"Mike (Remove X's to reply)" <aXeXnXeXaXs@gwis.com> wrote in message
news:gKGdndp9K9yIN9vdRVn-uQ@adelphia.com... Talked to someone else about this situation, and their response: What it MEANS is... It means your a good guy that doesn't totally ignore unattractive simply because they're unattractive. Take it as a compliment... or... if you find it offensive stop being so nice. People hit on other people when they perceive that the other person thinks that they're ok. I'll try to take it to heart... in the meantime, work on myself as best as possible, and hope someday that something will work out.

Not sure it is wholly responsive, just a thought (that I actually had last
night, but I'll claim it was fever induced).

I think (pardon me ladies) that the greatest way to "get laid" is to not try
and "get laid." I thought about "the dating scheme" and thought that were I
back in that mix, I would approach people just to talk to them, along the
lines of, "Hi, I noticed you and you looked like someone that would be fun
to talk with," and go from there. Completely removes the pressure, is an
honest opening and you find out about something. SO and I met kind of the
same way, and spent the evening talking about languages and traveling, not
which position was the best.

And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. I think it is
more somebody who has confidence in themselves, knows what their own
opinions are but makes room for others to have contradictory opinions
without giving up the ghost. To have to "demonstrate" that there are tons
of other women that would sleep with you is, pathetic.

Rambler

Xenos,

I don't think you quite got what Rambler was saying. Your
points are valid, but I think there is a more subtle and
important one. Also, I think your quoting is off. It
seems to my newsreader that Rambler wrote: 'And I think
this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. ...'.

There is more in-line.

Xenos the elder wrote:
Rambler wrote: "Mike (Remove X's to reply)" <aXeXnXeXaXs@gwis.com> wrote in message news:gKGdndp9K9yIN9vdRVn-uQ@adelphia.com... And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. I think it is more somebody who has confidence in themselves, A jerk has confidence. Part of he's confidence comes from not caring much of other peoples feelings. knows what their own opinions are but makes room for others to have contradictory opinions without giving up the ghost. A nice guy will try to make room for other peoples opinion and be very diplomatic. This effort will rob him of most of he's energy and he will look weak. The jerk on the other hand he just don't care. So he seams strong. Those who debate about the cons and pros of going to war seam weak. The guy who says lets bomb them looks strong.

Oops, here we are still stuck in the good guy/asshole categorization.
Let's, instead, use a variation of the confidence categorization and
look at two 'nice guys': one that has a good sense of himself
and what is important and valuable to him; and one that doesn't.

Both will try to make room for other peoples' opinion(s) and
will try to be diplomatic. The first nice guy, however, will
know where this room is being carved out of something that he
considers important and valuable. The second won't. The first
guy will (probably gently, at least at first) draw the line at
the things that are important to him, the second won't.

I think it is pretty easy to determine by observation which of
these two nice guys you are dealing with. The second is only
deserving of pity, scorn or derision, depending on your own state
of mind and being. The first is deserving of respect, and perhaps,
depending on what you and they value, of love.

My sense is that Rambler and Casey, for example, would fall into
the first category of 'nice guys.'. This is part of why I am using
them as general examples of where I would like to be in January '06.

-- Andy

> > Talked to someone else about this situation, and their response: What it MEANS is... It means your a good guy that doesn't totally ignore unattractive simply because they're unattractive. Take it as a compliment... or... if you find it offensive stop being so nice. People hit on other people when they perceive that the other person
thinks that they're ok. I'll try to take it to heart... in the meantime, work on myself as best
as possible, and hope someday that something will work out. Not sure it is wholly responsive, just a thought (that I actually had last night, but I'll claim it was fever induced). I think (pardon me ladies) that the greatest way to "get laid" is to not
try and "get laid." I thought about "the dating scheme" and thought that were
I back in that mix, I would approach people just to talk to them, along the lines of, "Hi, I noticed you and you looked like someone that would be fun to talk with," and go from there. Completely removes the pressure, is an honest opening and you find out about something. SO and I met kind of the same way, and spent the evening talking about languages and traveling, not which position was the best. And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. I think it
is more somebody who has confidence in themselves, knows what their own opinions are but makes room for others to have contradictory opinions without giving up the ghost. To have to "demonstrate" that there are tons of other women that would sleep with you is, pathetic. Rambler

Watch out, Rambler. Your sort of beginning to fit into my list of
attractive attributes.

Pamela

> Rambler: And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. I think it is more somebody who has confidence in themselves, <snip>

I find that its about all I can do just to be me, without also trying
to be something or someone else. I'd rather be evaluated based
on the real me going in (omitting perhaps the flatulent part). [Rog']

"Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:k0M2c.34401$6e7.32065@bignews1.bellsouth.net. .. Rambler: And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. I think it is more somebody who has confidence in themselves, <snip> I find that its about all I can do just to be me, without also trying to be something or someone else. I'd rather be evaluated based on the real me going in (omitting perhaps the flatulent part). [Rog']


That was funny!

P

Pamela wrote:
I think (pardon me ladies) that the greatest way to "get laid" is to not try and "get laid." I thought about "the dating scheme" and thought that were I back in that mix, I would approach people just to talk to them, along the lines of, "Hi, I noticed you and you looked like someone that would be fun to talk with," and go from there. Completely removes the pressure, is an honest opening and you find out about something. SO and I met kind of the same way, and spent the evening talking about languages and traveling, not which position was the best.

Yep.

And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. I think it is more somebody who has confidence in themselves, knows what their own opinions are but makes room for others to have contradictory opinions without giving up the ghost. To have to "demonstrate" that there are tons of other women that would sleep with you is, pathetic.

It shouldn't have to be demonstrated, it should be simply known (by the
man) and understood (by the woman).

- Ron ^*^

BadHad wrote:
Xenos, I don't think you quite got what Rambler was saying. Your points are valid, but I think there is a more subtle and important one. Also, I think your quoting is off. It seems to my newsreader that Rambler wrote: 'And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. ...'.

No it's not. I know plenty of women who complain being with an asshole
but an asshole they chose as a partner.
There is more in-line. Xenos the elder wrote: Rambler wrote: "Mike (Remove X's to reply)" <aXeXnXeXaXs@gwis.com> wrote in message news:gKGdndp9K9yIN9vdRVn-uQ@adelphia.com... And I think this whole good guy/asshole stuff is ridiculous. I think it is more somebody who has confidence in themselves, A jerk has confidence. Part of he's confidence comes from not caring much of other peoples feelings. knows what their own opinions are but makes room for others to have contradictory opinions without giving up the ghost. A nice guy will try to make room for other peoples opinion and be very diplomatic. This effort will rob him of most of he's energy and he will look weak. The jerk on the other hand he just don't care. So he seams strong. Those who debate about the cons and pros of going to war seam weak. The guy who says lets bomb them looks strong. Oops, here we are still stuck in the good guy/asshole categorization. Let's, instead, use a variation of the confidence categorization and look at two 'nice guys': one that has a good sense of himself and what is important and valuable to him; and one that doesn't. Both will try to make room for other peoples' opinion(s) and will try to be diplomatic. The first nice guy, however, will know where this room is being carved out of something that he considers important and valuable.

