why are feminist obsessed with Nice guys(TM)
I love the quote "The truth is incorrect." What is the factual truth, because it's not politically correct, gets dismissed.
Since I'm in an asperger's forum I had to put the explanation in front of it because we're not very good with these kind of interpretations. But, had you bothered to read the rest of the sentence and connect the dots, you would understand what the quote means. An example: black people have, in average, lower IQ's than jewish people. Does that mean it's a genetic trait or a cultural trait? Well, since it's politically incorrect to even consider this FACT (the difference in IQ's) the subject was not as well adressed as it should. It turns out that it can be better explained as difference in culture, economic and social status, than in genetic terms.
The thing is: the truth, many times, is ugly. But by discovering it we at least can do something about it.
But this discussion is going nowhere since page 3 or 4. Either you get it or you don't.
I get it now, as you have essentially changed the sentence. "The truth, many times, is ugly" at least has some sense to it. "The truth is incorrect" does not. Either you need a qualifying word before 'incorrect', or to have 'incorrect' itself in quotes. Otherwise it is gibberish. I guessed what it meant from context. I had to guess, as the line on it's own was, again, gibberish. I'm sure it made sense in your head. It's just that it didn't on screen.
You still haven't told me what FACT I have denied and dismissed. A little unfair. Our discussion might go somewhere if you did so.
I don't think it's politically incorrect to consider the IQ FACT, more that, well, what is to be made of the fact. Is there even such a thing as IQ is supposed to be? If so, can it be measured? etc.
For sake of argument, I will agree to your statement that, on average, Jewish people do better than Black people on the same IQ test. And, well, what? What is there to talk about? Do you consider it important? Why? Etc. I don't mean to drag this into a discussion on IQ, by the way. I was using your FACT to make the point that, even where we agree on a FACT, we may disagree on its importance and relevance and meaning. The problem is when one party attributes a particular importance to a FACT, and thinks that, actually, the importance is inherent in the FACT, when it has actually been attributed. But when you won't tell me what FACT I have dismissed, we can't even begin to talk about importance, meaning etc.
Either you get it or you don't.
I'm geting bored...
I can only suppose you're writing as though I have any interest in the US comedy world, and the opinions of those therein. I don't. I'm not entirely sure why I should, either. If I wanted to, I would. I don't want to, so I don't. I don't know who Grothendieck is, nor what he says about mathematics. I don't suppose such a thing would interest me, assuming I could understand it. It may well be important to me, if he says things that could impact upon my life in a practical way. What some comedians I haven't heard think of another comedian I have heard a little of but didn't care for - try as I might, but I can't see how what those opinions are will impact practically on my life.
But then, there are many such things - people having opinions about things I don't have much interest in. I have enough things I'm interested in, and enough people whose opinions I deem worth considering to keep me quite busy, ta.
Do you know Simon Price's opinion of the third Manic Street Preachers album? Do you even care? Do you even know who any of those people are? I'd be pleasantly surprised if you did, but I'm not going to opine that you haven't got a clue about music if you don't, and that you really should and that, honestly, it'd be like a layman not being interested in Mary Warnock's views on voluntary euthanasia.
See, I'm not you, and you're not me. I think we're both relieved at that (rather beautiful) FACT.
(Edit for removal of repetitions, and the typos I've noticed thus far)



