Is this negative "nice guy" stereotype actually a thing?

[DevilWithaHalo]

As for arousal triggers, you'd be surprised just how much they're based on "conditioned responses" then by pure biology. Example: being "thin" is considered more attractive then not for women nowadays. In western culture at least. If you go back several centuries or hell, just take a ride to certain other cultures in the world today and you'll find that it's the opposite. Why? Simple changes in cultural norms based on traditions and environmental influences.

...I can't even... what? You're *seriously* suggesting that sexuality is purely cultural and environmental? God good man! This same crap is regurgitated by religious zealots attempting to convert homosexuals into "proper" heterosexuals.

Now I'll grant you that it may play some "influence", but let's not pretend that you can teach people sexuality, or that their sexuality would change if you just dropped them into another country. People are attracted to different things just because that's how they're wired.

Status based attraction is actually quite culturally relevant, but that's not attraction, that oppertunism. There's a difference between the two.

 

[Kevlar Eater]

snip

I'm gonna divide your quote in bite-sized chunks so I can better organise my own thoughts.

Hi kevlar eater, how nice of you to join in, in defence of fiery trainweck. Don't you think it's funny that you're calling me the white knight?

Your post came off a bit as defending the woman in question, even if she could have been in the wrong. That, and I've grown a little tired of the "there's a 'nice guy', let's jump his ass" mentality that been prevalent throughout this entire topic. And this topic at hand has become a fiery train wreck, with the flames being extinguished with gasoline. It could have been a misconception; alcohol and Emilie Autumn albums can do that to me.

In any case, thanks, it's a refreshing change from being called a mysoginist or overzealous mra. You don't know what I think about women so your thinking that women are safe from my criticism is woefully uninformed.

Of course I'm no mindreader, though I believe a mind is a terrible thing to read. Also, I said what I said because almost no one here is criticising the woman and how she could be as deceitful as the 'nice guy' in question.

I also didn't label him nice guy for having a different opinion, I was labeling him a nice guy, because he showered women with affection and gifts under the guise of friendship and then got prissy that she wasn't romantically interested.

Mayhaps the woman in question was a user. Why keep accepting the affection and gifts if she didn't truly want him around? Also, I see no issue in breaking off a friendship if only one person is reaping the benefits. Regardless, I highly doubt the friendship was real.

You seem to view all men / women relations as some kind of zero-sum game, which I'm guessing isn't benificial to your romantic life.

Both of us have at this point, made egregious statements concerning the mind of the other that could be false. I believe both sides of a friendship should benefit from each other in some tangible way, preferably without the whole affection and gift to sex transaction. And there's no middle finger big enough I give to romance, since I believe it's a load of crap and I refuse to participate in the meat market that is the dating game. I may be as mad as a hatter, but I know better than to go down that rabbit hole.

Eventually you do make a good point: feelings can blossom inside a friendship. This is true. Sometimes that's true. Other times it's someone like fiery trainwreck trying to have a good excuse for duplicitous behaviour. Do you really believe he showers all his friends with affection and gifts or just the girls he finds attractive?

We are in agreement; befriending for the sake of sex or gifts and favors is a disgusting thing to do. If he's giving all his friends affection and gifts, then he could be seen as generous, since the wealth is being spread around as opposed to focused on one target. Also foolish for what amounts to bribing people to talk to him; kinda like wearing a meat suit in a dog pound. If specific targets are being focused on, then I believe things could be problematic. If the woman in question don't want the gifts and affection, she could always say no and not put up with the behavior. Accepting these things, begrudgingly or not, is still deceitful. Both parties are to blame for the turn of events that happened upon them. Were both parties straightforward, time, money and energy would not be wasted. This extends not only to FieryTrainwreck, but to others as well. There would also be a hell of a lot less male/female friendships unless both parties are in agreement they want nothing to do with each other romantically or sexually.

