Girl Problems? Ask

[cegman]

punkbass I'd say it is true that nice guys finish last when you are a "nice guy" who bends over backwards for a girl. These guys think of themselves as nice guys and finish last. you can think of yourself as a nice guy and not finish last though.

 

[punkbass2000]

Here is something else I've got to say regarding the nice guy argument.
Read enough material and you will realize how much more inefficient the nice guys are when it comes to girls.

"Inefficient"?

They don't know how to get results.

Hmm. This brings up an interesting thought. Perhaps it's some other catalyst which tends to cause guys to become both "nice guys" and poor with women and there isn't necessarily a direct relationship.

 

[Masquerouge]

"Inefficient"?



Hmm. This brings up an interesting thought. Perhaps it's some other catalyst which tends to cause guys to become both "nice guys" and poor with women and there isn't necessarily a direct relationship.

The whole "nice guy" issue is because in this context, "nice" means "you will do everything and more to please the girl", and in real life "nice" is not necessarily that.

 

[Whomp]

The whole "nice guy" issue is because in this context, "nice" means "you will do everything and more to please the girl", and in real life "nice" is not necessarily that.

I agree. I think the "not nice" in this context is being cool and at times aloof.

 

[DYNAMICS]

ok all this advice only works if you're in the western world. How can one applied this to say a more “culturally conservative environments”. i don't believe women in conservative countries behave like girls in western countries.

i believe there is no universal law regarding women. and if your after a specific women like those old fashioned house wives, then you wrote get that in the west.

 

[Masquerouge]

ok all this advice only works if you're in the western world. How can one applied this to say a more “culturally conservative environments”. i don't believe women in conservative countries behave like girls in western countries.

You probably do not date in "conservative" countries. You just marry.

 

[DYNAMICS]

Social peer bonding still exists between the sexes.

 

[cegman]

DYNAMICS the heart of it all still works. The things about being an Alpha male ect... just some of the more direct stuff like cocky and funny might not work... although if you still have contact with women it will.

 

[Civrules]

"Inefficient"?

Yes, exactly. Inefficient.
You'll know exactly what I mean when you understand this:

Guys who've got their stuff down do less and get A LOT more. That's efficiency.

 

[Whomp]

Yes, exactly. Inefficient.
You'll know exactly what I mean when you understand this:

Guys who've got their stuff down do less and get A LOT more. That's efficiency.

What do you mean by stuff?
I've probably dated more girls than every >18 year old around here combined and the nice guy thing is crap imo. Shy and low self esteem have nothing to do with nice.

 

[cegman]

Whomp your right but most guys that are shy and have low self esteem consider themselves nice and therefore to simplify things nice guys finish last.

Edit. By the way are you a Friendly Illinois Buddy

 

[Whomp]

Whomp your right but most guys that are shy and have low self esteem consider themselves nice and therefore to simplify things nice guys finish last.

I see...well I'm a nice freakin' guy and chicks dig it.

I think it's better to say be a "nice" audacious and self assured type not a "nice" self-effacing and sheepish type.

Yes I'm a classic Freakin' Illinois bastage and I invade Milwaukee to visit an old college mate often. I usually age a few years in that town

 

[Civrules]

What do you mean by stuff?

Nonchalance.
Making them chace you.
By avoiding trying too hard.
Acting on your own interest, NOT solely trying to please someone else.
Having no expectations of the outcome.
Not being clingy.
And the list goes on and on. By mentioning the above, I'm not implying that, for example, you are clingy. If you were, you wouldn't be dating so much. And if you are clingy and still dating as much the type of girls you go for are probably different than my personal preference.


Again, we are going back to the Nice Guy stuff. It all depends on what YOUR definition of "Nice Guy" is. We can't have this discussion if each of us has 10 different meanings of what a Nice Guy is.
I've already told everyone who I think the Nice Guys are.

 

[cegman]

Yea but we hear all about the "nice guys" complaining never the self assured people.

 

[punkbass2000]

"nice" means "you will do everything and more to please the girl",

To my mind that doesn't constitute "nice".

 

[punkbass2000]

Yes, exactly. Inefficient.
You'll know exactly what I mean when you understand this:

Guys who've got their stuff down do less and get A LOT more. That's efficiency.

Perhaps there's more to life than doing as little as you can and getting what you want?

EDIT: Incidentally, I think I know what you mean. I just find the terminology amusing. You make it sound mechanical. As though the goal is the cold calculation of how many one-night-stands one can have in as short a period of time as possible.

 

[Civrules]

Perhaps there's more to life than doing as little as you can and getting what you want?

EDIT: Incidentally, I think I know what you mean. I just find the terminology amusing. You make it sound mechanical. As though the goal is the cold calculation of how many one-night-stands one can have in as short a period of time as possible.

Haha, well you have the freedom to interpret what I say however you wish (be it in a positive or a negative way).



However I will say this:
It definitely is distracting to get played by a woman. And by being "inefficient" and chasing, being needy, and begging for her approval, you not only distract yourself from your career goals (school, work, sports, etc), but you also communicate that you do not get it. Therefore you are digging yourself into a hole which is quite difficult to get out of without getting hurt. Get the analogy?

On the other hand - on the flip-side, by using communication which attracts the opposite sex, you not only spare yourself from the distractions that will occur, but you actually get somewhere and feel good about succeeding in what you intended to do in the first place.

I think your statement has no basis, especially in the dating scene. I won't go into my life-story of how inefficient I've been to get to where I've gotten in other areas aside from attracting the opposite sex, so we can leave it at that.

However, if you feel that you have to do a little more and work harder when it is not necessary as you have stated, especially with women, I wish you good luck. And I sure hope you have a strong will to be walked all over by women, instead of doing the… “easier” thing by working less and getting more. All this will be done by standing up for yourself and what you want, by not chasing her, and by showing the attractive qualities to women nature intended you to show.

Fair enough?

If not, try to be a little more detailed because it boggles my mind as to why someone would intentionally do what does not work just because he's trying to prove that sometimes you just have to work a little harder to get somewhere.

I've already worked a little harder by reading plenty of books and articles. Now it's time to reap the benefits.

 

[punkbass2000]

It seems to me that our viewpoints differ too greatly to meaningfully discuss this. However, it does appear to me that yours was perhaps neither the "easier" nor "more efficient" route, and still is not.

why someone would intentionally do what does not work just because he's trying to prove that sometimes you just have to work a little harder to get somewhere.

I'm not doing what does not work. You seem overly convinced that yours is categorically the best method.

 

[Civrules]

I'm not doing what does not work. You seem overly convinced that yours is categorically the best method.

It's not my method. I've just adopted that method and I'm pretty happy about it. No regrets.



So if you don't seem convinced that the method is the best... what is? Is there an even better method we do not know of yet?

 

[punkbass2000]

Well, personally, I don't tend to give much credence to methods. I'm not doubting that this is a viable method. I wouldn't use it, though I don't think that that's particularly inefficent. To determine if there is a better method you'll need to establish some reasonably concrete criteria, at any rate.