why are feminist obsessed with Nice guys(TM)

Post Reply New Topic

None of that is in my job description. I should have explained that quote from the song "Sweet Dreams". I'm just fed up with people & their B.S. What ever they want to do with their lives-Just Go Do It! Just leave me out of it.
It's been a BAAAAAAAAD week, ArrantPariah, a BAAAAAAAD week....

Last edited by NinsMom on 19 Mar 2014, 2:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

friendzone and female friendship are not the same thing.

Yes, friend zone for males by females = phuck off. there is no such animal.
and if you think thats a lie, then ask your next boyfriend.

That's right. Even to me, friendship, be it with male or female, is one of the most important things in life. That wonderful sense of being able to be at ease with someone, to share interests, to help each other.

Whereas 'the friendzone' is a very silly idea believed in by silly boys who can't seem to comprehend any interest in a female beyond being a series of holes in which to stick their penis.



As a heterosexual married male, I think it'll be a long, long time before I get a boyfriend.

Why thank you.

Now, was the tenner in UK pounds or Canadian dollars?

your confusing crush on female friend and friendzone.
Friendzone is when a woman act beyond a Platonic friend,act
like emotional quasi-girlfriend towards her male friend.

I've had many male friends.

Of course, it helps that I'm ugly and have no interest in sex......

No, I'm not. I've had crushes. Said crushes did not make me resentful and bitter towards the woman in question, let alone women at large. Not once did I feel entitled to the woman's interest beyond what it was. Unrequited/unmatched feelings can be very difficult, and can sink otherwise good friendships. It's a sad thing, not an opportunity to apportion blame and huff-puff your sense of entitlement.

What is an 'emotional quasi-girlfriend'? Basically, a female who puts themselves emotionally close to you? Or, you know, a close female friend. Relationships of all sorts can be tricky terrain. If you're not comfortable with one, reassess it.

I presume the mismatch here is that the man wants a full, intimate, meaningful relationship with a sexual side, and the woman doesn't (though I have some scepticism that any man who unironically uses the term 'friendzone' is capable of such a relationship). But the woman behaves in such a way - being emotionally close - that confuses the man. I can have some sympathy for that confusion, but the man complaining how he's in 'the friendzone' kills that sympathy dead. Because the very term, and the way it's used, reeks of punishment, like solitary confinement, or the sin bin, or the naughty step. That they are being punished, yet have done nothing to deserve it. The poor dears. Again, martyrdom.

If you consider a woman has 'friendzoned' you, you are not her friend. The decent thing would be to stop pretending you are.

Ironically, their very idea that they are being punished makes them deserving of feeling so.

Sure, and I'm not a rapist. I refuse to sleep with girls who are passive or even tipsy because (a) I don't enjoy it, and (b) I want more than momentary consent. I want the satisfaction of knowing that they're attracted to me. I work hard. I train hard.

In fact, even when I was a "testosterone-soaked" teen and early 20-something, I met that standard. You would not be able to find one single exception.

I'll have to look through your posts, but I haven't seen any woman stand up for "nice guys" when the topic of rape accusations ("one in three") came up recently. [Edit: actually, one admirable girl was supportive of the overall post, but not Re: that specific point.] People like sonofghandi and my father reliably chime in for fairness for girls. If you want me to specifically except "nice girls", then you need to stick up for boys and men at least as often. (And not as a vehicle for criticizing patriarchy, as starvingartist recently did with custody.) I don't see sonofghandi or my dad saying "Yes that's bad for women [and this is why you should support some men's issue.]"

My post was meant to be fair to boys who don't stick up for themselves enough right now.

You might be right if you thought that women have to justify their positions more strenuously, but boys have to justify themselves. Feminists get mad about having their work picked apart. How would they like it if they were picked apart?

There's nothing fair about the gender "debate". I'm just trying to even things up. A girl in my state could get $20,000 in cash subsidy for her women's studies major (+loan subsidy). I couldn't give boys $20,000 worth of talking points and four years to hone them if I wanted to. I am at least going to give them that one. No, I'm not going to let you shoot it down.

