Lib Arts Major:
“Generation AFC” has done a great job of producing Brevik, Cho, Laughner, Sodini, Holmes, and now recently Lanza among scores of others who never got a bodycount high enough to make the news.
Here’s to a new generation of defects.
Or should I say products working as intended?
Furious Ferret:
This is just standard way of tearing down beta males. Most of the guys that are nice are geniuely nice guys but being guys they still want to fuck. They were taught by women that being nice and respectful lead to being attractive so they were brought up to behave this way. It’s no uniqueness or virtue for a woman to call ‘nice guys’ as really horrible digusting perverts while rewarding the bad boy.
Mumtaz elaborates in response to a female commenter:
‘ From my own personal experiences, I’ve found that being nice does not equate to attraction from men. ‘
Actually, it’s being nice man that doesn’t equate to attraction from women. Nice woman means sweet and pleasant , that is attractive.‘ Nice is boring. ‘
That’s exactly what women think.‘ And the average person appears to NEED drama or kaybe just more vivacity. ‘
No , it’s average WOMAN who seeks drama . For a man , coming home after day of hard work , drama is the LAST thing he wants…‘ It seems that a lot of men look to women for something akin to entertainment ‘
Again, swap sexes and it rings true.
Also notice anecdotal evidence…
When I wrote Play Nice I elaborated upon the recent fem-centric trend of ridiculing self-professed Nice Guys. The notion of Nice Guys only using the monicker as a ruse for an assholish reality has been a staple response for Alpha-burned women for decades now. However, an interesting threshold is being crossed when a globalized internet society begins a campaign of mass ridicule of Nice Guys.
Nice Guys of OK Cupid is one such effort.
While I’ve come to expect women’s rationalizations about Nice Guys as foils for their attention needs, what NGOKC illustrates is an escalation in beta male in-fighting. Some have called this ridicule cyber-bullying on a global scale, but there’s more to this than that. The progression from rebuking forum white knight to online attack blogger is evidence of a new comfort level the femosphere has in sowing discord amongst the beta orbiters they rely on for fem-centric male affirmation.
NGOKC is really a clever new twist on Dalrock’s proposition of “lets you and him fight.” In viscerally exposing OKC Nice Guy profile pictures and pairing them up with subjectively contradicting statements about being ‘nice guys’, NGOKC is (perhaps unwittingly) attempting to define what makes a guy genuinely “nice” based on the terms that indicate feminine supremacy.
If you peruse the sampling of ‘nice guy’ case subjects on the blog you’ll begin to see a pattern form. A, most likely out of context, declaration of ‘Nice Guy-ness’ paired with some horribly incongruent statement about expectations of women’s legs being shaved or men being the head of the household. The social experiment that NGOKC is involved in starts with its efforts in qualifying ‘Nice’ as being compliant with what best serves the feminine imperative. Do you like the feel of a woman’s smooth legs that she painstakingly shaves 7 times a week? You’re not a Nice Guy. Do you believe that men should be confident, decisive, heads of the household? You’re not a Nice Guy either. In fact if you indicate on your profile any belief that is inconsistent with absolute, equalitarian gender neutrality, you’re not a nice guy.
For all the semantics debates the manosphere gets into over the proper usage of “Nice” for men, the binary nature of the femosphere is definitive; if a belief is contradictory to the feminine imperative, it is decidedly “not nice”.
Beta Fights
Being that beta men constitute the vast majority of men in modern society, one of the larger problems of being an abject beta is the sheer volume of sexual competition they experience from other betas. When a beta chumps is AMOG’d by an Alpha there’s an almost tacit understanding by the beta that the Alpha held an advantage over him. The Alpha had the physical, Game and status tools the beta does not. However, put two (or more) betas in contention with each other and they will resort to ever escalating feats of greater beta qualification amongst each other. When all you know is Beta Game, only more intense applications of that game is the natural response to competition within Beta Game.