you keep making his point for him, MP--you insult and say he denies things, yet refuse to tell him what he's denying or how he is supposedly wrong, then announce that you've won the argument.
do you really expect this behaviour to impress anyone? do you think we are all blown away by your "indisputable logic"?
Lady, get this through your skull: I'm waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy smarter than you people.
(with the exception of one person, who certainly knows who I'm refering to).
The quote "The truth is incorrect" is only worthy of being a quote because it's an amusing paradox. It's obvious to anyone with a working brain that the truth cannot be incorrect. So what the hell is the quote saying then? The quote is using the word "incorrect" in the sense of "politically incorrect". And it's an interesting way to sum up the atitute towards the things that, although they are true, get denied _ or swept under the rug _ because they are politically correct. Was it that hard? It shouldn't be hard, especialy when you have the explanation next to it!
The FACT that he is denying is the FACT we've been discussing from the first page, that he didn't even bother to read (or has misteriously disapeared from his memory), namely, in case your memory was erased, that feminists deny the fact of the existence of the friendzone. And then he says that I don't point out the fact. The whole thread revolves around this thing.
The only alternative explanation is a collective trolling, but that's too paranoid for my taste. So my first sentence is absolutely correct.
I've argued with reasoning; with science; I've made my point from numerous perspectives; I've posted a video of a demonstration of collective supressed racism; I posted a video of a guy turning an angry woman like all of you into a horny giggling woman _ because he knows how you work. You don't understand neither of the points? Or are they "incorrect"? That's too bad.
i can sum up your argument in one sentence: all feminists think x, and x is incorrect, therefore i win!
can you truly not see how this argument is flawed?
Ah, the curse of the genius - too smart to understand the stupidity of what they're saying.
And that is what I understood by it. I just wanted confirmation that that's what you were talking about. Because the sentence indeed made no sense. Jeezy creezy.
I am not denying an established truth. I am questoning whether your asserted truth is actually so. There's a difference. I see a little paranoia is to your taste, at least.
Who/what's it a quote from?
Do feminists deny that sometimes a man may want more of a relationship with a woman than she wants with him? Really? I doubt it - it's a fairly common experience. Other way round, too. It would be very silly to deny situations like that happen. They're the stuff of many books and films and songs and poems. It's one of the oldest stories.
What I think feminists object to - what I object to - is the use of a term by a man in that friendship with a woman is some sort of punishment, like being sent to the sin bin or the naughty step; that it is some sort of female/feminist consipracy to wind up Nice Guys; and that sense of 'what did I do to deserve this?'. The sulky martyrdom, which comes from a sense of entitlement, like a spoilt brat not getting the right colour £20,000 car they wanted for their 18th birthday.
If you think a woman is being too emotionally close to you in such a way you consider unfair that could only be balanced if she jumped into bed with you, well, f**k off. You do not get diddums points for letting someone get emotionally close to you in the hope of getting her into bed, and failing to do so. In fact, you are a lousy friend.
That's for sure. Time and again people have offered reasoned thoughts, and time and again you've blustered a response.



you keep making his point for him, MP--you insult and say he denies things, yet refuse to tell him what he's denying or how he is supposedly wrong, then announce that you've won the argument.
do you really expect this behaviour to impress anyone? do you think we are all blown away by your "indisputable logic"?
I don't know. I mean, three laughing emoticons? That's a hell of an argument.
I had a read through the thread earlier, and what the central problem here, and with a certain venn diagramed anti-feminist/'rational'/Game overlap thinking (or, 'thinking') in general, seems to be is that some men are utterly convinced of a particular theory of how women are, and what they want from men, and how men are, and what they want from women, and what sexuality is, etc. It doesn't matter that any number of women (and men) may say 'no, I'm not like that, and don't know many people who are, that's not my experience', that any number of examples run counter to their theory, because they really really like their theory. It's got some scientific bits in and everything (which handily allows for anyone who disagrees to be labelled 'anti-scientific', or someone who denies FACTS).
It seems to me that, where one's theory is found wanting time and again, one goes away and rethinks it. It is Cnut levels of folly to stamp your feet and insist reality live up to your theory.
indeed--there seems to be a serious emotional investment in being right, rather than understanding the truth. people can't get out of their own way to see the reality of a situation.
*edit to include: Why can't people understand that human sexuality is not black and white? Men are not one way and women another. We are more than the walking sums of various biological impulses dictated by chromosomes, and to suggest that's all we are is reductive to the point of rendering one's argument ridiculous and irrelevant. i know that black-and-white thinking can be a problem with people on the spectrum (i have struggled with it at times, myself)--but come on!
Ah, but don't you know - men are rational, women emotional. Therefore you can only offer emotional responses to their rational arguments. It's an unfortunate delusion that, where women may think they're putting forward considered, reasoned responses, all they're actually saying is 'but this makes me saaaaaad'. And where any man may look to you like he is worryingly emotionally invested in his lovely theory of human behaviour, he in fact is being good and patient and trying to explain your own nature to you, all the while knowing you'd rather be cooing over kittens and babies, occasionally jumping bones with an alpha male.
It's tragic.
An understanding of human (and any subdivisions thereof) nature has to include all and everything any human has done. Because no creature can go against its nature. Properly understood, human nature is remarkably varied and multi faceted and often contradictary.
this is a little off-topic, but: is this a welsh thing or are you an eddie izzard fan?

