mr_engineer

Is 'neediness' a real thing or is it another shaming-tactic dating-coaches came up with to shame people into buying their products?!

Let's settle the nice guy debate once and for all. In a capitalistic society, the reason people behave nicely with each other, is because they want to have a good relationship with that person, for their own selfish reasons. Not out of the goodness of their hearts, not 'out of love'. You will behave very nicely with a famous person and you will ignore a homeless person on the street (sucks for the homeless person, but it's true). Let's apply this logic to the dating-situation. If a man behaves nicely with a woman because he values that relationship for his own selfish reasons, what is wrong with that? Does this make the niceness an 'act'? It is conditional, for sure. But why is that so bad? An argument goes that 'a real nice person would not ignore the homeless person, they would help the homeless person'. Fine. But, if I value the relationship with the famous person more than the relationship with the homeless person, I'm going to be nicer to the famous person!

My honest opinion is that this whole talk of 'nice guys finish last' is internet nonsense. It was a tumblr trend that started in the early 2010s. Since then, everyone's been coming up with BS rationalizations as to why this is in fact the case. It is common sense that relationships work better when people aren't shouting and screaming at each other, i.e., they are behaving nicely with each other.

By 'theoretical nonsense', I meant, saying 'women want a kind man' only to negate me saying that 'being nice is important to have a good relationship'. What you're saying is also theoretical nonsense. How on earth are we supposed to prove to women that we can 'kill everyone in the room'?! Should we actually do that?! Will women get wet then?! What are you even saying?!

For some weird reason, everybody has equated 'nice' and 'pussy' and everyone collectively believes in this false equivalency. Where in the definition of 'nice' does it say that 'nice people don't face their fears'?!

This is theoretical nonsense.

@Onecirrus It is definitely healthier than marrying someone because of looks. Strategically smarter.

Others can also weigh in.

@Leo Gura What does 'be yourself' mean, when said to nice guys?

Your first impulse response, which was 'a "nice guy" is someone who is too afraid to be real with a girl because he worships her' made sense to me. In this response, though, I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'being himself'. In fact, if you tell them to 'be themselves', they're going to say 'I am being myself! I am being nice to her because I value this relationship'.

When a divorce happens, we have a reflex reaction to feel sorry for the woman and to blame the man for it. Let's look deeper into that. Why is that our first reaction?

The first thing you have to understand is that the rules of dating, or the mainstream dating-coaching or pick-up advice is for men who think with their dicks. Aka, men who aren't like you! This entire dating-strategy is to get laid. What the actual point of dating is and where this is all headed is irrelevant to these individuals, it's just 'me want sex so me approach women'. The reason you're not like this, is because you have higher standards in women. You don't see 'experience' with women who aren't that feminine as worth it. A very important point to note here, is that in the mainstream, dating, relationships and marriage have been romanticized to no end, to the degree that people equate these things to 'love'. They will just use the word 'being in love' when they're just in an arrangement that logistically works. There is little to no awareness of genuine compatibility in relationships when it comes to future plans and aspirations. So, what you should do, is you should date correctly. Meaning, you should date to find someone compatible! Which is the actual point of dating. Ignore all of the pick-up guys bragging about how much they scored with women, understand what you want in a woman and date strategically. That'll make dating smooth and effortless for you.

The 'finding yourself' is supposed to happen before you date, not 'through the man'. It's a relationship, not a cult. That's no excuse. The 'wrong man' doesn't necessarily mean someone who doesn't meet your 'real man' standards, it could just be someone who's incompatible. And compatibility is 100% your responsibility, man or woman. Why even climb the mountain, then?! Don't do it, then!! It's a really crappy thing to say to a man, that he can't add value to her life, that being with her is 'making her life tougher'. 'Acting weak'. Yeah. Makes a lot of sense. Again, that's no excuse. If you use sex as a manipulation, that's your fault, bottom-line. Why are you trying to portray women as 'poor little victims' who 'had no option but to use sex as a manipulation'?! It's possible to directly communicate about and resolve issues! If you don't value someone's leadership-skills, why marry them?! If there are issues that are relatively recent, you have to be solution-oriented and actually do something to resolve them, rather than make it the other person's job to fix it for you. Yupp. All women are power-hungry monsters who 'smell weakness' and 'jump on the opportunity'. So you can deflect more shit onto men?! You have already decided that my list makes no sense, so why should I add more to it?! Why do you hate men so much?!

Out of the blue deciding that 'she wants to find herself' so she steps out on the marriage, instead of finding herself before getting into dating. Cheating Choosing the wrong man (this one goes both ways) Being argumentative and adversarial Spreading rumors about her husband through gossip, creating a conflict-ridden environment Using sex as a manipulative tactic, destabilizing the relationship Being hyper-critical, nagging Being a control-freak, being cynical You want me to continue?

@NoSelfSelf Why can't this same logic be applied to women? Even if the man is the leader (which people will call you sexist for saying, but let's say it's true), shouldn't women also be held accountable for the failure of a marriage?! Or, is a marriage entirely a man's responsibility?

Hi everyone, I want all of your opinions on this one. (Especially Leo's) This is a good one. Should women be allowed to falsely accuse men of things they've not done?

We need to make men guilty until proven innocent, unlike other crimes. Right. Why, though?! Is it because 'men are narcissistic'?! Because 'men think with their dicks'?! What man-hating thing do you believe that made you say that? Where does our objectivity go when a woman opens her mouth?

Objectively, it's obvious. But, the level of dismissiveness people have to men reporting being falsely accused by women, got me thinking - is it socially acceptable to do this to men?! That's why the question.

@Leo Gura Let's get back to the topic of the thread. I asked a question - is it ethical for a woman to falsely accuse a man? By 'ethical', I mean, socially. Legally, of course, we all have the right to sue each other. But socially, is it right? To jeopardize someone's life and career and safety, just because?!

Both of these are two sides of the same coin, honestly. We don't believe real victims because of false accusations! The reality of false accusations is precisely why real victims aren't being believed.

Oh, so you need to be falsely accused to drive the point home that 'it's not a good idea to assault women'. The fact that it's wrong isn't enough for you. Got it. The problem is that the crowd around both of you would beat the crap out of you before you could be 'calm' about it.

Let's say, you're standing behind a woman in a queue and, for shits and giggles, she decides to yell 'he touched my ass', pointing the finger at you. What 'consequences' would you be able to give to her for doing that? What if it got ugly for you? What would you do?

Okay. Thanks for your input. I dare the true at-heart SJWs here to say 'If cancel-culture has some casualties, that's okay'. Anyone bold enough to say that on this thread?

Oh, consequences are a long way off. My real question is - in principle, is it right or wrong to falsely accuse a man? Sometimes I get the sense here that people here would say that 'it's okay, why should we even give a shit about men? Are they oppressed?!'

For example, here's one place where the way men are treated could improve. When men say 'this is not okay', people associate this with their own dictatorial father-figures doing something similar. So, they will project their daddy-issues onto you and tell you that 'you have an ego, and that's bad'. This is why people have no issue telling men that they have an ego. As a result, having boundaries in and of itself is becoming more and more taboo for men, which is making the world more and more dangerous for men. Pay very close attention to your rationalizations of 'oh, he has an ego' and 'oh, he's had negative experiences and this is warping his perception, because he has an ego' when you read this. I'm calling this out right here.