Nice girls move to the end of the line?

[chevalier]

*Women can be just as scared of getting hurt, as men. So, chev…it’s possible that women might find your ‘‘tactics’’ appealing, but they put you into a friend category out of fear. *

First of all, it’s not just tactics, I just am that way, well, except when I do have to make a tactical choice. Anyway, personally, my theory would be that I end up in the friend category for 1) lack of thrill (I can’t but also won’t keep up the drama consistently), 2) lack of mystery factor (actually, there is a lot, but it takes digging and I don’t act like a mystery man), 3) lack of unpredictability (preference to be truthful and reliable and to build up or preserve, not to undermine their certainty), 4) lack of scare and danger, meaning a woman always knows what to expect from me and that is never anything putting her in danger, meaning there’s no playing with fire.

The four factors add up to boringness that no amount of literary talent, vivid imagination, general knowledge or academic education can overcome and no physical or other attractiveness or emotional connection make up for, so no matter what you are or do => friend.

(This omits the problem of lack of sexual advances potentially clashing with expectations.)

Obviously, my theory may be wrong, but I can’t come up with better and this one seems to find confirmation in practice.

 

[whatevergirl]

Yes, I didn’t mean ‘‘tactics’’ as though you put on a show or something, chev. I meant how you come across to women, your style. Might be better phrasing. Sorry for stating it as such, earlier.

 

[chevalier]

No worries, I should’ve made it come with a smiley or something. Just meant to mention the difference, not to complain.

 

[whatevergirl]

First of all, it’s not just tactics, I just am that way, well, except when I do have to make a tactical choice. Anyway, personally, my theory would be that I end up in the friend category for 1) lack of thrill (I can’t but also won’t keep up the drama consistently), 2) lack of mystery factor (actually, there is a lot, but it takes digging and I don’t act like a mystery man), 3) lack of unpredictability (preference to be truthful and reliable and to build up or preserve, not to undermine their certainty), 4) lack of scare and danger, meaning a woman always knows what to expect from me and that is never anything putting her in danger, meaning there’s no playing with fire.

The four factors add up to boringness that no amount of literary talent, vivid imagination, general knowledge or academic education can overcome and no physical or other attractiveness or emotional connection make up for, so no matter what you are or do => friend.

(This omits the problem of lack of sexual advances potentially clashing with expectations.)

Obviously, my theory may be wrong, but I can’t come up with better and this one seems to find confirmation in practice.

Has it ever crossed your mind that you might be interested in the wrong types of women? Hardly most…I’d say remotely few…women like dangerous men who play headgames, making them guess, and keeping them off balance. Truly. If you believe that the women you date are not interested in a good, solid, predictable, honest, kind man who doesn’t play games…you should be grateful they have ‘‘friended’’ you.

 

[whatevergirl]

No worries, I should’ve made it come with a smiley or something. Just meant to mention the difference, not to complain.

LOL–I know. But, it did sort of look like I was implying you have a lil grab bag of tricks up your sleeve…’‘tactics.’’ hee hee

 

[chevalier]

Has it ever crossed your mind that you might be interested in the wrong types of women? Hardly most…I’d say remotely few…women like dangerous men who play headgames, making them guess, and keeping them off balance. Truly. If you believe that the women you date are not interested in a good, solid, predictable, honest, kind man who doesn’t play games…you should be grateful they have ‘‘friended’’ you.

Actually, there is always the possibility, but I don’t think that’s the case. Generally, at my age, women tend to be either married (or “committed”) or fear commitment, few are simply available. As for me, you shouldn’t get the impression it’s all preppy, every button done, all quiet and no speaking out of turn. I sure do have more flair and colour than that! Someone expecting always one mood, always positive, always at work or in bed, not needing entertainment, never pulling one off, never doing anything out of the ordinary, never rebelling against the system, would neither be happy with me nor make me happy either (I *am *an adventurer type and a loose cannon to an extent). The point is basically that when you’re no threat to the woman, you don’t undermine her certainty and she doesn’t have a mess in her head thanks to you, then you’re a friend, you’re a wet blanket. She *has *you, so you aren’t precious, so you aren’t worth getting. The type that’s more resistant to taming, that one is more worthy than you are because it takes more effort to land him. A sorry misconception of the laws of nature (or economy), but try to correct it! And the end of the day, this dark mysterious lure is the power.