sorry for the random tangent.
It is indeed from Eddie Izzard. I've kind of lost track of when his newer stuff has come out, but there was a time when repeatedly listening to his stuff was a way of trying to hold my sanity together.
I only have to think about this to crack up (in a good way):
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnBtd-dOnUQ[/youtube]
"It's 180 over 60"
"What does that mean?"
"I don't know - I'm a dog"
Drilling cats, 'new & improved'. See, that's funny.
"I finished last" - meaning, presumably, they haven't got a girlfriend, let alone a 'hot' one - "so therefore I must be nice. Therefore all the guys who have girlfriends aren't nice. They're a bunch of jerks. Therefore all girls truly want jerks, though they may insist they want a 'nice' guy'."
It's a whole bunch of wrong.
Nice Guys are also jerks. They just think they're too nice for girls to like them. There's a martyrdom to it, and a sense of entitlement, and egos way out of proportion.
The 'friendzone' is one of the more pernicious ideas of late - that being 'only' friends with a woman is some sort of punishment. If you think like that, you deserve neither girl friends nor a girlfriend.
Why does this irk some feminists (as well as non-feminists)? Because it's BS. The Nice Guys are, by and large, not nice.
^^ also, this. i think this is one of the most accurate and succinct posts on this thread.
Why thank you.

Now, was the tenner in UK pounds or Canadian dollars?
Thanks Hopper! You may have temporarily restored some of my faith in men. (which will shortly be destroyed again by reading s'more of these posts.

as i am what could be called a female semi-transvestite (i do makeup and hair but not women's clothes), he's a personal hero of mine. he describes himself as a male lesbian--my brother (who is gay) and i joke around about how i have more of a gay man's mentality than he does, which i guess makes me a female gay man?
love this bit....
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf3WTUsQhpA&feature=player_detailpage&list=PLsIF1Xvnu7ld7iGP5wPKpn7zvCP2Qendq[/youtube]
i've had similar experiences with the canadian equivalent (late-night visits to convenience stores in bad neighbourhoods).
I don't have a cell phone (neither does anyone in the house, including my daughter), I don't have an IPad & I don't have any of the current techy stuff of which you speak. I might buy them, if I actually Needed them, but I don't.
The 'stuff' I do have was provided by Me, or my daughter. One t.v., & one computer for gaming. End of list.... All bought by the people in the house that don't have a penis.
Maybe you run with a different crowd, but I don't expect the world, or a man to provide me with the latest gadgetry. I'm not into gadgets, Prada footwear, or $500.00 purses. (I don't carry a purse. & my shoes & boots fit fine even if they were bought on sale @ the end of the season.
All I've ever wanted from anybody, male or female, is some mutual respect, not Stuff! (& I can assure you that I will never get that respect, less I become a more conspicuous consumer, rather than a responsible consumer!)
If all this extraneous 'stuff' is oriented toward women, why do they have to make 2nd. versions of it to try & attract a female market?
As for being obsessed with nice guys, I'm not obsessed with guys at all. Nice, not nice, jerks & worse. I'm at a point were it all just rolls off me like water off a duck.
"Some of them want to abuse you. Some of them want to be abused." None of that is in my job description.
,
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.
So you want a pat on the back for not being a rapist? Maybe a 2nd. one for working hard? O.K. "pat, pat". there ya go!
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.
Since I don't know you, I probably couldn;t...