NGOKC is one such escalation in the Beta Game arms race. From Enter White Knight:
Every random chump within earshot of your conversation about Game, about your ‘changed’ way of seeing inter-gender relations, about your most objective critical observations of how women ‘are’, etc. – understand, that chump waits everyday for an opportunity to “correct” you in as public a way as he’s able to muster. That AFC who’s been fed on a steady diet of noble intent, with ambitions of endearing a woman’s intimacy through his unique form of chivalry; that guy, he’s aching for an opportunity to prove his quality by publicly redressing a “villain” like you for your chauvinism.
By essentially doxxing the Nice Guys on OKC, NGOKC is a blog dedicated to beta white knights attempting AMOG other betas while the women of the femosphere egg them on. The social impetus behind the blog is one of beta men jockeying for feminine approval by ever increasing declarations of being more suitable, more feminine identifying betas, than the so-called fraudulent Nice Guys they hope to expose. They’ve made a game of qualifying for the approval of the femosphere by looking for chinks in their competitor’s beta armor:
“I’m a nice guy,..”
“Charlatan! You want to oppress women by expecting to be the head of the household! I’m the real nice guy,..”
“STFU rape apologist, says here you’re open to first date sex, and what type of guy has tats and piercings like that? Rapists, that’s who! I’m the real nice guy,..”
“Misogynist, looks like you expect women to shave their legs,…FOR YOU!,..only fucking patriarchs think women should make themselves ‘acceptable’ for men,..I’m the real nice guy,..”
The feminine influence naturally loves the beta dystopia between guys they’d never want to fuck otherwise because it primes their need for indignation while simultaneously satisfying a woman’s need for attention and affirmation of her own imperative.
Obligation
One of the things that solidified this beta in-fighting for me was reading Hugo Schwyzer’s Jezebel endorsement of NGOKC.
Hugo Schwyzer has a rightly earned reputation in the manosphere for being a manboobed captain amongst the vichy males feminization has made so common through its selective breeding efforts . The lengths to which he’s ego-invested his life, career and personality into a feminine identification schema is truly grandiose. Hugo’s gender self-loathing is a monument to the dictates of the feminine imperative – he is what feminized men would ultimately become in a society defined by the feminine imperative.
While I have patience for the likes of Manboobz and even the information deficient members of the PUA Hate forums, Hugo is a step beyond their simple mockery.
What’s on offer isn’t just an opportunity to snort derisively at the socially awkward; it’s a chance to talk about the very real problem of male sexual entitlement. The great unifying theme of the curated profiles is indignation. These are young men who were told that if they were nice, then, as Laurie Penny puts it, they feel that women “must be obliged to have sex with them.” The subtext of virtually all of their profiles, the mournful and the bilious alike, is that these young men feel cheated. Raised to believe in a perverse social/sexual contract that promised access to women’s bodies in exchange for rote expressions of kindness, these boys have at least begun to learn that there is no Magic Sex Fairy. And while they’re still hopeful enough to put up a dating profile in the first place, the Nice Guys sabotage their chances of ever getting laid with their inability to conceal their own aggrieved self-righteousness.
Nice Guys of OkCupid provides an excellent opportunity to reiterate a basic truth: there is no right to have sex.
This represents the basic disconnect that a feminine conditioned male like Schwyzer can’t grasp. He’s very concerned that self-avowed Nice Guys harbor this endemic, deep expectation of obligatory sex in lieu of ‘being nice’, yet remains willfully ignorant of the nature of exchange inherent in the sexual marketplace. Of the hundreds of self-professed nice guys I’ve known or counseled, not one of them expressed an expectation of reciprocal sex. In fact the genuine ‘nice guys’ are so self-sacrificing that the idea of a social contract of reciprocal sex is alien to them.