*needed to edit a few things*

 

[EvilRoy]

The girl isn't *just* looking for someone "nice". That's good enough for a neighbour or a random person on the street. She's looking for someone who can do more than what is effectively begging for sex. Ie, you need to be able to stand up for yourself (self-respect - i.e. you don't pressure her for sex, revealing weakness as a result), influence other people, provide for a family reliably, at least when she needs support and be honest and interested in her.

On that one, though, where is the line between "influencing" other people and "manipulating" them? It looks like the same thing under a different label, getting people to do something you want them to do, with a lesser regard to whether or not they wanted to do it.

Oh, and pulling a pocket knife for a bullet wound is a terrible analogy. Trying to drag the bullet out is literally the worst thing you can do, and everyone can stop the bleeding (including the guy who "needs a doctor"; hope he did call 911 at least), assuming they did some basic first aid course. So in that scenario, not only is the "nice guy" a complete and utter moron who has no clue what he's doing, the guy screaming at him is also a loser because he's apparently failing to do something pretty much everyone should be able to do but sees it as more fitting to waste time on some random fool than actually doing something about the bleeding.

I actually quite liked the article for how cynical it is, mind, but Cracked isn't a site I'd opt to take life advice from ^^

You should take a read of the blog referenced in that article. While I don't think anything should be taken as gospel or even necessarily correct, I found it really made me think a bit - which is more than I can say for most of the blogs I've read.

Say away from the comments though, there are some people in there with some issues that they seem to take out on others.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

As for arousal triggers, you'd be surprised just how much they're based on "conditioned responses" then by pure biology. Example: being "thin" is considered more attractive then not for women nowadays. In western culture at least. If you go back several centuries or hell, just take a ride to certain other cultures in the world today and you'll find that it's the opposite. Why? Simple changes in cultural norms based on traditions and environmental influences.

...I can't even... what? You're *seriously* suggesting that sexuality is purely cultural and environmental? God good man! This same crap is regurgitated by religious zealots attempting to convert homosexuals into "proper" heterosexuals.

Now I'll grant you that it may play some "influence", but let's not pretend that you can teach people sexuality, or that their sexuality would change if you just dropped them into another country. People are attracted to different things just because that's how they're wired.

Status based attraction is actually quite culturally relevant, but that's not attraction, that oppertunism. There's a difference between the two.

No, I'm not seriously suggesting that sexuality is purely cultural. There are certainly biological foundations to everyone's sexuality. But that's the thing: they're foundations. Simple reactions to stimuli. And you can condition those responses to happen with stimuli that normally wouldn't have that effect.

You say people are attracted to different things because that's how they're wired. Sure, I agree with you. But when was that wiring "put into place". Plenty of people would say "at birth" but I find that a load of bullshit. People don't choose their their sexuality any more than they are born with it. They "learn" it. Same with their personality. It's all shaped by conditional learning. That wiring is changed and reinforced over time by certain stimuli being associated with certain responses.

Example: foot fetishists. Sexual arousal from feet makes no biological sense. Feet have nothing to do with reproduction and are in no way a sexual characteristic (primary or secondary). Yet people can get off to just feet. How does that happen? Conditioned response.

And yes, you can change what people find sexually attractive. I know because my sexual "tastes" have certainly changed over time from pure on straight to pan/bisexual. And no it wasn't me "finding a new side of myself" or "accepting what I've been trying to suppress". It was a legit expansion of my arousal triggers. People's personalities change all the time, this is an accepted fact. Why not their sexuality? It doesn't happen instantly, but if you reinforce the neural connections enough, you'd be surprised just how different someone can act.

And no, status based attraction is indeed attraction. Some of it might be people seeing an opportunity, but plenty of it might be legitimate attraction to the social status. Same thing that drives much of the BDSM culture: arousal based on being dominate or subservient towards someone else, read: social statuses.

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

No, I'm not seriously suggesting that sexuality is purely cultural.

I went off an inaccurate interpretation of your statement when I should have clarified your meaning. Apologies.

