To all the nice guys @tm...

Post Reply New Topic

posted in june, while is it you just now brought it up?

the post says

ie he'd be able to have sex if he'd cured asd, not that the cure to asd is sex.

NiceGuy????

I'm a nice guy it seems. thats what people who know me say. O.o should I be a bad guy why is being good bad? is being bad now good?
or does the tm(trademark) mean the fake nice guy? o.O

In this context 'nice guy' doesn't mean a guy who's nice.

It's a guy who attempts to be manipulative and guilt women into relationships by being a doormat and then acting like they're owed for it.

most the fake guys aren't doormats. its the real nice guys who are doormates. as they are all about pleasing others at the expense of themselves.

I am a doormateish. my past friend took advantage of me but I hardly stood up for myself.

I must be fortunate. I've never run into any trademarked Nice Guys.

They are doormats most of the time. It's a passive-aggressive behaviour and it depends on building up a list of items they're 'owed for'.

The name for the behaviour (NiceGuy?) comes from them being most noticeable for complaining bitterly that nice guys don't ever get anywhere and then go on to explain how they're the victims while (if you read between the lines) they're really explaining how they attempt to guilt uninterested female friends into romantic relationships.

I've complained about how nice guys don't seem to get gf a few times. which isn't to say that I think women look down on nice guys but that bad boys/as*holes tend to garnish more public attention.

I don't know how to manipulate women o.O From what I gather it includes saying mean things purposely which I'm not capable of.

There's as many ways to manipulate people as there are people to be manipulated. What you describe (what lowlife PUAs describe as 'negging') is only one.

What I've described, the behaviours used by the NiceGuy? are most certainly manipulative, only if he's called on them you'll get a lot of butthurt protesting of innocence. Pretending to be friends with a girl while slowing building up imagined 'debts' she'll owe you a relationship for, only to grow resentful towards her when she fails to 'pay' those 'debts' is most certainly a manipulative behaviour. It's effectively attempting to use the friendship she imagines to have with you for emotional blackmail.

from my experience most people do that. they do things for others so later they get favors back and can say but remember that time i did ______ for you.

women in some relationships will be super nice and do nice things right before asking for something or for the guy to do something. like visit her family or other things.

The problem isn't doing something nice in hopes of being rewarded later.

The problem is that they don't honestly represent 'the price' of their generosity but will act as though it should have been understood from the beginning. This is how they claim to have been used. They don't bother to make their intentions clear, leaving the object of their affection to believe they're interested in a platonic relationship while they intend on pursuing a romantic relationship. Once the other person is invested into the friendship, a bait and switch is pulled on them (from their standpoint) before finally the NiceGuy? throws a hissy-fit where they accuse the person of using them, that the terms should have been understood despite having never been communicated.

I don't like looking at doing things for people as putting them in debt. Rather, I look at doing favors as storing up assets in trust. If you commit to that long enough, people will help you. You get back what you put in plus interest!

It's not a debt. They're just "holding it for you."

Debts are incurred when there is a lack of resources for a transaction, which in turn makes you a slave. Being nice to others isn't a loan, because you're giving away something for free. You will get it back plus dividends. Making slaves of people only builds resentment.

That is a really trashy thing to write and promote.

Why does everything involving sex have to turn into a culture war these days?

I agree with much of what the original poster said. I was obsessed with sex when I was a young male virgin. I figured I was the only freak in the world who no one could love or want, and I hated all of society for mocking me for my weakness when it came to women.

That said, we can't discount that sexuality is a natural human urge which a lot of people would feel even if society didn't impress it upon us. Much more importantly, *LOVE* is vital for a person's psyche. I find it really hard not to feel pity for people who are utterly lonely, and who are angered and embittered by their loneliness. I was like that. I never meant to think the terrible things I thought. It was just my perception of the world, tinted by crap-coloured glasses.
It's tempting to write off a person who clearly had no personal ethics, seeing as he shot people, by assuming he was devious sex-fiend who didn't want anything like love. I don't know. But most people who are sexually frustrated DO want love, and I'm not talking about familial love. Sex causes very strong emotions, but when you cry yourself to sleep at night, you're not just horny.

I'd really like to get us to the point where we can diagnose properly the mental health challenges of young people without judging them or holding them to a standard they can't meet - whether that's telling them they need to stop being virgins, or telling them they're not supposed to want sex - which might not be the intention of the OP, but it comes across that way to those who you intend to reach.

Now, we are all accountable for our actions and words, but for the vast majority of frustrated youths, this is about thoughts and feelings they don't want and don't understand. We can either help them overcome their frustration on their terms, or we can let them stew in their misery until they develop misogynist ideologies or, God forbid, act on them.

And for God's sake, can people please act civilized. Don't make rude comments - And try to forgive those who do. People aren't always in the right frame of mind for these discussions, and might end up saying something they regret. Give them a chance to regret - If nothing else, this will avoid flaring up another flame-war.

Most "nice guys" only become that way after being treated like s**t for so long. I might say that this was part of Rodger's problem, but also the problem is that he was just a psychopath to begin with.

And please don't sit there and tell me I'm using the word "psychopath" wrong. Anybody who kills purposefully and with no remorse is, indeed, a psychopath.

ETA: I don't know that you were specifically addressing me, but I figured I would address my post regardless.

Ok, sure I'll expand on what I wrote.

What i quoted is not "rude". It's kind of scary and predatory. Now before everyone jumps my shit- the idea is a predatory one, I'm not saying the poster is. But, what's just as scary? Only one other person even found it disturbing enough to address it.

I mean the idea here is that an individual is supposed to research how to identify a specific kind of vulnerability in persons, take advantag of that vulnerability for sex [then knowing full well what they are doing because of said research] and then... who cares, right?

no. People are not objects. no matter the gender, so my issue with this is not a male vs female thing.

If you need to get off and then dispose of the tool- you go to an adult toy store or use the internet to order an object. You don't hunt for people who have attachment issues and emotional vulnerability, knowingly take advantage of that and kick them to the curb.

This suggestion seemed specifically thought out- so while I'm not trying to slam down on the poster of said comment, I'm really concerned and taken aback.

RIGHT HERE is one of the reasons we have the culture we have.
Someone makes a comment like this: suggesting we simply use people for our sexual pleasure, disregarding the harm we might cause them, and then cast them aside.
And in this thread, even, only one person really addressed it.

yeah, that concerns me.

I don't think that is flame war material and I'm pretty amazed it needs to be spelled out.

Last edited by SignOfLazarus on 02 Nov 2014, 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

This thread is gonna get a lock soon.

See... that's not fair.
It's simply not.