The new popularity of Nice Guy demonization that Hugo and the predictable, gender trend vultures piling on at The Atlantic isn’t about expectations or entitlements it’s about the underlying and unspoken reciprocal nature of the sexual marketplace being exposed. When a ‘nice guy’ does express some angst over his sexless and solitary life, or does bring his Savior Schema to the surface in a public fashion it becomes an ugly reminder for the feminine that the SMP is actually that, a marketplace. A fem-centric society doesn’t like the idea of a visceral resource exchange, because it ruins its humanist/equalist social pretense. Solution? Ridicule and marginalize the one doing the exposing.
Besides the near-universal sense that they’ve been unjustly defrauded, the great commonality among these Nice Guys is their contempt for women’s non-sexual friendship. They rage about being “friendzoned,” and complain about the hours spent listening to women without being given so much as a hand job in return for their investment.
Because Hugo has been so well conditioned by his feminization he lacks any frame of reference to understand the reflexive rage these “false-flag nice guys” experience. This rage response isn’t the disappointment of some societal masculine influence convincing these guys of a sex-debt obligation, it was the entirely feminized influence which convince them of myth of Relational Equity:
…I’ve repeatedly read men relate to me when they say how unbelievable their breakups were. As if all of the investment, emotional, physical, financial, familial, etc. would be rationally appreciated as a buffer against hypergamy. The reason for their shock and disbelief is that their mental state originates in the assumption that women are perfectly rational agents and should take all of their efforts, all of their personal strengths, all of the involvement in their women’s lives into account before trading up to a better prospective male. There is a prevailing belief that all of their merits, if sufficient, should be proof against her hypergamous considerations.
For men, this is a logically sound idea. All of that investment adds up to their concept of relationship equity. So it’s particularly jarring for men to consider that all of that equity becomes effectively worthless to a woman presented with a sufficiently better prospect as per the dictates of her hypergamy.
Hugo’s preoccupation with the sex-debt obligations for being ‘nice’ is a convenience for his inability to address the concept of relational equity. In a sense he’s correct, men should never presume that anything they do, any personal sacrifice, any emotional investment they make for a woman will EVER be appreciated, much less reciprocated, because hypergamy doesn’t care about any of it.
If these ‘nice guys’ are guilty of anything, it’s in their ego-investment in the lie that any woman might have the capacity to appreciate his investments in them. That rage isn’t about the disappointment of not getting an expected lay, it’s the self-rage associated with the disillusionment of a belief in a relational equity that women (often times the same women they want to become intimate with) continue to convince them of. It’s a rage that comes from the loss of investment and being ridiculed for ever having invested by the same women who convinced them to invest.
So thank you Hugo, you’ve unwittingly made the manosphere, Game and red pill wisdom all the more attractive for ‘nice guys’ with your exposé. The obvious moral to this story is to drop the pretense of being a ‘nice guy’ and embrace a self-concerned Game perspective. In other words, unplug. Drop any expectations of a mutual respect, shared purpose or infantile visions of an idealistic love – because you have no ‘right’ to something women fundamentally lack the capacity to reciprocate. Your idealized relationship doesn’t exist in a feminine frame, it only exists in a positive masculine frame of your making. The only thing ‘nice guys’ have to lament is not embracing these truths before they posted their profile pic on OK Cupid.
Here’s the abbreviated version:
“Mom, how do I get girls to like me?”
“Well, be nice and be yourself.”
Fast forward a few years and voila!… frustrated nice guys with no Charisma and involuntarily celibate.
Everytime I see a fat chick it reminds me to not be a nice guy.
Neither men or women have an “obligation” to keep themselves shaven. Obligation to whom or what, exactly?
“In fact the genuine ‘nice guys’ are so self-sacrificing that the idea of a social contract of reciprocal sex is alien to them.” Reciprocal? You’re saying that if a man is “nice” to me than I should “reciprocate” with sex?! [No, I’m saying women fundamentally lack the capacity to appreciate the sacrifices men make to facilitate women’s reality. That being the case, the very concept of reciprocation is foreign to women. Even prostitutes get paid after the act.] Please know one thing: when women say they want a “nice” guy or a “sensitive” guy or whatever, they are saying they… Read more »
I would think Nice Guy Betas get rejected, then quietly move on. (Since most guys are Beta, and this is the normal adult male response to rejection.)