Give me some exambles here. This is to theoretic.
The second won't. The first guy will (probably gently, at least at first) draw the line at the things that are important to him, the second won't. I think it is pretty easy to determine by observation which of these two nice guys you are dealing with. The second is only deserving of pity,

Jorma ( A man i know ) started to be with he's girlfriend 3 month's
after he's divorce.
He was still in a mess then but he's girlfriend hat love and compassion
for him.
scorn or derision, depending on your own state of mind and being. The first is deserving of respect, and perhaps, depending on what you and they value, of love. My sense is that Rambler and Casey, for example, would fall into the first category of 'nice guys.'.

Casey has been 3 times married.
Rambler is often kissing up to women.
I give a damn about the gender of a person.
I want to know what the hell is going on.
Why do people vote crooked people to power?
Why in my organization do the women vote a crock and a thief as
president again and again?
Why do men look down on a slut ( a women with multiple partners ) but
women line up to go to bed with a rock star?
I have never seen men lining up for a female rock star.
This is part of why I am using them as general examples of where I would like to be in January '06. -- Andy

Werebat wrote: "A REAL man who's not afraid to POUND his hamfist on the table and make DEMANDS!!!" And this is exactly who many (young, attractive) women go for. - Ron ^*^

I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a
nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own
wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very
attractive.

Cheryl

Hunny_Pot wrote: Werebat wrote I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very attractive. Cheryl
and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another...
Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.

Bill in Co. wrote: Hunny_Pot wrote:Werebat wroteI agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being anice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your ownwants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is veryattractive.Cheryland not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another... Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.
Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't like
for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I
am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just
to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally
unacceptable.

JMHO

Cheryl

Hunny_Pot wrote: Bill in Co. wrote: Hunny_Pot wrote: Werebat wrote I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very attractive. Cheryl and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another... Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL. Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't like for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally unacceptable. JMHO Cheryl

Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think sometimes
the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just did for me.
I dunno.

"Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:QP13c.2213$Cm3.623@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net... Hunny_Pot wrote: Werebat wrote I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very attractive. Cheryl and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of
another... Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.

Not ever is not the point. One can compromise and not lose good guy/girl
status. It's when one mewls around and never has their own needs met and is
always deferential to the other person's desires that there is a problem.

Pamela

<surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... Hunny_Pot wrote: Bill in Co. wrote: Hunny_Pot wrote:> Werebat wrote>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being
a> nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own> wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very> attractive.>> Cheryl> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of
another... Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL. Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't like for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally unacceptable. JMHO Cheryl Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think
sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just did for
me. I dunno.

People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up being
left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone
else can be pretty boring.

Pamela

Pamela wrote: <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...Hunny_Pot wrote:Bill in Co. wrote:>Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>Werebat wrote>>>>I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a>>nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>>attractive.>>>>Cheryl>>>>and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another...>Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't likefor the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who Iam as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love justto make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totallyunacceptable.JMHOCherylWell, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think sometimesthe dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just did for me.I dunno. People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone else can be pretty boring. Pamela
And those people often have the hardest time moving on because they no
longer know what 'they' like to do or how to feel without that other
person in their life. They no longer feel a sense of worth without that
validation. Very sad.

BTDT

Cheryl

Werebat wrote: Hunny_Pot wrote:Werebat wrote:"A REAL man who's not afraid to POUND his hamfist on the table and makeDEMANDS!!!"And this is exactly who many (young, attractive) women go for. - Ron ^*^I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being anice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your ownwants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is veryattractive. It's also called "being a boorish ***". Or at the very least, a pushy person who is very tiring because they always have to get their way and (subtly or obviously) assert dominance in every social situation. I know people who literally like to "POUND their hamfists on the table and make DEMANDS!!!" They are not typically people that I enjoy associating with. I can see a woman wanting one around to fight her battles for her, but I think she's also blinding herself to the bad that comes with the good in that arrangement. - Ron ^*^

I don't think I would go to that extreme about always having to get your
way, but the important thing is to not neglect your own needs/wants for
the sake of someone else's. In other words, forsaking yourself for the
wants/needs of others at ALL costs. The caretaker role, the martyr
role, whatever you wanna call it.

I don't think it is boorish at all, unless you throw hissy fits when you
don't get your way all the time.

Cheryl

Pamela said...
People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone else can be pretty boring.

Having to live with someone that was a reflection
of me is a scary thought indeed.



Casey

I drive way too fast to worry about cholesterol.

"Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>...

<snip>
And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous.
<snip>
Rambler


Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I
think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at
all.

Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self
confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive,
etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the
jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem
happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not all
women by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (and
have to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there is
something there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guys
more than nice guys.

"I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. A
jerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus be
able to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating and
thus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from some
guys.

Pamela wrote: <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... Hunny_Pot wrote: Bill in Co. wrote:> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>> Werebat wrote>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a>> nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>> wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>> attractive.>>>> Cheryl>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of
another...>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't like for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally unacceptable. JMHO Cheryl Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just did for me. I dunno. People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone else can be pretty boring.

Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the inevitable
compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring resentments.

Hunny_Pot wrote: Werebat wrote: "A REAL man who's not afraid to POUND his hamfist on the table and make DEMANDS!!!" And this is exactly who many (young, attractive) women go for. - Ron ^*^ I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very attractive.

It's also called "being a boorish ***". Or at the very least, a pushy
person who is very tiring because they always have to get their way and
(subtly or obviously) assert dominance in every social situation.

I know people who literally like to "POUND their hamfists on the table
and make DEMANDS!!!" They are not typically people that I enjoy
associating with. I can see a woman wanting one around to fight her
battles for her, but I think she's also blinding herself to the bad that
comes with the good in that arrangement.

- Ron ^*^

Pamela wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:QP13c.2213$Cm3.623@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net.. Hunny_Pot wrote: Werebat wrote> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very attractive. Cheryl and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another... Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL. Not ever is not the point. One can compromise and not lose good guy/girl status. It's when one mewls around and never has their own needs met and is always deferential to the other person's desires that there is a problem.

And I'll agree with Ray Gordon that most women do a fair amount of
"testing" of a new guy to see whether or not he'll put up with BS. Those
who cave in too soon get bumped off the list of potential bedfellows
right pronto.

This is where "nice guys" feel they are being treated like dirt -- and
they are.

Through all this it's worth mentioning that for many people raised and
trained a certain way, being what they would define as a "jerk" is
perhaps not such a terrible thing. It's possible, I think, to be one of
the "jerks" who scores dozens of beautiful women, and still be at heart a
basically decent, honorable person.

Of course, as with just about everything else, it helps a lot if you're
wealthy and tall. :^)

- Ron ^*^

"Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... Pamela wrote: <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... Hunny_Pot wrote:> Bill in Co. wrote:>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs.
being a>>> nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>> wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is
very>>> attractive.>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another...>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy).
LOL.>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't
like> for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who
I> am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love
just> to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is
totally> unacceptable.>> JMHO>> Cheryl Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think
sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just did for
me. I dunno. People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up
being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of
someone else can be pretty boring. Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the
inevitable compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring resentments.

People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment.