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.
So if the topic is rape, do you want me to say, "Kudos to those who don't rape?" The stat speaks for it's self . Not all men are rapists. We don't spend a lot of time thanking people for not raping, or not robbing banks. Do you think we should thank people for behaving in a normal fashion?
[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'm sorry, but if you want me to support patriarchy, you have asked the wrong person. All those run away daddies out there. Not supporting their kids, too busy having a good time to care about them.
There are a lot of dads who would like to spend time with children & are prevented from doing so. My late husband was divorced & the only time he got to see his 2 kids was when it was 'inconvenient' for his ex wife to have them around.
My own father could have walked past me on the street & neither of us would have recognized each other for most of my life. I did spend a few hours with him as an adult @ family functions, & I"M SO GRATEFUL TO MY MOTHER FOR LEAVING HIM! He abused alcohol, he abused her both physically & mentally, & I could see how he just made both of us feel so Insignificant & like Nothings when we were around him even briefly. He was good at that!
So, I've seen it from both sides
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.
[b][b] I don't really see what any of your post has to do with my post. Are most of the gadgets in the world created with women in mind? Not usually. Except for high end fashion, most pricey 'stuff' is for the male market. Men still have the most disposable income, so it makes sense.
Have I even asked for expensive things from men? NEVER! Have I ever gotten expensive things from men? NEVER! Would I return them if that happened? YES!! I asked my husband to return my wedding ring because I thought that he had spent too much money on it.
As for sticking up for men.... I would if they already didn't have so many apologists & availers. They don't need me. [/b][/b]
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?
You keep using the term 'boys"? Are you referring to males under 16 ot 18? Boys are boys & men are men. The younger ones have an excuse for being ignorant.
Feminists are picked apart on a daily basis, & not even on political matters. What planet are you on? (Planet "Male" no doubt!)
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.
Well shouldn't you be taking that up with your State, not me? I'm not a U.S. citizen so I doubt I'd have any influence, even if I were male, or a feminist assisting your argument.
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 fine, but what if the experience fits what others have experienced? Should it not get mentioned? I had a rape attempt made on me when I was 3 months pregnant, by a crazy drunk neighbour. He was angry that my husband & I actively prevented him from beating the hell out of his wife, & terrorizing his young daughter nearly every weekend for a decade! He did not attempt to assault my husband, because my husband was a Lot Bigger than me. He thought that I was small enough to handle. He was wrong.
I had a similar experience to LKL. In the absolute 100% absence of my own father, my mother was supporting herself & her family by herself. On the other hand, my father was closing bars nightly, & spending time & $$$ with hookers & a string of girlfriends. So WHICH influence do you think was the best for me ?
Rolling Eyes
Seriously? Your personal family experiences challenge the statistics of the last several thousand years?
Let's look at typical measures of who is "in charge."
Who controls the money flow, on average (see earnings, above)?
Who controls the government, on average?
Who controls industry, on average?
Who controls religion, on average?
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?
I'M GONNA PUT THIS IN CAPS BECAUSE I"M YELLING! I HAVE NO EXPERIENCES TO DEAL WITH OR COMMENT ON EXCEPT MY OWN! WHY DO YOU EXPECT ME TO COMMENT ON SOME ONE ELSE'S EXPERIENCES!? I WASN'T THERE! I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED! IF YOU WANT TO KNOW, GO ASK THE PERSON WHO POSTED THAT, NOT ME! !
[Edit:] It wasn't just 'any guy' that they did that to (from the same post):

That is very admirable! He was clearly an intelligent man, who was before his time!
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).
LOOK BUDDY, I don;'t know or care what your issues are with Your mother. I am not her. Here is my quote:
" Maybe you run with a different crowd, but I don't expect the world, or a man to provide me with the latest gadgetry. I'm not into gadgets, Prada footwear, or $500.00 purses. (I don't carry a purse. & my shoes & boots fit fine even if they were bought on sale @ the end of the season.
[b]
I do not expect a man to provide me with things, expensive or not! Why would I? My husband died over 9 years ago. Should I beg in the street as some widows do in the United Arab Emerates?
Should I try to "hook a man", because I'm too feeble to do things for myself? That would be the ultimate form of prostitution. Marrying a man for 'stuff', not because you cared about him.
I'm just saying I don't know of any women personally that have benefited in an unrealistic way from men. Not only do I not know any gold diggers, I don't know any men with gold to dig. See! We obviously travel in different circles.
Lots of Saudi men think that they're perfectly fine husbands. Their wives even agree with them:
And a lot of Saudi men & women are in living in Canada, & glad to be away from Saudi Arabia, Sharia Law etc.
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.
I'm poor & I also have a lot of self respect! I wouldn't trade my life for any of these women's "existences".
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.
This is not a gender war. This is a quest for equality! If you chose to think of it as a 'war' then I choose to think of your attitude as an affluent, entitled product, of a substandard, out dated dogma factory.
If there was strife in your life due to gender equality, Join The Club! So is everyone's life affected.
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.
You have picked so many accusations, that I'm not sure what exactly you are talking about now.
FYI, I was born Muslim, but due to the fact of my father being a self indulgent cruel jack ass, my Mother left him after 1 too many beatings.
OH B.S.! ! Poor You! Poor lil rich ex pat Saudi. Note that in the passage from the Kuran below Zaid , doesn't get a lot of say in what happens to her.