There are certainly biological foundations to everyone's sexuality. But that's the thing: they're foundations. Simple reactions to stimuli. And you can condition those responses to happen with stimuli that normally wouldn't have that effect.

Are we talking about ?conditioning? as in an alteration? Or through positive reinforcement? Or something else?

You say people are attracted to different things because that's how they're wired. Sure, I agree with you. But when was that wiring "put into place". Plenty of people would say "at birth" but I find that a load of bullshit. People don't choose their their sexuality any more than they are born with it. They "learn" it. Same with their personality. It's all shaped by conditional learning. That wiring is changed and reinforced over time by certain stimuli being associated with certain responses.

I would wager it happens just prior and during puberty most of the time; obvious the onset of sexuality. But I?m not sure one can actually ?learn? it from beyond the experience set of circumstances. Because people are affected by similar conditions, yet react to them differently. Sexuality is as much personally biological as it is reinforced by various conditioning I suppose. Would make sense given people?s personally ability to repress natural urges.

Example: foot fetishists. Sexual arousal from feet makes no biological sense. Feet have nothing to do with reproduction and are in no way a sexual characteristic (primary or secondary). Yet people can get off to just feet. How does that happen? Conditioned response.

How is that possibly conditioned? Aside from rule 34, there isn?t anything beyond advertising that could even remotely condition or expose someone to the sexual nature of feet. And if advertising is all it takes, I suppose I could see where certain sexual fetishes come from. But I don?t see how society conditions the, for the lack of a better term, ?unusual? sexual preferences in the minority of the population.

And yes, you can change what people find sexually attractive. I know because my sexual "tastes" have certainly changed over time from pure on straight to pan/bisexual. And no it wasn't me "finding a new side of myself" or "accepting what I've been trying to suppress". It was a legit expansion of my arousal triggers. People's personalities change all the time, this is an accepted fact. Why not their sexuality? It doesn't happen instantly, but if you reinforce the neural connections enough, you'd be surprised just how different someone can act.

Again I?d say that?s a personal response. No amount of social conditioning has yet to make me interested in certain kinds of women, nor will it. Unless of course you strap me to a chair and condition me with ?therapy? for the better part of a year, then maybe I?d build the association. And of course, I?m not suggesting that we do anything of the sort to anyone.

And no, status based attraction is indeed attraction. Some of it might be people seeing an opportunity, but plenty of it might be legitimate attraction to the social status. Same thing that drives much of the BDSM culture: arousal based on being dominate or subservient towards someone else, read: social statuses.

Hmm? I suppose there are legitimate cases of it, although somewhat questionable. And sure, there are times when people have demonstrated their action to a specific status outside the individual holding said status. But BDSM has less to do with social status as it does a power exchange on a personal level. We can?t make the suggestion that those who engage in BDSM are aroused when their boss screams at them do to the notions of social status. Sigh? which of course reminds me that I do need to be reminded that human sexuality is overly complex to pigeon hole anyone into simplistic classifications.

 

[mitchell271]

You know the guys that complain about getting friendzoned because they were nice to a girl and weren't paid in sex? Yeah, those guys are real. They're assholes, and far less of them than the people that complain about the friendzone.

Personally, I will go out of my way to do something exceptionally nice or special to someone I'm attracted to. If there's a girl I like that likes similar styles of music, I'll write something for her. If she likes cooking, I'll invite her over to bake cookies or something. Will I only be nice to someone to get in their pants? Only if you surgically replaced my brain with another set of testicles.

Just be nice to people, doesn't make your day any worse (usually).

 

[softclocks]

People are still linking that god-awful cracked article.

Been a while since I've seen someone lend some actual credence to that trite gibberish.

Nothing like some exagerrated analogies to make sure the sweeping generalizations hit home.

You know the guys that complain about getting friendzoned because they were nice to a girl and weren't paid in sex? Yeah, those guys are real. They're assholes, and far less of them than the people that complain about the friendzone.