Pamela

"Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8b15372.0403081455.e6a1d9b@posting.google.co m... "Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message
news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>... <snip> And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous. <snip> Rambler Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not all women by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (and have to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there is something there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guys more than nice guys. "I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. A jerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus be able to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating and thus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from some guys.

I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys.

Pamela

"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote in message
news:vT73c.28540$aT1.2248@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:d8b15372.0403081455.e6a1d9b@posting.google.co m... "Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>... <snip> And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous. <snip> Rambler Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not all women by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (and have to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there is something there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guys more than nice guys. "I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. A jerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus be able to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating and thus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from some guys. I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Pamela

Well, I'm right there with you Pamela.

"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote... Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip>
I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys.

Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"),
that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be:
"Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted to
jerks, anyway?" These /superficial/ women are doing nice guys a
favor by not dating them. If I were a nice guy (I may or may not be),
but if I were, I'd rather find that rare woman who is not attracted to
jerks, but instead find nice guys appealing. Its just a theory. [Roger]
rather than

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:09:33 -0500, "Joy"
<joydoesntlikespam@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote:
"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote in messagenews:vT73c.28540$aT1.2248@newsread1.news.pa s.earthlink.net... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:d8b15372.0403081455.e6a1d9b@posting.google.co m... "Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>... > <snip> > And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous. > <snip> > Rambler Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not all women by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (and have to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there is something there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guys more than nice guys. "I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. A jerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus be able to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating and thus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from some guys. I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. PamelaWell, I'm right there with you Pamela.
Me too

"Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ta83c.404$p77.170@bignews3.bellsouth.net... "Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote... Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip> I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"), that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be: "Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted to jerks, anyway?" These /superficial/ women are doing nice guys a favor by not dating them. If I were a nice guy (I may or may not be), but if I were, I'd rather find that rare woman who is not attracted to jerks, but instead find nice guys appealing. Its just a theory. [Roger] rather than

I think the descriptors nice and jerk are so open to interpretation that
they just lose their meaning in this context.
I am sure there are women (or men for that matter) who are attracted to
table thumping, insecure, tryrants. But, if she (or he) is, than you have a
woman (or man) who has deep emotional problems. So, who would really want
that person anyway? And, that probably explains the reason they are
attracted in the first place. Which may be somewhat along the lines of what
you said Roger. Your comments got me thinking about it. I just don't think
it's rare to find a women who isn't in search of a lord and master.

Pamela

"Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> writes:
"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote... Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip> I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"), that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be: "Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted to jerks, anyway?" These /superficial/ women are doing nice guys a favor by not dating them. If I were a nice guy (I may or may not be), but if I were, I'd rather find that rare woman who is not attracted to jerks, but instead find nice guys appealing. Its just a theory. [Roger] rather than

I have to say, this question struck me as well.

"Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8b15372.0403081455.e6a1d9b@posting.google.co m... "Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message
news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>... <snip> And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous. <snip> Rambler Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not all women by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (and have to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there is something there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guys more than nice guys.

The obviously haven't seen my charm and romanticism. And they probably
wouldn't be women that I'd be interested in dating anyway. <yes dear, I'm
speaking hypothetically>
"I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. A jerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus be able to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating and thus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from some guys.

I agree with teh first part, but diagree with your conclusion. A jerk will
make a woman feel unsafe, because the woman will know that the jerk is in it
for himself, and therefore will not provide a safe haven for the woman.

Rambler

"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... I am sure there are women (or men for that matter) who are attracted to table thumping, insecure, tryrants. But, if she (or he) is, than you have a woman (or man) who has deep emotional problems. So, who would really want that person anyway? And, that probably explains the reason they are attracted in the first place. Which may be somewhat along the lines of what you said Roger. Your comments got me thinking about it. I just don't think it's rare to find a women who isn't in search of a lord and master.

Neither do I, but I do find it remarkable that so many self-described
nice-guys seem to want to date women who aren't interested in them.
What's so nice about that? IMHO, a true nice-guy would hold out
for a nice-woman with whom he has something in common ... like
their "niceness," however they want to define it. [Rog']

Roger B. said... "Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... I am sure there are women (or men for that matter) who are attracted to table thumping, insecure, tryrants. But, if she (or he) is, than you have a woman (or man) who has deep emotional problems. So, who would really want that person anyway? And, that probably explains the reason they are attracted in the first place. Which may be somewhat along the lines of what you said Roger. Your comments got me thinking about it. I just don't think it's rare to find a women who isn't in search of a lord and master. Neither do I, but I do find it remarkable that so many self-described nice-guys seem to want to date women who aren't interested in them. What's so nice about that? IMHO, a true nice-guy would hold out for a nice-woman with whom he has something in common ... like their "niceness," however they want to define it. [Rog']

Very true. I've been hit between the eyes with that in the last few
months. There's nothing like coming to grips with the fact that a nice
woman could come along and you wouldn't appreciate her presence nearly
as much as you should have.

Purely hypothetical, of course...


Casey

I drive way too fast to worry about cholesterol.

Pamela wrote: "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:d8b15372.0403081455.e6a1d9b@posting.google.co m... "Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>... <snip> And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous. <snip> Rambler Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not all women by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (and have to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there is something there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guys more than nice guys. "I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. A jerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus be able to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating and thus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from some guys. I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Pamela

Me too. Or I choose the people I know and/or hang out with a little more
selectively, I should say.

Pamela wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... Pamela wrote: <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...> Hunny_Pot wrote:>> Bill in Co. wrote:>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a>>>> nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>>> wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>>>> attractive.>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>> another...>>>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>>>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't like>> for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I>> am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just>> to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally>> unacceptable.>>>> JMHO>>>> Cheryl>> Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think> sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just> did for me. I dunno.> People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone else can be pretty boring. Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the inevitable compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring resentments. People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment. Pamela

Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self.

"Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5Wa3c.28849$aT1.9213@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net... Pamela wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... Pamela wrote:> <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>> Bill in Co. wrote:>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs.
being a>>>>> nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your
own>>>>> wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is
very>>>>> attractive.>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>> another...>>>>>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>>>>>>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't
like>>> for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change
who I>>> am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love
just>>> to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is
totally>>> unacceptable.>>>>>> JMHO>>>>>> Cheryl>>>> Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think>> sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it
just>> did for me. I dunno.>>>> People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up
being> left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of
someone> else can be pretty boring. Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the
inevitable compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring resentments. People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment. Pamela Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self.

Not everybody.

I wouldn't expect anyone to give up any part of their "self", just their
damn annoying habits. ;0)
Pamela


"JWB" <bigtom@servo.com> wrote in message
news:H6b3c.31283$Wo2.22452@twister.nyc.rr.com... "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:5Wa3c.28849$aT1.9213@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net... Pamela wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...> Pamela wrote:>> <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a>>>>>> nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>>>>> wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>>>>>> attractive.>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>>> another...>>>>>>>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I
don't like>>>> for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I>>>> am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just>>>> to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally>>>> unacceptable.>>>>>>>> JMHO>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>> Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think>>> sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe
it just>>> did for me. I dunno.>>>>>>> People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up being>> left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone>> else can be pretty boring.>> Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the inevitable> compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring resentments.>> People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment. Pamela Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self. Not everybody.