LOL–I know. But, it did sort of look like I was implying you have a lil grab bag of tricks up your sleeve…’‘tactics.’’ hee hee

Now that you say… That wouldn’t have been *entirely *wrong, lol. (I do know more tricks than your typical bad boy.)

 

[whatevergirl]

*chev, definitely most women I know are not like that at all…and they are beautiful, smart, well adjusted types…who are married and some not married. Those who are not married are not interested in playing games with men, or men messing with their heads…or ‘‘the dark mysterious lure,’’ as you say. That could be the name of a Japanese anime movie. lol

Keep being yourself…you’ll meet someone someday, who will appreciate it. I promise you, it will happen. But, if you start believing this about women, I caution you, it can cause you to grow bitter about things. Be careful, some women want that bad boy type that they have to ‘‘reign’’ in like a wild stallion…but, many don’t. Trust me, many don’t. *

 

[chevalier]

I already am bitter, I just keep making the last exception every time and getting hurt every time. I have every reason to trust you, but at the same time every reason that while generally the nice guys, the gents, whatever you want to call it, get it flashier throughout and more popular acclaim and do indeed finish last, the factors I mentioned reign the field rather invariably when it comes to concrete results, with the exception that the well-adjusted folks will generally find each other before 25 and marry. It doesn’t really come down to a single thing like uncertainty or darkness, perhaps, but what is rather invariable is that old-fashioned kindness is out of vogue (and mostly seen as a self-destructive liability), egoism is expected as the norm and encouraged, actual interest is seen as a weakness, care about another is seen as a weakness or even a perversion, having *feelings *as opposed to the cool and normal sex drive is a liability. This *is *the common outlook, from people who want to have fun and play cool to people who seek to protect others from harm by telling them how to play it self-preservingly. Trying to break this circle is quite a countercultural activity, ironically, so who knows, one might even become a bad boy!

 

[whatevergirl]

The thing is though…how many women marry those bad boys? How many bad boys make good husbands and dads? There are many men who never grow up…and make horrible husbands and fathers. The truth is, women might like to date the bad boys (for a time) but, in the end, they choose a gentleman to have as a husband. Have to change the way you view it, that’s all.

 

[Jay82]

Anyway, personally, my theory would be that I end up in the friend category for 1) lack of thrill (I can’t but also won’t keep up the drama consistently), 2) lack of mystery factor (actually, there is a lot, but it takes digging and I don’t act like a mystery man), 3) lack of unpredictability (preference to be truthful and reliable and to build up or preserve, not to undermine their certainty), 4) lack of scare and danger, meaning a woman always knows what to expect from me and that is never anything putting her in danger, meaning there’s no playing with fire.

I think the four things you listed above about yourself also apply to me very much. I think all of those traits are desirable for the most part, but I’ve come to a conclusion they don’t really help you in the early stages of a relationship. In fact, they probably hurt you to some extent because you get ‘friended’. But conversely, I have seen many friendships turn into great relationships.

I tend to think those characteristics appeal more towards women in their 30s and up rather than 20s. When you are younger it seems that - predictability, reliability, etc isn’t as appealing. At least from personal experience.

The four factors add up to boringness that no amount of literary talent, vivid imagination, general knowledge or academic education can overcome and no physical or other attractiveness or emotional connection make up for, so no matter what you are or do => friend.

Obviously, my theory may be wrong, but I can’t come up with better and this one seems to find confirmation in practice.

I also agree from personal experience. I have a very active lifestyle. I travel often, I organize group trips, I am involved in various organizations, I run sports teams and
I’m involved in several sports leagues, I lead various things at work, plan/attend all sorts of social events, and many other things, but in the end I’m quite a ‘predictable/reliable’ person who does a lot interesting things. You know what you will get from me.

‘Nice girls’ also have this same issue I think, because they don’t initially come across as ‘exciting’ or ‘thrill seeking’ or they are just overshadowed by the girls who steal the spotlight with actions/clothing that are very attention getting. Its unfortunate that even some decent guys tend to ignore them, at least temporarily.