Personally, I will go out of my way to do something exceptionally nice or special to someone I'm attracted to. If there's a girl I like that likes similar styles of music, I'll write something for her. If she likes cooking, I'll invite her over to bake cookies or something. Will I only be nice to someone to get in their pants? Only if you surgically replaced my brain with another set of testicles.

Just be nice to people, doesn't make your day any worse (usually).

Your actions contradict your advice.

It's also poor advice/common senes.

And you're addressing a construed stereotype that probably wouldn't take your advice, if it existed.

 

[viscomica]

So I've read this article [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/criticalintel/11083-The-History-And-Abuse-of-The-Fedora], which for the most part seemed interesting and believable enough.

However, one particular statement confused me, and I suppose it is something that somewhat relates to previous discussions on this subforum.

Women have largely pegged this uniform as belonging to the so-called "nice guys" that think being decent to a woman is a ticket into her bed. I'm sorry about that, but it's true. (For what it's worth, I asked two women outside the gaming community what kind of men they associate black fedoras with. Answer: Creep, avoid immediately.)

Wait, really? There is such a stereotype? Honestly, I know of many stereotypes relating to nerd culture, and I know that "normal" women tend to be less than impressed with a lot of these stereotypes. But the quoted statement, if the rest of the article hadn't been so believable, I'd just call bullshit on that. As it is, maybe there's something I don't understand, maybe somebody can shed light on this for me.

Let's start here: Somebody is a thoughtful and considerate person("nice guy"). Their attempts to sway women go along the same lines - After all, in order to win somebody's affection, isn't the most sensible approach to show them that you care about them and respect them?

Now here's the first contradiction. Such a person would not believe their actions to be a "ticket" to anybody's bed. After all, if they truly are considerate, they know full well that the other person has their own feelings and preferences. They would consider their own "being nice" simply as a way to show their own interest for that person, and then leave it to the other person to decide how much of that interest they wish to return.

Keeping that in mind, there seem to be only two possibilities:

1) Women in general dislike considerate people for some reason. But why? Even if the whole "women like jerks" stereotype applies, that stereotype is aimed at being partners. "creep, avoid" means that even acquainting yourself with such a person would be out of the question, which seems crazy to me.

2) We're not actually talking about considerate people at all, when we say "nice guys". Only, then what are we talking about? Jerks who, on the surface, display some sort of concern for the person they're trying to win over, while really being completely egotistical? Congratulations, that's like half the men on this planet, and from what I've seen during school, girls have no problem with such guys at all(as long as they're good looking, mind). Or does this really not have anything at all to do with being "nice" or not being "nice"?

Honestly, this whole thing confuses me.

As a woman I have to say I don't only look for niceness in a guy. If a guy is nice but uninteresting and / or we don't share common interests, then thanks for the niceness, but you're just not my cup of tea. Doesn't that apply to men as well?

 

[invadergaz]

Speaking as someone who has done alot of online dating recently, I was told quite often that I was too nice. Sometimes it would involve wanting me to be more confident or "more alpha". It was super frustrating because I didn't want to change myself or how I acted but I was not having any success. So I decided to pretend to be a jerk and portray myself as egotistical. I was shocked because it actually worked. I was having a ton of success and had amazing dates.

Unfortunately, I didnt like the person I was turning into, so now im taking a break and I deleted my profiles

 

[Phasmal]

If the woman in question don't want the gifts and affection, she could always say no and not put up with the behavior. Accepting these things, begrudgingly or not, is still deceitful.

Accepting gifts is deceitful?

How can accepting gifts EVER be deceitful?

You are confusing gifts with a transaction.

I wonder what the population of the Escapist would think of a woman who flat out refused to accept any gifts from men in case of any romantic intent? I imagine they would feel she certainly had `inflated sense of self-worth`.

`Well, gee, I know it's my birthday and you're my brother-in-law, but I couldn't possibly take a gift from you! What kind of girl do you think I am?`

Now, excuse me, I have to go count out the number of guys I've misled by taking gifts from them...
(counting)

Only all my friends and my boyfriends brothers.