"Casey" <cclremovethispart@cox.net> wrote in message
news:xQa3c.49212$Ri6.19428@lakeread04... Roger B. said... "Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... I am sure there are women (or men for that matter) who are attracted to table thumping, insecure, tryrants. But, if she (or he) is, than
you have a woman (or man) who has deep emotional problems. So, who would really want that person anyway? And, that probably explains the reason they are attracted in the first place. Which may be somewhat along the lines of what you said Roger. Your comments got me thinking about it. I just don't think it's rare to find a
women who isn't in search of a lord and master. Neither do I, but I do find it remarkable that so many self-described nice-guys seem to want to date women who aren't interested in them. What's so nice about that? IMHO, a true nice-guy would hold out for a nice-woman with whom he has something in common ... like their "niceness," however they want to define it. [Rog'] Very true. I've been hit between the eyes with that in the last few months. There's nothing like coming to grips with the fact that a nice woman could come along and you wouldn't appreciate her presence nearly as much as you should have. Purely hypothetical, of course... Casey I drive way too fast to worry about cholesterol.

Casey,

I have no doubt that "nice" women find you very interesting.

Pamela

"Doug Anderson" <ethelthelog@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e0oer6oknf.fsf@noether.uoregon.edu... "Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> writes: Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"), that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be: "Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted to jerks, anyway?" These /superficial/ women are doing nice guys a favor by not dating them. If I were a nice guy (I may or may not be), but if I were, I'd rather find that rare woman who is not attracted to jerks, but instead find nice guys appealing. Its just a theory.
[Roger] rather than I have to say, this question struck me as well.

Two thoughts:

(1) many of the guys arguing for the "women don't date nice guys (and
therefore I must be a jerk to date women)" claim that a large percentage of
women (ranging from "most" to "all") fall into the category of "superficial
women attracted to jerks."

(2) many of the guys arguing for the "women don't date nice guys" are not
interested in dating any ole "nice girl." They want to date a hot babe. Now,
the hot babe who has got herself all together really *can* land the guy who
is "all that, and a bag of chips." (i.e., a hot guy who has it all
together--mazel tov, you beautiful and together couple!) So, for the guy who
is merely "all that" but not "the bag of chips" (or the "bag of chips," but
not really "all that"), the best shot at getting a hot babe is to go for the
hot-but-messed-up babe. Messed up women *do* often date jerks (that I will
definitely conceed). So, in a nutshell, why do these guys get their undies
all in a wad about the messed up women who date jerks? Because maybe their
only chance with a hot babe is with such types of "damaged goods."

That is part of their "self". People that think they don't give up any part
of themselves - their individualism - are living in denial. Or else haven't
been married very long.

Pamela wrote: I wouldn't expect anyone to give up any part of their "self", just their damn annoying habits. ;0) Pamela "JWB" <bigtom@servo.com> wrote in message news:H6b3c.31283$Wo2.22452@twister.nyc.rr.com... "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:5Wa3c.28849$aT1.9213@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net... Pamela wrote:> "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>> Pamela wrote:>>> <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>> news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:>>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs.>>>>>>> being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up>>>>>>> your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence>>>>>>> and is very attractive.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>>>> another...>>>>>>>>>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't>>>>> like for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change>>>>> who I am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I>>>>> love just to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which>>>>> is totally unacceptable.>>>>>>>>>> JMHO>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>> Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think>>>> sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it>>>> just did for me. I dunno.>>>>>>>>>> People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up>>> being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of>>> someone else can be pretty boring.>>>> Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the>> inevitable compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring>> resentments.>>>>>> People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment.>> Pamela Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self. Not everybody.

Uh, a sense of humor could serve you well, ya know.

Pamela

"Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:myb3c.28961$aT1.26241@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... That is part of their "self". People that think they don't give up any
part of themselves - their individualism - are living in denial. Or else
haven't been married very long. Pamela wrote: I wouldn't expect anyone to give up any part of their "self", just their damn annoying habits. ;0) Pamela "JWB" <bigtom@servo.com> wrote in message news:H6b3c.31283$Wo2.22452@twister.nyc.rr.com... "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:5Wa3c.28849$aT1.9213@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net...> Pamela wrote:>> "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>> Pamela wrote:>>>> <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>>> news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:>>>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs.>>>>>>>> being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving
up>>>>>>>> your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's
confidence>>>>>>>> and is very attractive.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>>>>> another...>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy).
LOL.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I
don't>>>>>> like for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't
change>>>>>> who I am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that
I>>>>>> love just to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME,
which>>>>>> is totally unacceptable.>>>>>>>>>>>> JMHO>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>> Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think>>>>> sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe
it>>>>> just did for me. I dunno.>>>>>>>>>>>>> People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end
up>>>> being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a
reflection of>>>> someone else can be pretty boring.>>>>>> Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the>>> inevitable compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring>>> resentments.>>>>>>>>>> People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment.>>>> Pamela>> Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self. Not everybody.

You don't think I have a sense of humour? I do (wait a minute, I seem to
remember those lines from somewhere). It's just a little bit dry sometimes.

Well, ok, sometimes it's not there, especially when a hot button gets
triggered.

Pamela wrote: Uh, a sense of humor could serve you well, ya know. Pamela "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:myb3c.28961$aT1.26241@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net... That is part of their "self". People that think they don't give up any
part of themselves - their individualism - are living in denial. Or else
haven't been married very long. Pamela wrote: I wouldn't expect anyone to give up any part of their "self", just their damn annoying habits. ;0) Pamela "JWB" <bigtom@servo.com> wrote in message news:H6b3c.31283$Wo2.22452@twister.nyc.rr.com...> "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:5Wa3c.28849$aT1.9213@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net...>> Pamela wrote:>>> "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>> news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>>> Pamela wrote:>>>>> <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>>>> news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:>>>>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs.>>>>>>>>> being a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up>>>>>>>>> your own wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence>>>>>>>>> and is very attractive.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>>>>>> another...>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't>>>>>>> like for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't>>>>>>> change who I am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies>>>>>>> that I love just to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing>>>>>>> ME, which is totally unacceptable.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JMHO>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think>>>>>> sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it>>>>>> just did for me. I dunno.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up>>>>> being left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection
of>>>>> someone else can be pretty boring.>>>>>>>> Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the>>>> inevitable compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring>>>> resentments.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment.>>>>>> Pamela>>>> Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self.>> Not everybody.

Bill in Co. wrote: Pamela wrote:"Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in messagenews:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.p as.earthlink.net...Pamela wrote:><surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>>Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>Bill in Co. wrote:>>>>>>>Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>Werebat wrote>>>>>>>>>>I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a>>>>>nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>>>>wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>>>>>attractive.>>>>>>>>>>Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>>>and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>>another...>>>>>>>>Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy).LOL.>>>>>>>Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't like>>>for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I>>>am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just>>>to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally>>>unacceptable.>>>>>>JMHO>>>>>>Cheryl>>>>Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think>>sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just>>did for me. I dunno.>>>>People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up being>left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone>else can be pretty boring.Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the inevitablecompromises, and the consequent build up of harboring resentments.People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment.Pamela Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self.

