Men's Rights Advocates! Come out and plaaaaaayyyyy

[N35t0r]

******* good loking guys tend to score with the ******* good looking girls.

average-looking 'nice guys' get to be BFF with ******* good looking girls, complain when ******* good looking girls would rather date ******* good-looking guys (while at the same time very probably paying no attention to average-looking nice girls), but rather than say, put an end to the 'friendship' or even TALK ABOUT IT with her FFS, because in the end its easier to be the victim and blame someone else rather than admit that they are ****ing up and/or that they might not 'deserve' whatever stupid submissive princess idea they built up in their own heads.

[N35t0r]

Yeah, on rereading you're right.



The idea I think is of being entitled to be doing at least as well as the serial abuser guy. Which leads some people to believe in some cargo cult thing where being an ******* is the key to succeeding with women because they see that *******s in their own lives who are, in fact, successful with women.

And this is not taking into account why what said serial abuser guy does is considered as successful in the firs place.

[C0ckney]

talking about the picture in the OP, i recently saw that film, a recommendation from my wife, and absolutely hated it.

[iHateFatPeople]

Yeah, on rereading you're right.



The idea I think is of being entitled to be doing at least as well as the serial abuser guy. Which leads some people to believe in some cargo cult thing where being an ******* is the key to succeeding with women because they see that *******s in their own lives who are, in fact, successful with women.

Also, I think you're focusing too much on the sex part. If you really just want sex then you could always hire a prostitute, but the dateless "nice guys" aren't doing that.

Men like Elliot Rodger feel entitled to attractive women because they're arrogant *******s. If they resort to having sex with prostitutes, they don't get validation.

[MRT144]

Men like Elliot Rodger feel entitled to attractive women because they're arrogant *******s. If they resort to having sex with prostitutes, they don't get validation.

Exactly! This is what I've been trying to say - a lot of these people want to be societally validated for being a "winner" by ****ing women that are deemed to be extremely attractive by society. When they can't attain that because of the hurdles they put in front of themselves they don't blame themselves for having a stupid dream or desire, they blame women for everything they feel bad about in themselves.

[Sava]

The idea I think is of being entitled to be doing at least as well as the serial abuser guy.

The solution is to not believe in fake scenarios involving people who don't actually exist.

[kentonio]

They're still hitting on a nugget of truth there, which is that women don't necessarily consider "niceness" more important than whatever the serial domestic abuser has got--probably a combination of physical attractiveness and confidence.

Why would they? If a guy was in a room with a vivacious, confident funny girl, and a shy but 'nice' quiet girl, which one is he likely to be more attracted to? It's not about looks (or rather looks play a far smaller role in it that people think), it's about being a person that is enjoyable to be around, and who values themselves enough to seem valuable to other people.

[regexcellent]

The solution is to not believe in fake scenarios involving people who don't actually exist.

People like that absolutely do exist and it's not even uncommon. The thing is, I wouldn't consider that "success" with women.

Why would they? If a guy was in a room with a vivacious, confident funny girl, and a shy but 'nice' quiet girl, which one is he likely to be more attracted to? It's not about looks (or rather looks play a far smaller role in it that people think), it's about being a person that is enjoyable to be around, and who values themselves enough to seem valuable to other people.

Oh, I absolutely agree. And it could turn out that the confident funny girl is a huge ***** and everyone knew it and she would probably still be more desirable. In other words the "niceness" is orthogonal.

I want to be clear here, I'm not on the same side as the MRA folks.

[Lorizael]

The idea I think is of being entitled to be doing at least as well as the serial abuser guy.

The problem I see with this attitude is the idea that not getting to date/have sex with a woman is seen as a failure rather than just a different outcome. I don't think women (or people, generally) rate others on a single reduced scale of awesomeness, with those highest on the scale being who a person dates and those lower relegated to friend status. I think we rate some people as being high on the friend scale, others as being high on the dating scale, and others still at various places in between.

[Sava]

People like that absolutely do exist and it's not even uncommon.

You're missing the point, as usual. Yes, people like that exist. However, the stereotype you have in your mind of "the serial abuser" is completely something you (or others) have made up. Divorce yourself from that delusion and start over. In fact, how about you (or others) just not worry about other people entirely and focus on yourself. Start there.

[Sava]

Just curious reg, what sort of real world experience are you basing all of this off of?

[Jon Miller]

While I wasn't really friend zoned much at all, I definitely believed in it (in my college and graduate school years).

I did recognise that the main issue is that I didn't put myself out there enough. Part of putting yourself out there is saying "hey, I am interested in you" as well as actually talking to women (for many nerdy guys, both nice nerdy guys and not nice nerdy guys, the latter is the problem). If you are interested in someone and you pretend you aren't (that you are happy to just be friends), then it is obvious why that person shouldn't consider you a good partner. You don't value them enough to put yourself out there and are instead being creepy and dishonest.

My wife broke up with me in the 4th month of our relationship. She wanted to just be friends (Because she was going to leave Sweden and didn't want a long distance relationship and I had been pushing her about it), and I told her that I didn't feel that way about her and wasn't OK with that. It caused us to not see eachother (at all) for about a month, and then we met for her to return some books/etc to me. When we met it was obvious to both of us that we were still liked eachother and we agreed to some casual dates (no kissing, we weren't boyfriend+girlfriend, but it was not as just friends). At the end of the third date we ended up kissing (on the subway in Stockholm) and decided to be boyfriend+girlfriend again. I didn't push her about the long distance and a couple of weeks later when she left Sweden we were still boyfriend a girlfriend.

And now we are married.

It was a mistake to push her about the long distance/etc, but it also would have been a mistake to agree to be 'just friends'.

JM
(The long distance was very hard sometimes though.)

[regexcellent]

Sava, I think you're misinterpreting my posts as an analysis of my own circumstances, which couldn't be further from the truth.

I don't think I've ever been "stuck in the friendzone" personally.

[Sava]

Sava, I think you're misinterpreting my posts as an analysis of my own circumstances, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Reading comprehension never was your strong suit.

you (or others)

you (or others)

I don't think I've ever been "stuck in the friendzone" personally.

Whether you have or haven't is a matter of your own personal opinion. Such a thing doesn't exist unless you believe it does... or if the woman in question believes that it does and is behaving towards you in a manner consistent with that idea.

If you want to quantify the prevalence of such a belief among women, feel free to conduct or provide research to that end. Otherwise, this is pretty much just all bull****.

[DinoDoc]