 

[Phasmal]

I wonder what the population of the Escapist would think of a woman who flat out refused to accept any gifts from men in case of any romantic intent? I imagine they would feel she certainly had `inflated sense of self-worth`.

There is no need to put words into other people's mouth. There are plenty of stupid things being said by people themselves, that you don't need to imagine additional issues here.

I probably should have added I wasn't being completely serious there, but taking the concept of gifts as deception to its absurd conclusion.
I just think it's silly.

(Also, no one can ever tell when I'm joking around- it must be something I'm doing).

 

[Eamar]

The stereotypical "nice guy" who thinks that being "nice" to women should be enough to make them fall madly in love with him, who is only nice in the first place because he thinks it'll get him into someone's pants, and who harbours romantic feelings for his female friends but never says or implies this, then acts all furious and hurt that they didn't pick up on his feelings and "friendzoned" him (despite the fact that he only ever presented himself as a friend in the first place) etc, etc very much does exist. I have met them, and I have been the object of their "affections"...

...However, this isn't something I've encountered in real life since my mid-teens.

All it is is emotional immaturity, pure and simple. It indicates a lack of experience with real life relationships and an over-reliance on the ideas perpetuated by movies and such. I'd even say it's entirely forgiveable, even expected, in teenagers (of both genders, because let's not kid ourselves that teenage girls don't act like this too), so long as they learn from it and eventually transition to a more healthy way of looking at relationships with people of whatever gender they're attracted to, be they romantic or platonic.

I have no idea how common it is among grown men, but I'd have much less sympathy if I encountered one who acted like this. Teenagers do stupid stuff and get things completely wrong because they're still learning the basics of how to be a functional human being. If you're still acting like this in your twenties and beyond, I'd say its more likely to be indicative of some major personality flaws and worrying attitudes towards other people in general. As I said though, this isn't something I've encountered in the adult world, so I like to think its prevalence is exaggerated on the internet.

 

[invadergaz]

The stereotypical "nice guy" who thinks that being "nice" to women should be enough to make them fall madly in love with him, who is only nice in the first place because he thinks it'll get him into someone's pants, and who harbours romantic feelings for his female friends but never says or implies this, then acts all furious and hurt that they didn't pick up on his feelings and "friendzoned" him (despite the fact that he only ever presented himself as a friend in the first place) etc, etc very much does exist. I have met them, and I have been the object of their "affections"...

...However, this isn't something I've encountered in real life since my mid-teens.

All it is is emotional immaturity, pure and simple. It indicates a lack of experience with real life relationships and an over-reliance on the ideas perpetuated by movies and such. I'd even say it's entirely forgiveable, even expected, in teenagers (of both genders, because let's not kid ourselves that teenage girls don't act like this too), so long as they learn from it and eventually transition to a more healthy way of looking at relationships with people of whatever gender they're attracted to, be they romantic or platonic.

I have no idea how common it is among grown men, but I'd have much less sympathy if I encountered one who acted like this. Teenagers do stupid stuff and get things completely wrong because they're still learning the basics of how to be a functional human being. If you're still acting like this in your twenties and beyond, I'd say its more likely to be indicative of some major personality flaws and worrying attitudes towards other people in general. As I said though, this isn't something I've encountered in the adult world, so I like to think its prevalence is exaggerated on the internet.

I am dating women in their early to mid-thirties and some of them are have been married before and I can tell you some women are just as guilty of romanticizing relationships even to the point of wanting the Disney experience. I dont think its a sign of emotional immaturity so much as baggage and hurts from past relationships

 

[Eamar]

I am dating women in their early to mid-thirties and some of them are have been married before and I can tell you some women are just as guilty of romanticizing relationships even to the point of wanting the Disney experience. I dont think its a sign of emotional immaturity so much as baggage and hurts from past relationships

Cool story, but I never said anything about over-romanticising relationships. I was talking about the belief that if you're a decent human being to someone/just really like someone for long enough they'll eventually fall in love with you without any additional input on your part. That's more specific than just over-romanticising in general (which is also a problem, just not the same one).