: "So when Zaid had accomplished what he would of her, then We (Allah) gave her in marriage to thee (Muhammad), so that there should not be any fault in the believers, touching the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished what they would of them; and Allah’s commandment must be performed." (33:37)
"Equality" for spoiled, rich American girls. You say that you're not in the US; what do you know about this? Why did you even reply to my earlier post?
I was cleaning out lathes in a machine shop when I was 12. I was almost stabbed when I was 7, and only got away by fighting the guy off. My mother was a closet sadist who took her anger out on her kids because we couldn't fight back. That's common here.
I didn't ask for your support, don't want it, and doubt that you have anything real to give.
??????? Women account for ~70% of US consumer spending.
Every state in the US.
I can see why.
Last edited by NobodyKnows on 20 Mar 2014, 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It matters as far as this conversation goes, and they are. See, it's quite simple. Why do some people, including a lot of feminists, take a disliking to Nice Guys? It's because Nice Guys are jerks.
(Ah, you believe in that alpha/omega stuff. That explains something.)
And? What does it matter? Non-rhetorically, sincerely, what does it matter to you? And what do you think feminists should do about it? Do you think feminists should care about men who are lonely and struggling, should take up their fight? Do you think it's because of feminism that some men are lonely and struggling? Do you think feminists all have the hots for 'alpha males', and such couples mock those of 'low status' as often as possible?
I would guess one reason some Nice Guys may be 'lonely and struggling' is because they are jerks.
Seeing as anything you have to say on the matter is a variation on 'but it's not faaaaiiirrrr!', I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that, actually, you want to know why feminists don't like - indeed, have an 'obsessive hatred' towards - you.
wrong,low status men(''nice guys'') are hated by feminist,no matter
if their jerks or not. Jerk is just an excuse they use.
Alot of jerks have GF.
"Equality" for spoiled, rich American girls. You say that you're not in the US; what do you know about this? Why did you even reply to my earlier post?
I am Canadian. I replied because you pretty much attacked my post. I am neither 'rich nor spoiled' Can you say the same about yourself?
I was cleaning out lathes in a machine shop when I was 12. I was almost stabbed when I was 7, and only got away by fighting the guy off. My mother was a closet sadist who took her anger out on her kids because we couldn't fight back. That's common here. Unless you have some real sob stories, get off it.
No, you are truly King of Sob Stories!

I didn't ask for your support, don't want it, and doubt that you have anything real to give.
[i] I doubt that you have any relevant opinions, apart for hating your mother. No I have no support for your opinions.[/i]
??????? Women account for ~70% of US consumer spending.
Yes because We are the ones sent out to the store to get stuff, cuz some husbands are too busy watching Sports or playing on the computer. Groceries. washers, driers, refrigerators, kid's clothes, school supplies, birthday, Xmas, anniversary etc. presents & cards, etc. etc. For some reason we are looked on as 'experts' in these areas.

Every state in the US.
I Don't live there. Do You actually Live there? It seems like you would be a lot happier some where else?

Last edited by NinsMom on 20 Mar 2014, 10:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

love this bit....
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf3WTUsQhpA&feature=player_detailpage&list=PLsIF1Xvnu7ld7iGP5wPKpn7zvCP2Qendq[/youtube]
i've had similar experiences with the canadian equivalent (late-night visits to convenience stores in bad neighbourhoods).

Good on yer Starvingartist!


I've had similar experiences in not so late visits in a good neighbourhood.

Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Feminist professor loses job after Islamist group demands... |
29 May 2025, 12:31 am |
Elon Musk is obsessed with America’s falling birth rate |
07 May 2025, 2:11 am |
Nice to meet you all! |
17 Jun 2025, 7:12 pm |
What to do when people aren't nice?
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
05 Apr 2025, 12:36 pm |