This is what guys get on this very site when we point out that an accusation doesn't fit our own experience one teeny bit:



That's a really nice way to talk to someone whose last surviving grandfather was robbed and abused in his final years by his own wife and kids because the aforementioned programming made him vulnerable. Wonder why I'm wary?

[Edit:] It wasn't just 'any guy' that they did that to (from the same post):



How did he deserve to be treated badly by women? [Endedit]

No, I don't necessarily run with a different crowd. You sound a lot like my mother. They would never admit that they robbed him. In their telling, he was just "confused" (because he caught them lying to him) and needed "help" (getting rid of all that burdensome cash). They even rationalized it by saying that it made "financial sense" to sell a property (that wasn't theirs).

Lots of Saudi men think that they're perfectly fine husbands. Their wives even agree with them:

http://saudiwoman.me/2009/09/03/my-guar ... st-for-me/

It's telling that, just like these Saudis wives, manginas are often affluent. They don't need to be treated fairly because life is good anyway. I'm affluent, but I also have a speck of self-respect.

What I said may still have been unfair to you. If so, I'm sorry for that. I'd do it again, though. Because this isn't civil society anymore. This is a gender war. I hate to cause collateral damage, because I was collateral damage for much of my life, so I at least know how it hurts.

It's also not completely un-targeted. I picked an accusation that someone like you (assuming that you've told the truth) can easily defend against, just as I can defend against a lot of feminist ones. You also have more defenders in society right now than I do.

The whole post is nonsense, but this borders on retardation. I bet you laugh at Amy Farrah Fawler's sexual frustration (Sheldon's girlfriend), but when a FACT goes against your beliefs, even though it's exactly as the previous example, you deny it.

I love the quote "The truth is incorrect." What is the factual truth, because it's not politically correct, gets dismissed.

Keep calm and listen to this on youtube "Patrice O'Neal - How would you keep your man?"

thank you MP for epitomising Hopper's point for us.

Please, enlighten me. I want to hear why you think I have a sense of entitlement, I'm a martyr and I have an ego out of proportion. Please explain and I'll explain my side. Please, go ahead.

How so? Or was that a sort of preamble to your own remarks, warning me what I was in for?



You bet wrong. What were you willing to wager?

I've found TBBT to be of diminishing returns comedically, and don't watch it anymore - I used to fairly obsessively, as it was part of my routine, and I found that (and it) soothing. It's a shame, because I think they have some great comedic actors, and it can be very funny. But I haven't thought much of Amy's change in character - she is not written with dignity.



What fact are you supposing I am dismissing here? I write from experience and observation. What FACT? That quote - what/who is it from? What is it supposd to express? I can only presume there's supposed to be a 'politically' in there. "The truth is politically incorrect". Only it's not. There are many understandings of what we mean by 'truth', but that ain't one of them. At best, you could say 'the truth doesn't care for political correctness', or 'the truth is apolitical' - you could at least make some sensible supporting arguments for those assertions.



Sir, yes sir. I will do what you tell me, sir. I will keep calm and listen to what you tell me to, sir.

Really, though, what am I supposed to be listening to? I don't find the material amusing, and I find his delivery lacking (good delivery can more than make up for bad material). Is it supposed to be clever, some 'truth' revealed? Given the implicit framing of the question, and how women are addressed by culture, I don't find the answers all that surprising. What was I supposed to understand or learn from that?

The only thing worth adressing is this part. All the rest has already been covered except for my previous quote that you can't even understand.

Anyway, Louis CK placed Patrice O'Neal on his top 5 comedians of all time; Bill Burr on his top 3; Kevin Hart on his top 2. Patrice was one of the very few comedians that has aquired the title of legendary. You are either lying or you don't have a clue of what commedy is.

i feel no shame whatsoever in admitting that i believe i am incapable of enlightening you, MP.

Because it's impossible that another person could have a different grasp of humour than yourself--that is certainly reasonable and logical.

keep setting the standard, MP.

edit* actually, i'm beginning to feel like i'm troll-baiting. i should probably stop now.