Yes, but I bet the value function for all parts of our self is
not constant. The best deal is to give up bits that aren't so
important to you but are highly valued by the other.

-- Andy

Pamela wrote:
"Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:d8b15372.0403081455.e6a1d9b@posting.google.co m..."Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>...<snip>And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous.<snip>RamblerOf course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT Ithink you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it atall.Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but selfconfidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive,etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say thejerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominemhappen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not allwomen by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (andhave to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there issomething there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guysmore than nice guys."I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. Ajerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus beable to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating andthus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from someguys. I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Pamela

I'm right there with ya Pam. The jerks never appealed to me either...
They were, well, um, er, JERKS! Even though they may get the girl, I
bet they don't get her twice, unless she is a total twit and doesn't
know well enough to run away screaming from this guy.

Can you say RED FLAG CITY?

Cheryl

"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote in message news:<tk93c.28692$aT1.1524@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink. net>... "Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:ta83c.404$p77.170@bignews3.bellsouth.net... "Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote... > Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be > BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any > truth to it at all. > Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self > confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, > etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the > jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem > happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip>
<snip> I think the descriptors nice and jerk are so open to interpretation that they just lose their meaning in this context. I am sure there are women (or men for that matter) who are attracted to table thumping, insecure, tryrants. But, if she (or he) is, than you have a woman (or man) who has deep emotional problems. So, who would really want that person anyway? And, that probably explains the reason they are attracted in the first place. Which may be somewhat along the lines of what you said Roger. Your comments got me thinking about it. I just don't think it's rare to find a women who isn't in search of a lord and master. Pamela

But thats part of whats so bizarre about it. It's not just women who
a) have emotional (obvious anyway) problems or b) women who are jerks
themselevs liking the same in men. I've seen women from just about all
walks of life fit this pattern. Women who were highly intelligent with
thier act together, women who were introvert(shy) and women who were
extroverted(outgoing). I've seen women with confidence and women with
little. Women who were nice and not so nice. My point is I don't think
it's just a certain type of woman who does this. But like I said, it's
not to the point of being as severe as people make it out to be. I've
seen many nice guys have good relationships although if I wanted to I
could bring up that many of the women they eventually find are with
them after being with so many guys who cheated, abused, treated them
like crap (i.e. jerks) first.

"Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<ta83c.404$p77.170@bignews3.bellsouth.net>... "Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote... Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip> I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"), that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be: "Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted to jerks, anyway?"

Well but then you have to ask yourself "what about the women?" I'm
referring to the women you know (friends, etc) who fall into this
pattern. In the end the nice guy will probably find a caring nice
woman. But what about the multitudes of women drawn to jerks like moth
to a flame who then suffer and are left coldly? Some of these are nice
women btw.

BadHad wrote: Bill in Co. wrote: Pamela wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:F073c.28474$aT1.17668@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...> Pamela wrote:>>> <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:>>>>>>>>> Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Werebat wrote>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being>>>>>> a nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>>>>> wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>>>>>> attractive.>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>>> another...>>>>>>>>>> Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>>>>>>>> Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't
like>>>> for the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who I>>>> am as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love just>>>> to make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totally>>>> unacceptable.>>>>>>>> JMHO>>>>>>>> Cheryl>>>>>> Well, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I think>>> sometimes the dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it
just>>> did for me. I dunno.>>>>>>> People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up
being>> left by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someone>> else can be pretty boring.>> Well, at least that didn't happen. I'm talking more about the
inevitable> compromises, and the consequent build up of harboring resentments.>> People who give up their "self" often harbor resentment. Pamela Everybody who is married gives up a little bit of their self. Yes, but I bet the value function for all parts of our self is not constant. The best deal is to give up bits that aren't so important to you but are highly valued by the other. -- Andy

That's probably a good assessment, Andy. At least I think it is. And
hopefully for the greater good - i.e., for the relationship itself.

Dakota Monroe said... "Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<ta83c.404$p77.170@bignews3.bellsouth.net>... "Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote... "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote... > > Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be > BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any > truth to it at all. > Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self > confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, > etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the > jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem > happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip> I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"), that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be: "Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted to jerks, anyway?" Well but then you have to ask yourself "what about the women?" I'm referring to the women you know (friends, etc) who fall into this pattern. In the end the nice guy will probably find a caring nice woman.

Hopefully most of them eventually will, but some won't.
Nice guys often make bad decisions.
But what about the multitudes of women drawn to jerks like moth to a flame who then suffer and are left coldly? Some of these are nice women btw.

There's no real difference in them and the guys that end up with the
wrong women and eventually hit the streets again. Hopefully over time
some of nice people of each gender will meet each other and live happily
ever after. Realistically though, many never will.



Casey

I drive way too fast to worry about cholesterol.

Pamela <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote:
I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys.

Me too. I never dated a guy who wasn't nice after high school (and only
one there - after that I knew better).

Werebat <rpoirier2@cox.net> wrote in message news:<404D0A0F.7706@cox.net>... Pamela wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:QP13c.2213$Cm3.623@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net.. Hunny_Pot wrote: > Werebat wrote >> > > I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a > nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own > wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very > attractive. > > Cheryl > and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another... Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL. Not ever is not the point. One can compromise and not lose good guy/girl status. It's when one mewls around and never has their own needs met and is always deferential to the other person's desires that there is a problem. And I'll agree with Ray Gordon that most women do a fair amount of "testing" of a new guy to see whether or not he'll put up with BS. Those who cave in too soon get bumped off the list of potential bedfellows right pronto. This is where "nice guys" feel they are being treated like dirt -- and they are.


Testing DOES happen. There are a couple of different types of tests
however. One test is if he puts up with BS then he is dropped. Another
test is if he cracks under the BS (which I think is what you refer to
above) then he is dropped. Those who either say "to heck with it" or
are not phased(sp?) by the BS are the winners. IMHO it happens for
the following reasons. Maybe more also...

1) She wants to see if he has backbone. Her thinking is that if he
will let her walk all over him then whats he going to do when he has
to standup for her if thats ever need. I guess thats a fair question
but then again many people can be very easy-going and accomodating but
won't be pushed around and will stand up when the time comes.

2) Some women do test to see if you stand up then it means you can
take them or leave them. I.e. you are not so desperate to have them
(or anybody) that you'd take anything they dish out. It means you
aren't wrapped around thier finger and that makes you more attractive.

3) Some just like drama and a guy who will play these games. If you
try not to make waves you're no fun.

4) Some just have bad attitudes (like some men do) and they know it so
in a way they are doing the guy a favor by putting it in the open
early own.



A story of mine. I'm usually a getalong kind of guy. Once I was in a
line with a friend of mine. This was in college. The friend of mine
noticed the girl ahead oh me and mentioned that she was from my
hometown. She heard this and turned around. After introducing myself I
asked her which high school she went to in our hometown. She said
guess. So I named 1 (mine), nope ok I named a second. Nope. After that
I just kindof gave this look like "ok I'm not going to sit here and
name every school in the entire city" and just turned around and
started talking to my friend again. Interestingly she then started the
conversation back up and became polite all of a sudden. Ok maybe not
the best example of testing but you kindof get the point that it was a
game in a way. When I implied I had no need for the game (or her). All
of a sudden she became interested in knowing more about me.

