzing...

Okay, so you are saying two things:

1. It is assumed that they are supposed to make a decision quickly.

2. The only possible way to accomplish part 1 is to use first impressions

Now, you were explaining why 1 implies 2 and at the same time you completely left out the issue of why 1 is assumed in the first place. This is precisely what I mean by unwritten rules. So lets go back and ask: why assume part 1? Who gave them that deadline?

I just feel that the quality of genuine is the only fair one, while other qualities such as "alpha male" are unfair.

Now, in that other message board the woman (not me) was saying that she judges based on "genuineness" (thus implying that she is "fair" in "my book"). But, I was reading her post closely I saw that she was admitting here and there that she has other criteria too, despite her own attempt to emphasize that she doesn't. And thats what shows that she makes implicit assumptions without even noticing them.

In either case, even if the other points were admitted explicitly, that won't make them any more fair (just probably less annoying since at least I would be able to have honest discussion). I just feel like it would have been the most fair to judge people by good intentions as opposed to being "alpha".

What "cooperation" were you referring to? Were you speaking of women "being selected" for "cooperating" with the above unwritten rules, or were you talking about men "being selected" for "cooperating" with society's demand of becoming alpha. I know you could mean both, but which part were you specifically thinking of?

@Roman I think you have misinterpreted me. There is no 'supposed to'. I'm saying that I have seen that moment when they decide they want to 'go for it'. I have observed that not every woman does this every time, hence my phrasing (see "can decide").

And yes, I am saying a quick decision can only be made on first impressions because of the nature of first impressions. Already before someone speaks, an NT has judged them. When they do, an NT judges them. How they behave around new people is also judged. These impressions set, and are difficult to change: it takes time to go from first impressions to a good picture of someone's character. I can give several examples from my experience where how someone first seemed is not how they actually are.

I think by genuine they mean that they want a long term relationship and not casual sex, which is what most of the men their type want. This is probably just a type of women that are into bad guys, so if you are not one I wouldn't stress over it.

"Genuine" means he's not just playing you and putting on a front. "Strong and capable" means that he's somebody who can take care of you if he needs to, he gives you a feeling of security. It's also not "being a jerk" if the guy can and will stand up for you if need be, no woman wants a guy who is going to turn tail and run if another guy is harrassing her. Well, most won't, but I'm sure there are some types of women who do.

The "bad boy" thing doesn't always mean "jerk". Also, every girl has their own definition of what a "bad boy" is, and it's not always the same.

Why is it that some factions of guys on here want to say that women want jerks when they don't want weak men?

there is no such thing as "fair" in choosing a mate. everyone has aspects of their choices that could be considered "unfair" by the people who are rejected.

there are multiple factors involved in attraction. even if a potential mate checks off all the boxes, the spark may not be present and therefore a person will be rejected. or the spark may be present when all the boxes aren't ticked so dating ensues. attraction is a strange animal.

i think the focus on alpha males is a red herring. if you look at a group of never-marrieds or older virgins, you will not see many personality traits that are universal to them all. they aren't all shy or reticent or nice or unconfident or friendly etc. so trying to label them as a group (omega or whatever) according to their lack of success will not yield any useful data. some of them are sweet and kind, yet others display angry jerkish bad-boy behaviour.

And many guys who are insecure will label other guys "alpha males" if those guys have qualities that they don't, even if the guy isn't a textbook "alpha".

I guess I could have said that it wasn't fair that guys wanted pretty girls with big boobs when I was young and single, huh?