 

[chevalier]

*The thing is though…how many women marry those bad boys? How many bad boys make good husbands and dads? There are many men who never grow up…and make horrible husbands and fathers. The truth is, women might like to date the bad boys (for a time) *

Too many marry them and I can show you a ready online collection of stories. How many of them make good husbands and dads? May all of them do, if you ask me, hope they undergo conversion of heart, but thing is it will likely take a lifetime (not like it’s impossible), plus there will be a lot of misery… after all, a bad husband is still a husband and there can be only one husband!

but, in the end, they choose a gentleman to have as a husband. Have to change the way you view it, that’s all.

That is a depressing part, actually. I hesitate to continue, but I suppose there’s no going back, so I have to. Basically, I don’t take it against someone that he (everybody is a he ) has had a difficult life with a lot of harm done to him as a result of his belief in love, loyalty, sticking through things. In fact, I’m sympathetic to that, as it coincides with my own values. I will gladly nurse the wounded sparrow back to health, hoping she will never run into that kind of treatment again. However, a woman who actually *chose *to hang out with the bad guys until she would feel the nudge to go and find a gent for a husband, now oh no, mademoiselle, you gotta do a lot of solitary thinking first, certainly such a woman would succeed in overcoming my deep-seated inhibitions against lecturing women. And I was a Latin tutor once.

 

[whatevergirl]

Just curious–why does every date have to ‘‘mean’’ something? Some women just like to have a nice dinner out with someone…a few laughs…a movie…over time…it* might **lead to something. But, dating in general can be more fun than not, if you don’t view it through such serious lenses every time. I am not saying to become a serial dater…but, live a little…and have fun. Not every date needs to be the end all be all…don’t over extend yourself either until you know someone better. It is not a woman’s fault, if by the second or third date, a man has delusions of grandeur…when she isn’t there yet, just because the sheer timeframe hasn’t been long enough.

No? Yes?*

 

[whatevergirl]

*I didn’t mean to imply you’re delusional.

Maybe illusions of grandeur…

Ok, nevermind. *

 

[chevalier]

I think the four things you listed above about yourself also apply to me very much. I think all of those traits are desirable for the most part, but I’ve come to a conclusion they don’t really help you in the early stages of a relationship. In fact, they probably hurt you to some extent because you get ‘friended’.

Let’s not get there, but I could tell you about hurt (no arrogance intended, I’m sure you’ve seen your battles, but I have a collection of rather scary stories).

But conversely, I have seen many friendships turn into great relationships.

I haven’t. One that seemed great until it wasn’t and it was mine. One that was kinda strange because it was a mixed friends-lovers kind of thing for my highschool classmate, then hey, those classmates of mine who married each other, yup, those two, but I think that’s it.

I tend to think those characteristics appeal more towards women in their 30s and up rather than 20s. When you are younger it seems that - predictability, reliability, etc isn’t as appealing. At least from personal experience.

Oh well, it doesn’t take a mind-reader to guess what I thought in reply. Let’s just point at the passage about the wounded sparrow and the smart *mademoiselle *above for reference. I would gladly collect another batch of scars dealing with the former, but the latter has to renounce her smartness before she gets anything from me a friend would not get.

I also agree from personal experience. I have a very active lifestyle. I travel often, I organize group trips, I am involved in various organizations, I run sports teams and
I’m involved in several sports leagues, I lead various things at work, plan/attend all sorts of social events, and many other things, but in the end I’m quite a ‘predictable/reliable’ person who does a lot interesting things. You know what you will get from me.

I see. Well, welcome on board then.

‘Nice girls’ also have this same issue I think, because they don’t initially come across as ‘exciting’ or ‘thrill seeking’ or they are just overshadowed by the girls who steal the spotlight with actions/clothing that are very attention getting. Its unfortunate that even some decent guys tend to ignore them, at least temporarily.

Dunno… I think I have the same kind of thing with the nice girls too.