People test other people ok. This is not just something women do. I
don't know if men test thier partners or potential partners as much as
women but we do use tests in other ways in our interactions with women
and other men. Just saying that so I'm not grouped into a category as
having a grudge against women or something. Just so I'm not sounding
one sided i would say just as I do believe the assumption that many
times women will go for the "bad boy" I would say I reject the notion
that most men hold and even some women hold that women are more
jealous of each other then men are of each other. While it's true that
many times women go for jerks what I've also noticed is that alot of
times when we call these guys jerks what it translates to is a jerk =
any guy I think I'm better than who has a girl while I don't. Not
always but I have seen guys apply this label to otherwise good men
just because the guy has the girl and he dosen't. Many times the
labeling of guys as jerks is a sign of male jealousy.

"Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8b15372.0403091119.27969e4c@posting.google.c om... Werebat <rpoirier2@cox.net> wrote in message
news:<404D0A0F.7706@cox.net>... Pamela wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:QP13c.2213$Cm3.623@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net.. > Hunny_Pot wrote: > > Werebat wrote > >> > > > > I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs.
being a > > nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your
own > > wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is
very > > attractive. > > > > Cheryl > > and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another... > Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy).
LOL. > Not ever is not the point. One can compromise and not lose good
guy/girl status. It's when one mewls around and never has their own needs met
and is always deferential to the other person's desires that there is a
problem. And I'll agree with Ray Gordon that most women do a fair amount of "testing" of a new guy to see whether or not he'll put up with BS.
Those who cave in too soon get bumped off the list of potential bedfellows right pronto. This is where "nice guys" feel they are being treated like dirt -- and they are. Testing DOES happen. There are a couple of different types of tests however. One test is if he puts up with BS then he is dropped. Another test is if he cracks under the BS (which I think is what you refer to above) then he is dropped. Those who either say "to heck with it" or are not phased(sp?) by the BS are the winners. IMHO it happens for the following reasons. Maybe more also... 1) She wants to see if he has backbone. Her thinking is that if he will let her walk all over him then whats he going to do when he has to standup for her if thats ever need. I guess thats a fair question but then again many people can be very easy-going and accomodating but won't be pushed around and will stand up when the time comes. 2) Some women do test to see if you stand up then it means you can take them or leave them. I.e. you are not so desperate to have them (or anybody) that you'd take anything they dish out. It means you aren't wrapped around thier finger and that makes you more attractive. 3) Some just like drama and a guy who will play these games. If you try not to make waves you're no fun. 4) Some just have bad attitudes (like some men do) and they know it so in a way they are doing the guy a favor by putting it in the open early own. A story of mine. I'm usually a getalong kind of guy. Once I was in a line with a friend of mine. This was in college. The friend of mine noticed the girl ahead oh me and mentioned that she was from my hometown. She heard this and turned around. After introducing myself I asked her which high school she went to in our hometown. She said guess. So I named 1 (mine), nope ok I named a second. Nope. After that I just kindof gave this look like "ok I'm not going to sit here and name every school in the entire city" and just turned around and started talking to my friend again. Interestingly she then started the conversation back up and became polite all of a sudden. Ok maybe not the best example of testing but you kindof get the point that it was a game in a way. When I implied I had no need for the game (or her). All of a sudden she became interested in knowing more about me. People test other people ok. This is not just something women do. I don't know if men test thier partners or potential partners as much as women but we do use tests in other ways in our interactions with women and other men. Just saying that so I'm not grouped into a category as having a grudge against women or something. Just so I'm not sounding one sided i would say just as I do believe the assumption that many times women will go for the "bad boy" I would say I reject the notion that most men hold and even some women hold that women are more jealous of each other then men are of each other. While it's true that many times women go for jerks what I've also noticed is that alot of times when we call these guys jerks what it translates to is a jerk = any guy I think I'm better than who has a girl while I don't. Not always but I have seen guys apply this label to otherwise good men just because the guy has the girl and he dosen't. Many times the labeling of guys as jerks is a sign of male jealousy.

You know I have had men tell me unflattering things about men they thought
I was interested in. Usually they know nothing about the guy they are
slamming.

As a recent example, I have a very close friend who plays piano at a
local upscale restaurant and bar. We have been friends for years.
The other night I went in and he was giving me signals from the stage
that he wanted to talk to me. I was smiling back at him and making some
facial expressions to let him know I understood. This guy walked up to me
as I was doing that and he said,

"Are you trying to get the attention of the piano player?

I said, "sort of"

He said, "well, it's not going to do you much good. He has a girlfriend
here, one of the many he has. He's a big time player"

None of that was true, the guy didn't even know my friend personally, and
what if I didn't know my friend?
Would I have said,
"really, oh gee, thanks for telling me what a jerk he is"

And, then run off with the guy who was slamming my friend.

What I did do was say:

"Really. Well, I am his sister, his wife is in the hospital having his
baby, and I was just trying to let him know that everything is going fine.
Now what was that you were saying about his girlfriend? Take me to her
right now!"

He mumbled and fumbled around and muttered something like, "I don't want to
get involved with this".

I said, "ok, I understand. Thank you so much for telling me this about my
brother. I am going up there right now and tell him you have exposed him.
Wait right here, ok. Because when I get back I want to talk to you"

I went up to my friend at the piano bar, and when I turned around that guy
was GONE!

Another jerk bites the dust.

Pamela

"Emma Anne" <mbjq@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1gadn4m.rpm4fs1mkw9ptN%mbjq@earthlink.net... Pamela <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote: I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Me too. I never dated a guy who wasn't nice after high school (and only one there - after that I knew better).

My ex was nice in the beginning. A little nutty from my perspective, but
nice.