 

[invadergaz]

I am dating women in their early to mid-thirties and some of them are have been married before and I can tell you some women are just as guilty of romanticizing relationships even to the point of wanting the Disney experience. I dont think its a sign of emotional immaturity so much as baggage and hurts from past relationships

Cool story, but I never said anything about over-romanticising relationships. I was talking about the belief that if you're a decent human being to someone/just really like someone for long enough they'll eventually fall in love with you without any additional input on your part. That's more specific than just over-romanticising in general (which is also a problem, just not the same one).

Yes, you did. You said romance perpetuated by movies whereas I just called it Disney. They may be different problems, but they are indemic with how the different genders process romance and relationships. One can play the nice guy because of past hurts whereas the other is looking for perfection in another partner. Both men and women have issues and your post came off as overly hostile to young men and their immaturity

 

[Raesvelg]

I think this applies somewhat to the "nice guy" scenario - http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-truths-that-will-make-you-better-person/

The screaming hypocrisy of that article was that, for all intents and purposes, it reduced the entire purpose of self-improvement down to a scheme for getting laid. It effectively advocates donning a facade in order to fool women into sleeping with you...

Which is, of course, the equivalent of the stereotypical "nice guy" that the article is focused at.

The "nice guy" isn't being nice because he was raised not to be a douche, he's being nice because he figures it's a low-cost, low-risk way of getting laid. All he has to be is nice, after all; he doesn't have to assume any of the risks of actually pushing for a relationship, and when his strategy doesn't work, he blames the object of his affections rather than accepting the fact that she (or he, because don't kid yourselves, women can be the "nice guy" stereotype too) simply isn't interested.

The irritation factor for me in the "nice guy" stereotype is that it's become so firmly entrenched in the collective subconscious that I've had to deal with women who thought the fact that I was polite and reasonably thoughtful meant I was expressing a romantic interest, and the resulting fallout when I told them I simply wasn't interested.

The irony there, of course, is that I'm not polite to my friends. We exist in a circle of collective insults; it's how we express our affection for one another, male and female alike. If you find any of us in particular, or god forbid the group as a collective, being polite to you, it generally means your presence is simply being tolerated rather than embraced. It's not a group for people with low self esteem. At the very least, a thick skin is required.

 

[Weaver]

I am dating women in their early to mid-thirties and some of them are have been married before and I can tell you some women are just as guilty of romanticizing relationships even to the point of wanting the Disney experience. I dont think its a sign of emotional immaturity so much as baggage and hurts from past relationships

Cool story, but I never said anything about over-romanticising relationships. I was talking about the belief that if you're a decent human being to someone/just really like someone for long enough they'll eventually fall in love with you without any additional input on your part. That's more specific than just over-romanticising in general (which is also a problem, just not the same one).

Then I'm not really sure you're rallying against a group of people that really exist. I truly don't think this is the widespread epidemic everyone is making it out to be. I'm starting to believe this is just something that exists in the anecdotal fiction of the internet.

It seems to me that some guy who isn't a total douche falls in love with a friend and then everyone lambasts him for being a deceptive creep.

 

[Eamar]

Yes, you did.

No, I didn't. I'm sorry if it came across that way, but that honestly wasn't the point I was trying to make at all. I apologise if my wording was unclear.

Both men and women have issues

I specifically addressed that girls act in exactly the same way:

let's not kid ourselves that teenage girls don't act like this too

and your post came off as overly hostile to young men and their immaturity

Ok, I have no idea where you got that from, because I clearly stated that this behaviour is a natural, understandable part of being a teenager. When I spoke about "emotional immaturity" that wasn't an insult, it was a statement of fact: teenagers are immature (as in not yet fully formed, be that physically, mentally, emotionally or socially), that's why we differentiate them from adults. There's nothing wrong with that, so no hostility intended at all:

I'd even say it's entirely forgiveable, even expected, in teenagers

Then I'm not really sure you're rallying against a group of people that really exist.