 

[chevalier]

Just curious–why does every date have to ‘‘mean’’ something? Some women just like to have a nice dinner out with someone…a few laughs…a movie…over time…it* might ***lead to something. But, dating in general can be more fun than not, if you don’t view it through such serious lenses every time. I am not saying to become a serial dater…but, live a little…and have fun. Not every date needs to be the end all be all…don’t over extend yourself either until you know someone better. It is not a woman’s fault, if by the second or third date, a man has delusions of grandeur…when she isn’t there yet, just because the sheer timeframe hasn’t been long enough.

No? Yes?

Disagree.

Self-control, body language and general knowledge of human nature are not arcane science and any well-rounded person past highschool should be well aware of the effect of actions, words and other choices on people. There’s a reason one doesn’t flirt with everybody.

As for time-frames, those are no-one’s fault (except maybe people who go OC over expected schedules), but again, it’s no arcane science that two different systems will generally react at different rates, so some people will get the chemistry sooner, some later. The typical reaction is that “oops, busted! you allowed yourself to fall for me; next one, please!” which is waste of human resources.

I didn’t mean to imply you’re delusional.

Maybe illusions of grandeur…

Ok, nevermind.

Humble pie?

 

[Magicsilence]

chevalier, I think WG has got you covered here, love is an emotional thing, and you’re looking at it like a technical contract

At Mass yesterday I was surprised at how many young ladies there were in there, 15, 20 who I found attractive - brunette all the way. And this was at just one mass, at one Church. Shame the lady that caught my eye disappeared before communion - she’s missing out, but what can I do?

Life is too short to be agonizing over tiny details, nice girls and guys - remember you have to reach up and pick the fruit from the tree, it rarely just falls into your hand.

 

[chevalier]

chevalier, I think WG has got you covered here, love is an emotional thing, and you’re looking at it like a technical contract

By far not. I argue precisely for love and against schedules, expectations of mind-reading etc. What you refer to as technical discussion was a way of pointing out the need for consideration of other peoples’ feelings. Let’s put some love in love.

Life is too short to be agonizing over tiny details, nice girls and guys - remember you have to reach up and pick the fruit from the tree, it rarely just falls into your hand.

You’re talking to a bunch of people who’ve done quite a bit of fishing.

 

[doanli]

This is sort of a sequel to the nice guys finish last thread. I’m not venting or complaining really just going by what I see and lately it does seem that a lot of men would rather get some and put up with being treated badly or used rather then dating a nice girl or person who would treat them better. Defies logic but there you go! Maybe I just know bad examples. Women let themselves be treated badly too…that I’ll never understand but to each his own. What do you think!

It happened to me several times in my twenties (in the 80s) so I know what you say is the truth!

 

[whatevergirl]

*Flirting doesn’t mean commitment. I think the problem here is that some view dating as a contract…that must lead to something if ‘xyz’ takes place in the course of ‘‘x’’ amount of dates. I think that if someone has the notion that a date must turn into something …he/she will show strain, and tension…possibly unbeknownst to him/her…but it can be picked up by the other party. It’s best to go on a date with a more carefree attitude…an attitude to have fun, get acquainted…and see if a ‘‘next step’’ needs to happen. If you decide that a next step should happen, you set up another date. By the second date, you get further acquainted…then decide if another next step should happen and so on. But, if a person is going into dating with too serious a notion of it…that could very well be the problem, and the problem gets blamed on the other person. (he/she wants a bad boy/girl type…oh woe is me…)

Bottom line is if someone likes you…the next steps will happen rather effortlessly. Believe me or not…I have dated a lot, and when my husband and I ‘‘knew’’…it became effortless. Dating shouldn’t be like taking on a second job–shouldn’t be work.

Don’t take yourself so seriously. You won’t get hurt as much. *

 

[whatevergirl]

By far not. I argue precisely for love and against schedules, expectations of mind-reading etc. What you refer to as technical discussion was a way of pointing out the need for consideration of other peoples’ feelings. Let’s put some love in love.

But what do you mean by that? ‘‘Consideration of other people’s feelings?’’ If a girl doesn’t like a guy after a few dates, she isn’t being inconsiderate by not wanting to see him anymore. If you could explain?

You’re talking to a bunch of people who’ve done quite a bit of fishing.