Pamela

Pamela wrote: "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:d8b15372.0403091119.27969e4c@posting.google.c om...Werebat <rpoirier2@cox.net> wrote in message news:<404D0A0F.7706@cox.net>...Pamela wrote:>"Bill in Co." <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>news:QP13c.2213$Cm3.623@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net..>>>Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>Werebat wrote>>>>>>I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being a>>>nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>>wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>>>attractive.>>>>>>Cheryl>>>and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of another...>>Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.> Not ever is not the point. One can compromise and not lose good guy/girl>status. It's when one mewls around and never has their own needs met and is>always deferential to the other person's desires that there is a problem.And I'll agree with Ray Gordon that most women do a fair amount of"testing" of a new guy to see whether or not he'll put up with BS. Thosewho cave in too soon get bumped off the list of potential bedfellowsright pronto.This is where "nice guys" feel they are being treated like dirt -- andthey are.Testing DOES happen. There are a couple of different types of testshowever. One test is if he puts up with BS then he is dropped. Anothertest is if he cracks under the BS (which I think is what you refer toabove) then he is dropped. Those who either say "to heck with it" orare not phased(sp?) by the BS are the winners. IMHO it happens forthe following reasons. Maybe more also...1) She wants to see if he has backbone. Her thinking is that if hewill let her walk all over him then whats he going to do when he hasto standup for her if thats ever need. I guess thats a fair questionbut then again many people can be very easy-going and accomodating butwon't be pushed around and will stand up when the time comes.2) Some women do test to see if you stand up then it means you cantake them or leave them. I.e. you are not so desperate to have them(or anybody) that you'd take anything they dish out. It means youaren't wrapped around thier finger and that makes you more attractive.3) Some just like drama and a guy who will play these games. If youtry not to make waves you're no fun.4) Some just have bad attitudes (like some men do) and they know it soin a way they are doing the guy a favor by putting it in the openearly own.A story of mine. I'm usually a getalong kind of guy. Once I was in aline with a friend of mine. This was in college. The friend of minenoticed the girl ahead oh me and mentioned that she was from myhometown. She heard this and turned around. After introducing myself Iasked her which high school she went to in our hometown. She saidguess. So I named 1 (mine), nope ok I named a second. Nope. After thatI just kindof gave this look like "ok I'm not going to sit here andname every school in the entire city" and just turned around andstarted talking to my friend again. Interestingly she then started theconversation back up and became polite all of a sudden. Ok maybe notthe best example of testing but you kindof get the point that it was agame in a way. When I implied I had no need for the game (or her). Allof a sudden she became interested in knowing more about me.People test other people ok. This is not just something women do. Idon't know if men test thier partners or potential partners as much aswomen but we do use tests in other ways in our interactions with womenand other men. Just saying that so I'm not grouped into a category ashaving a grudge against women or something. Just so I'm not soundingone sided i would say just as I do believe the assumption that manytimes women will go for the "bad boy" I would say I reject the notionthat most men hold and even some women hold that women are morejealous of each other then men are of each other. While it's true thatmany times women go for jerks what I've also noticed is that alot oftimes when we call these guys jerks what it translates to is a jerk =any guy I think I'm better than who has a girl while I don't. Notalways but I have seen guys apply this label to otherwise good menjust because the guy has the girl and he dosen't. Many times thelabeling of guys as jerks is a sign of male jealousy. You know I have had men tell me unflattering things about men they thought I was interested in. Usually they know nothing about the guy they are slamming. As a recent example, I have a very close friend who plays piano at a local upscale restaurant and bar. We have been friends for years. The other night I went in and he was giving me signals from the stage that he wanted to talk to me. I was smiling back at him and making some facial expressions to let him know I understood. This guy walked up to me as I was doing that and he said, "Are you trying to get the attention of the piano player? I said, "sort of" He said, "well, it's not going to do you much good. He has a girlfriend here, one of the many he has. He's a big time player" None of that was true, the guy didn't even know my friend personally, and what if I didn't know my friend? Would I have said, "really, oh gee, thanks for telling me what a jerk he is" And, then run off with the guy who was slamming my friend. What I did do was say: "Really. Well, I am his sister, his wife is in the hospital having his baby, and I was just trying to let him know that everything is going fine. Now what was that you were saying about his girlfriend? Take me to her right now!" He mumbled and fumbled around and muttered something like, "I don't want to get involved with this". I said, "ok, I understand. Thank you so much for telling me this about my brother. I am going up there right now and tell him you have exposed him. Wait right here, ok. Because when I get back I want to talk to you" I went up to my friend at the piano bar, and when I turned around that guy was GONE! Another jerk bites the dust. Pamela
rotflmao! Quick thinking!

Cheryl (bows in humble admiration)

"Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote... <Snip> In the end the nice guy will probably find a caring nice woman. But what about the multitudes of women drawn to jerks like moth to a flame who then suffer and are left coldly? Some of these are nice women btw.

Too bad for them. I have enuff to worry about as it is. [Rog']

"Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8b15372.0403091119.27969e4c@posting.google.c om...
And I'll agree with Ray Gordon that most women do a fair amount of "testing" of a new guy to see whether or not he'll put up with BS.
Those who cave in too soon get bumped off the list of potential bedfellows right pronto. This is where "nice guys" feel they are being treated like dirt -- and they are. Testing DOES happen. There are a couple of different types of tests however. One test is if he puts up with BS then he is dropped. Another test is if he cracks under the BS (which I think is what you refer to above) then he is dropped. Those who either say "to heck with it" or are not phased(sp?) by the BS are the winners. IMHO it happens for the following reasons. Maybe more also... 1) She wants to see if he has backbone. Her thinking is that if he will let her walk all over him then whats he going to do when he has to standup for her if thats ever need. I guess thats a fair question but then again many people can be very easy-going and accomodating but won't be pushed around and will stand up when the time comes. 2) Some women do test to see if you stand up then it means you can take them or leave them. I.e. you are not so desperate to have them (or anybody) that you'd take anything they dish out. It means you aren't wrapped around thier finger and that makes you more attractive. 3) Some just like drama and a guy who will play these games. If you try not to make waves you're no fun. 4) Some just have bad attitudes (like some men do) and they know it so in a way they are doing the guy a favor by putting it in the open early own.

I think that the vast majority of "testing" comes from the persons own
insecurity as to whether or not they are fit to be loved. They see in
themselves someone who is unloveable, and so test their partners and
potential partners to see if they can validate that they are indeed lovable.
Not that I have any direct experience with those type of people of course
....

Rambler

Pamela wrote:
<surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in messagenews:P%23c.28109$aT1.18852@newsread1.news.p as.earthlink.net...Hunny_Pot wrote:Bill in Co. wrote:>Hunny_Pot wrote:>>>>>Werebat wrote>>>>I agree Ron (gasp, did I say that?). It's not being a jerk vs. being>>>>a>>nice guy/girl, but being your own person and not giving up your own>>wants/desires for the sake of another. That's confidence and is very>>attractive.>>>>Cheryl>>>>>>>>and not [ever] giving up your own wants/desires for the sake of>>>>another...>Even if you're married? (We're not in Kansas, Dorothy). LOL.>>>>Within reason Bill. I can sacrifice and go to a restaurant I don't likefor the sake of my spouse, to make them happy, but I won't change who Iam as a person, give up friends that I have or hobbies that I love justto make my spouse happy. That would mean changing ME, which is totallyunacceptable.JMHOCherylWell, what you've written makes perfect sense, Cheryl, but I thinksometimesthe dividing line can get a little blurred. Or maybe it just did forme.I dunno.People who give up their "self " for another person sometimes end up beingleft by that very same person. Being nothing but a reflection of someoneelse can be pretty boring.Pamela
There are many ways of how to " beat out " the self out of somebody.
My ex was using a mixture of mean behavior and " poor me i am sick ".
Hey, you can't be angry to a sick person?

Dakota Monroe wrote:
"Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>...<snip>And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous.<snip>RamblerOf course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT Ithink you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it atall.Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but selfconfidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive,etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say thejerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominemhappen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not allwomen by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (andhave to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there issomething there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guysmore than nice guys."I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. Ajerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus beable to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating andthus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from someguys.
My observation to.