I'm not "rallying against" anyone, I'm saying that this behaviour is a normal part of growing up and learning about relationships and how they work in reality. I said that hypothetically I'd be less sympathetic to an adult who acted like this, but I also said I'd never actually encountered one, so that wasn't an issue. In my experience this is a teenage thing.

I truly don't think this is the widespread epidemic everyone is making it out to be. I'm starting to believe this is just something that exists in the anecdotal fiction of the internet.

I agree with you:

As I said though, this isn't something I've encountered in the adult world, so I like to think its prevalence is exaggerated on the internet.

 

[DementedSheep]

The stereotypical "nice guy" who thinks that being "nice" to women should be enough to make them fall madly in love with him, who is only nice in the first place because he thinks it'll get him into someone's pants, and who harbours romantic feelings for his female friends but never says or implies this, then acts all furious and hurt that they didn't pick up on his feelings and "friendzoned" him (despite the fact that he only ever presented himself as a friend in the first place) etc, etc very much does exist. I have met them, and I have been the object of their "affections"...

...However, this isn't something I've encountered in real life since my mid-teens.

All it is is emotional immaturity, pure and simple. It indicates a lack of experience with real life relationships and an over-reliance on the ideas perpetuated by movies and such. I'd even say it's entirely forgiveable, even expected, in teenagers (of both genders, because let's not kid ourselves that teenage girls don't act like this too), so long as they learn from it and eventually transition to a more healthy way of looking at relationships with people of whatever gender they're attracted to, be they romantic or platonic.

I have no idea how common it is among grown men, but I'd have much less sympathy if I encountered one who acted like this. Teenagers do stupid stuff and get things completely wrong because they're still learning the basics of how to be a functional human being. If you're still acting like this in your twenties and beyond, I'd say its more likely to be indicative of some major personality flaws and worrying attitudes towards other people in general. As I said though, this isn't something I've encountered in the adult world, so I like to think its prevalence is exaggerated on the internet.

Last guy I had do this was in my first year of university which was 4 years ago but he very obviously had some issues, no confidence and was one of the types that threatens suicide if you don't date them types so not your standard.
It seems to mostly be a high school thing and that is understandable. Teenagers do many stupid things. It's part of the learning process.

Girls definitely do it to.
They do this and then go from hating the other girl and making all sorts of judgements about them to getting bitter and angry at they guy when life isn't like their fantasies and he doesn't "realise the truth" even if they never asked him out. I sat next to a girl in math who was doing this to a guy who wasn't even in the same country. She was calling the girl he was dating a ***** and paranoid because the girl asked her to stop chasing her boyfriend under the pretence of friendship which she had admitted to me she was doing!

 

[Bebus]

It certainly is "a thing", and in my experience most people who deny it are, well, usually part of it themselves possibly without realising it. Symptoms include insecurity manifesting in the form of defensively lashing out against women who offer any genuine insight into their condition. But as a post above said (and, incidentally, went on to prove with the subsequent lashing out...), it's mostly a teenage thing that thankfully most people grow out of. My source... well, ex "nice guy" here. Hello!

And it's certainly not a totally recent thing: here's a story from a website that, as far as I can tell, is well over 10 years old.

The man with no spine.

There once was a man without a spine.

He was a very likable guy. The advantage of not having a spine was that he could fit himself to anyone, and he frequently did. He could flex this way and that.

But he couldn't stand up ...

...and being kinda mushy and flat most of the time, people often walked on him without realizing he was there.

So he got sad, having this dreadful absence of a spine, and he was resentful too. He wondered why other people couldn't fit themselves to him the way he fit himself to others, but that was silly because he never felt he had the right to ask anyone directly to fit themselves to him. He was formless, what was there to fit to anyway? In cyberspace he talked tough as if he had a spine, but people could clearly see by his rage and resentment that he didn't have one in real life, and he perished in the flame wars he provoked and only came out feeling more ashamed and ineffectual.