Complaining to the internet is Gamma. Or lower. (If you ascribe to that hierarchy)
The RedPillRoom had a blistering take on this: http://theredpillroom.blogspot.com/2013/01/humiliating-omegas-for-greater-good.html
Beat me to the punch.. i have a post coming out later.. will have to link (and read this post, as it’s too long to read right now at work)
Do want to add, this shit is spreading into the main.. check out what i found swimming in the pond.
http://www.pof.com/viewprofile.aspx?profile_id=46199514
Funny how that site is now taken down. Maybe they were getting too much heat. Or maybe they are revamping it ’cause of the attention it’s received lately. Will there ever be an Attention Whore’s of OKCupid site? Or a site which display’s profiles (facebook, myspace, POF, OKCupid, etc…) with tally marks for every guy that’s fucked her, or reviews on how much of a “bitch” she was, or how easy of a lay. Seems to me that would be an equivocal response to Nice Guys of OKCupid: Whore’s of the Internet/Women to Avoid (or Fuck & Dump).com But maybe… Read more »
Not just with women;
http://www.bakadesuyo.com/2011/12/who-makes-more-money-nice-people-or-mean-peop/
No its pretty simple that this is focused to badger men and boys into depression and suicide merely for the lulz. None should be surprised that women are now employing their psychological warfare on the internet now. In addition, young men committing suicide is now the #1 cause of “accidental” death in the US.
As the numbers of “useless men” increase, expect more campaigns to drive them to suicide to rid the “girl-power generation” of having to pay one cent or have to sit next to their eww icky selves in public.
Just think of its from the ladies perspective:
More dead men means bigger inheritances if their brothers are dead, more funding for scholarships and programs if more male athletes are dead, and more jobs that pay well if more beta males are dead.
All women win!
Except mothers, but as we know, white women aren’t having kids anymore.
That’s right, 1 Women’s View, there is no obligation to do anything but your choice determines the possible consequences.
I think the whole issue with Nice Beta Guys is that there is actually is a market for such people. Some women really do like sensitive nice acting men. It’s just that this market is so super saturated that you have to be a complete idiot to enter it. If you want to go the nice guy route you better damn well be awesome looking with a lot of talent in attractive hobbies. Bascially you should be close to the manicorn as possible. If you want to be a ‘nice guy’ and pull decent ass you better be firing on… Read more »
Perhaps there should be a ‘Nice Girls of (insert date site here)’ where we can post up all the whiney ‘where are the good men?’ and ‘tired of the games’ and ‘no real men left’ and etc.. etc… No woman is ENTITLED to a relationship. So what if these cunts are pumped and dumped… they should have ZERO expectation of getting a relationship just because they put out. Not so nice after all these fucking harlots… thinking they can get a relationship and commitment of some alpha just because she put out. Not so nice after all are they. Jezzies.… Read more »
I’ve been seeing the denigration of ‘Nice Guys (TM)’ more and more lately. Apparently women are taking to the term and concept much like the way ‘creeper’ blew up a few years ago. Usually this shit doesn’t really bother me, but this one is pissing me off. Most men are nice. They’re genuinely decent people, and they treat women well because they like them. Now, not only do these men have to be strung along and watch the object of their genuine affection get plowed by some scumbag who doesn’t give a fuck (no condoms, naturally; sleep tight, boys) but… Read more »
Nice guys feeling slighted in the SMP is a classic problem of projection from the perspective of the nice guy.
Men tend to be decent to each other because men fundamentally understand hierarchy among males. Often men want to be team players because they understand that there is power in being part of and supporting the team. They tend to be cooperative and supportive of other men and assume that this strategy will work in their relations with women. It doesn’t.
BTW, excellent writing Rollo. Hats off to you sir.