Roger B. wrote:
"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote..."Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote...Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to beBUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres anytruth to it at all.Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but selfconfidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive,etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say thejerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominemhappen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip>I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys.Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"),that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be:"Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted tojerks, anyway?" These /superficial/ women are doing nice guys afavor by not dating them. If I were a nice guy (I may or may not be),but if I were, I'd rather find that rare woman who is not attracted tojerks, but instead find nice guys appealing. Its just a theory. [Roger]rather than
Crap men getting all the crap women.
Why should i want crap women?
Hehe good point.

Pamela wrote:
"Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> wrote in messagenews:ta83c.404$p77.170@bignews3.bellsouth.n et..."Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote..."Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote...>Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be>BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any>truth to it at all.>Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self>confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive,>etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the>jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem>happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip>>>I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys.Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"),that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be:"Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted tojerks, anyway?" These /superficial/ women are doing nice guys afavor by not dating them. If I were a nice guy (I may or may not be),but if I were, I'd rather find that rare woman who is not attracted tojerks, but instead find nice guys appealing. Its just a theory. [Roger]rather thanI think the descriptors nice and jerk are so open to interpretation thatthey just lose their meaning in this context.I am sure there are women (or men for that matter) who are attracted totable thumping, insecure, tryrants. But, if she (or he) is, than you have awoman (or man) who has deep emotional problems. So, who would really wantthat person anyway? And, that probably explains the reason they areattracted in the first place. Which may be somewhat along the lines of whatyou said Roger. Your comments got me thinking about it. I just don't thinkit's rare to find a women who isn't in search of a lord and master.Pamela
It least 90% of the women in our handicraft organization were in search
of a lord and master.
It was a know fact that Raimo Volanen ( the president of Solmukas ) did
put money belonging to the organization in to he's own pockets.
They voted him in as a president over and over.
The men, once they knew what went on, protested and left the organization.
The women for the most part were worshiping a man who was stealing they
money.
He was a smooth talker.
I don't care how smooth somebody is talking if he is stealing my money.
Being rational ( most of the time ) makes me a man.
Being emotional ( most of the time ) makes a woman.

Roger B. wrote:
"Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote...I am sure there are women (or men for that matter) who are attractedto table thumping, insecure, tryrants. But, if she (or he) is, than youhave a woman (or man) who has deep emotional problems. So, whowould really want that person anyway? And, that probably explainsthe reason they are attracted in the first place. Which may besomewhat along the lines of what you said Roger. Your commentsgot me thinking about it. I just don't think it's rare to find a womenwho isn't in search of a lord and master.Neither do I, but I do find it remarkable that so many self-describednice-guys seem to want to date women who aren't interested in them.What's so nice about that? IMHO, a true nice-guy would hold outfor a nice-woman with whom he has something in common ... liketheir "niceness," however they want to define it. [Rog']
Mutual respect ( inclusive self-respect ), honesty, compassion.

Dakota Monroe wrote:
"Roger B." <rcblinnNoSpam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<ta83c.404$p77.170@bignews3.bellsouth.net>..."Pamela" <Pamela@msnnot.com> wrote..."Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote...>Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be>BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any>truth to it at all.>Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self>confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive,>etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the>jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem>happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. <snip>>>I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys.Let's say, for the sake of argument (lawyers use Latin, "arguendo"),that his observation has merit. To me, the question would then be:"Why would a 'nice guy' want to date a woman who is attracted tojerks, anyway?"Well but then you have to ask yourself "what about the women?" I'mreferring to the women you know (friends, etc) who fall into thispattern. In the end the nice guy will probably find a caring nicewoman. But what about the multitudes of women drawn to jerks like mothto a flame who then suffer and are left coldly? Some of these are nicewomen btw.
I disagree. They don't respect them self. If they would respect them
self, they wouldn't want a jerk.
I have seen it in our organization. Low self confidence and the idea
that a real man must be master.
Beware of people who don't respect them self.

Roger B. wrote:
"Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote...<Snip> In the end the nice guy will probably find a caring nicewoman. But what about the multitudes of women drawn to jerkslike moth to a flame who then suffer and are left coldly? Someof these are nice women btw.Too bad for them. I have enuff to worry about as it is. [Rog']
Same here.
Don't date " masters " or you will be they slave.
But also don't date " slaves " or you will become they master or even
worse: " they slave ".
There is nothing worse then becoming the slave of a slave.

Hunny_Pot wrote:
Pamela wrote: "Dakota Monroe" <dakota_mon@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:d8b15372.0403081455.e6a1d9b@posting.google.co m... "Rambler" <iamrambler (at) yahoo dot com> wrote in message news:<c2e9h9$dtu2@imsp212.netvigator.com>... <snip>> And I think this whole good guy/a-hole stuff is ridiculous.> <snip>> Rambler Of course it's not as severe as some people make it out to be BUT I think you'd be mistaken if you don't think theres any truth to it at all. Take two men, both have equal confidence (not egomaniac but self confidence), equal looks, etc but make one a jerk (rude, insensitive, etc) and the other a nice guy (romantic, charming). I would say the jerk would get the most dates. Sorry but I've seen this phenominem happen way too many times to believe it's all in my head. Sure not all women by a long shot go for jerks but I've seen so many women do (and have to cry thier heart out later) that I have to believe there is something there that cause (many) women to be attracted to jerky guys more than nice guys. "I" think that what it comes down to is a woman wants to feel safe. A jerk usually gives off the aura that he can handle himself, thus be able to protect her, while the nice guy seems too accomodating and thus weak. Thats why so many are willing to put up with crap from some guys. I guess I am just living in a different world than you guys. Pamela I'm right there with ya Pam. The jerks never appealed to me either... They were, well, um, er, JERKS! Even though they may get the girl, I bet they don't get her twice, unless she is a total twit and doesn't know well enough to run away screaming from this guy.

No they don't run away ( usually ) but put he's *** under fire after a
while.
I friend of my is a jerk. He can't or wont keep a woman longer then 2-3
months.
One other jerk i know: He's longest relationship was 11 month's.
The whole life of those guys are revolving around getting the next woman.
Much like a vampire who needs a new victim every full moon.
Can you say RED FLAG CITY? Cheryl

Xenos the elder wrote:
There are many ways of how to " beat out " the self out of somebody. My ex was using a mixture of mean behavior and " poor me i am sick ". Hey, you can't be angry to a sick person?

Oh no! Then you're a Bad Person!

Sick people can go to Hell. And right now I have a cold.

- Ron ^*^

"DrLith" <drlith@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<c2jfva$1ucoil$1@ID-132000.news.uni-berlin.de>...

(2) many of the guys arguing for the "women don't date nice guys" are not interested in dating any ole "nice girl." They want to date a hot babe.

I think you're right about that.

Now, the hot babe who has got herself all together really *can* land the guy who is "all that, and a bag of chips."

Yes.

So, in a nutshell, why do these guys get their undies all in a wad about the messed up women who date jerks? Because maybe their only chance with a hot babe is with such types of "damaged goods."

By George, I think she's got it! You're definitely onto something
here.
I've heard it countless times from men this thing about "women don't
like
'nice guys', they like 'jerks' who mistreat them, etc. etc. I think
your
theory makes a whole lot of sense.

Another question I would have for the guys who say this is, where are
you meeting this kind of woman? Maybe you need to go somewhere else
to meet women.