He wished he could be with a woman, to help him the way a spine would. If he clung to a woman with a spine, he could stand up, but women didn't like it when he did that. He often called them "bitches" for the women with spines coldly asked him to let go of them, or unceremoniously shrugged him and his issues off onto the ground telling him to get his own spine.

If he fancied a spineless woman, on the other hand, he couldn't get her interest because they were looking for men with spines that they could cling to. But the spineless women would hang around with him for sympathy, and he'd be their platonic male friend and play "therapist" though he was as sick as they were. He'd often call himself a "feminist" and lecture these spineless women how to stand on their own when he had no idea of how to stand for himself.

With all the bending and flopping around he did, a spine never could get a chance to grow.

Then one day he had a brainstorm, he decided he'd make himself a spine.

He took a long stick.... and he put it far up his ass.

It was an improvement, though uncomfortable. It was the first time in his life he could walk tall, if not a bit stiff. He found he could have opinions at odds with others, and stand for them. He found out that he didn't have to be liked, that the world didn't end if he pissed someone off. He didn't want to fit easily with other people anymore, in fact he became inflexible.

People commented on the change, some people didn't particularly like him with the stick up his ass but they did notice him more. Some people felt that at least they could respect him, even if they didn't always like him because he did less whining. At least nobody stepped on him by accident.

However relationships still didn't come easy, it was hard for a woman with a spine to love him with the stick up his ass. He was stiff, cold, brutally opinionated, condescending, and self-righteously hostile. But eventually he did attract a very pretty woman without a spine who saw him as a tower of strength to cling to.

At first he loved this woman, he thought the stick up his ass was the answer to his dating problems. He was finally being loved the way he once loved others. At first it was great, and then it was good, and then it was ok, and then it was uncomfortable, and by the end of a year it was infuriatingly suffocating. The spineless woman clung like a straightjacket. The horror!!! The horror!!!

But the stick up his ass made him so inflexible he didn't know how to get the spineless woman off of him, If only he could bend. He was trapped, upright in his "obligations", "duty to her", "guilt", "pride in his commitment", he spent months with his arms helplessly flapping about trying to get her off of him and trying not to look like he was doing that.

He was hoping that she would leave by hinting her indirectly, he used sarcasic tones, said mean things that were "just a joke", neglect, "constructive" criticism intended to insult. He only made the spineless woman feel more insecure, so she clung HARDER.

Spineless men envied him, called him a jerk for the way he was treating her, just the way he remembered how he used to envy other men before he had the stick up his ass (when he'd play consoler to their teary-eyed spineless girlfreinds). If only they knew what it was like to be on the receiving end of a spineless person's embrace they'd understand. He wished she'd leave him for one of the spineless men who envied him. He felt ashamed for the way he must have made women feel in the past when he was trying to cling to them, he knew that they weren't so evil after all.

One day he decided that there was only one way to be free of the spineless woman once and for all, the stick up his ass had to go.

So he pulled the stick out, and to his amazement a miracle happened: he was still standing! All of the years of inflexibility allowed him the chance to grow a spine. At first he was still a bit stiff but eventually he had the flexibility to contort a bit and yet maintained the firmness to struggle, push, and wriggle from the spineless woman's grasp (though she protested much). He stayed far out of her reach and the reach of other spineless women so that he could never be grasped by one again.

He was overjoyed with his new-found freedom; he could bend sometimes like he used to (but not too far) and also he could stand tall. He went out, partied, enjoyed life to the fullest, and eventually found a woman with a normal spine like his.

They stood together as separate individuals giving mutual support and enjoying time alone too, and lived (relatively) "happily ever after"...

The end

<url=http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/spineless.shtml>Source (A very good website that a lot of young guys and girls can learn from)