I have a better answer to that question.Heh. Slightly related, I remember reading once that the perfect answer to a 35+ year old single women asking “where are all the nice guys?” is this: “back in your 20’s where you left them”.
Once I get the chance, I will do it my way.
Lol…yup.I have a better answer to that question.
Girl: Where are all the nice guys!?
Me: You threw men like me away so you can be with bad boys.
Your tactic is a lot better than what I had in mind.
I agree…get the hamster spinning then sit back and watch. Move on like nothing happened…“so…how about them Yankees”. This…oddly…will attract her to you.
My answer, is like a battleship firing at the enemy’s naval defenses due to the fact that the former has outranged and is now going to outgun the latter.
Short answer? Because they are sexually available.
As much as you think that, it’s 100% wrong. As I posted a moment ago, when women are thinking about sex their biology is thinking procreation. Isn’t it nifty how the Church is one of the few institutions that recognize that the two are intrinsically linked and can’t be separated no matter how much we delude ourselves? Anyway…
Damn…totally forgot about the repressing of ovulation and hormones with the Pill.
Dude…that is frackin hilarious.
Sexual attraction or any attraction isn’t just looks. I was replying to the idea that attraction in general (regardless of what the attractive qualities were) was not necessary or even wrong to focus on. To clarify, the way I see it, there may be other factors in spouse selection than immediate sexual attraction, e.g. we may pick a person who attracts us sexually only to a moderate extent but on the other hand has a good character or means a lot to us for other reasons. But subjective sexual attraction is not at all a factor that shouldn’t be considered.
Not in the trenches. I “fought” a guy in a narrow space using an arming sword (what RPG games call a “longsword”) while he had a Roman gladius (shortsword). It was massively difficult. You must consider practicality, not just style. Tough men get the job done. Style is an addition.Or a one-handed knightsword.
We aren’t exactly talking male attraction here but personally I’d like a woman who’d be able and willing to challenge me if I were in the wrong (while on the other hand not being an “assertive and wrong” type herself).
Much of that is a matter of style IMHO. It’s very true that being a good person doesn’t require being ‘nice’ in a superficial way. The expression ‘nice guy’ is often understood as being a doormat, and that understanding of “nice guy” isn’t what I’d like to identify myself with. On the other hand, there is value in being kind, polite, gentle, even meek, putting others first, being relentlessly positive, forgiving and accommodating, although this isn’t much appreciated by the secular world (because it isn’t cool/alpha enough). Exaggerated masculinity, especially one intentionally primitive, is something I find ridiculous.
She might ask you what kind of girls you have been pursuing so far. You might find yourself in need of making the conclusion that you haven’t exactly pursued the good girls.I have a better answer to that question.
Girl: Where are all the nice guys!?
Me: You threw men like me away so you can be with bad boys.
People nowadays have an exaggerated phobia of perceivedly condescending or judgemental speech. A bit like those 19th century (and earlier) emo idiots looking for an offence to their honour (e.g. someone spilt a drink on them) and a reason to duel.
Glad to hear it all ended well for you!
Two-handed swords are not very practical weapons.Not in the trenches. I “fought” a guy in a narrow space using an arming sword (what RPG games call a “longsword”) while he had a Roman gladius (shortsword). It was massively difficult. You must consider practicality, not just style. Tough men get the job done. Style is an addition.
And I’m saying a good character or what makes a person mean a lot to us for other reasons can be just as sexually stimulating, or even more so for some people, than the physical appearance of a person. I NEVER said sexual attraction wasn’t a factor to be considered, just that sexual attraction can be soooo much more than the physical appearances. I’m not arguing against sexual attraction at all, but that for SOME, not ALL, its not based on looks and looks alone, or even looks at all. And the marital embrace, the point and only point is not always physical sexual attraction. Some times its based on emotional or mental stimulation/sexual attraction. My husband may look his absolute worse, but if we’ve had a stimulating conversation, that is a complete turn on for me, more than when he looks his best.Sexual attraction or any attraction isn’t just looks. I was replying to the idea that attraction in general (regardless of what the attractive qualities were) was not necessary or even wrong to focus on. To clarify, the way I see it, there may be other factors in spouse selection than immediate sexual attraction, e.g. we may pick a person who attracts us sexually only to a moderate extent but on the other hand has a good character or means a lot to us for other reasons. But subjective sexual attraction is not at all a factor that shouldn’t be considered.
Not in the trenches. I “fought” a guy in a narrow space using an arming sword (what RPG games call a “longsword”) while he had a Roman gladius (shortsword). It was massively difficult. You must consider practicality, not just style. Tough men get the job done. Style is an addition.
Please use precise terms. An “arming sword” is a one-handed sword, referred to as a “longsword” in roleplaying games. A proper longsword is two-handed, games refer to it as a “greatsword”. At any rate, I was talking about a one-handed weapon. Two-handed weapons can actually be very practical, they deliver a big punch, you just need to find a proper application for them. Like any weapon, in some situations they’re great, in others they’re bad.Two-handed swords are not very practical weapons.
Also, you forgot ferocity.
Personally, I’d choose an arming sword.Please use precise terms. An “arming sword” is a one-handed sword, referred to as a “longsword” in roleplaying games. A proper longsword is two-handed, games refer to it as a “greatsword”. At any rate, I was talking about a one-handed weapon. Two-handed weapons can actually be very practical, they deliver a big punch, you just need to find a proper application for them. Like any weapon, in some situations they’re great, in others they’re bad.