@Vicomte: To quote the venerable Clint Eastwood: “Deserve’s got nuthin’ to do with it.” What makes it extra hard is that some of these nice guys have two red pills to swallow. The first red pill is “This is how things are/this is what works.” They realize that being nice won’t get them what they want. But the second pill that some of them have to take is “This is what’s right.” It’s possible to acknowledge that “most women” are like that, but refuse to accept that it’s morally okay to be more of a selfish bastard in response. These… Read more »
@Martel
The key is that you don’t have to change your moral compass you just have to get the order of actions correct.
It’s a cart before the horse problem
Nice guys think that you act nice and then you get pussy. But they’ve got the order wrong.
You get pussy and THEN you are nice.
See? All better. No need to transform yourself into an asshole. Just get your priorities straight and be upfront with your desires.
All I thought when I saw the OKCupid nice-guy mocking blog was: “Huh…I guess they don’t realize they’ve just created the next generation of PUAs.”
Guaranteed this cyber-bullying by women converts a handful of those guys. Will they be the type that learn game to seduce women and leave them better than they found them, or learn it to use them, hurt them and get revenge for being mocked across the world as a Nice Guy? I know which one I’d place my bets on. Well done, ladies!
When the NiceGuy becomes extinct in North America… There will be a reckoning amongst women when the time to assign blame comes for who taught men to avoid being “nice” at all costs.
I think a lot of women’s (especially feminists) hatred of “nice guys” is their rationalization for the disconnect between their stated preference for kind, unselfish, considerate, and sensitive men and their actual sexual disdain for those men. So instead of thinking: “I like nice guys. Joe’s really nice, but I don’t like him ‘like that’… hmm.. maybe I don’t find nice guys all that attractive after all?” They think: “I like nice guys. Joe’s really nice, but I don’t like him ‘like that’… but I like nice guys! So Joe must be a “fake” nice guy! That’s it! Because if… Read more »
@Hero: I know what you mean, but I was talking about something somewhat different. For a while, I knew that being a prick was how you would get most women, but I refused to be one because I thought it was wrong, because I thought that somebody somewhere would appreciate me even though I was going against the grain. Part of what confused me is that prior to that I went through a brief alpha period where I actually was nice. I stumbled into a high-status position and played a YaReally type role in a little section of Paris and… Read more »
@1Woman’sView Women don’t have any obligation to shave their legs for the men in their life, until they enter into a committed relationship. At that point, yeah, you’re obligated to look good and do what you can to foster a good relationship.
Why bother entering a relationship if you don’t feel obligated to do the basics?
Because she feels “entitled” to one.
You know.. like nice guys feel entitled to sex…
I learned about this site last week at heartiste’s. I think its disgusting. The internet is a modern public square to put people in the stocks. Except these guys haven’t committed a crime. Will their mockery act as an example to others? Perhaps, but at their expense. Regarding nice guys, I think women have so much contempt for them romantically because they feel that they deserve better. When they do give these nice guys a chance, they resent it ten times more when they are dumped by them because they feel they are deigning to see them in the first… Read more »
I’d say the nice guys is almost already extinct, people don’t target a group because they are LARGE in numbers.
The death of the nice guy will be cheered by women across all spectrum of the anglosphere until the first woman is pulled into a bush screaming for mercy and nobody. bothers. to. help.
NiceGuys (Betas) give up their resources to women hoping for love/affection/praise/sex/kids. Few win, most lose.
Sluts (Female version of Beta) give up their bodies to men hoping for love/affection/attention/kids/resources. Few win, most lose.
Neither gender (on the whole) really wants things to change because individuals tend to think they are special and can eventually win the game after enough tries.
“No boys allowed: the rise of single-sex clubs and societies
This month, a women-only restaurant will join a clutch of new clubs, societies and networking events that exclude men. So would many of us really prefer our social lives to be single-sex?
Zoe Williams
The Guardian, Friday 4 January 2013 23.00 GMT ”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/jan/04/rise-single-sex-clubs-societies
And of course the “single sex” they are referring to is women.
And so it starts, your long trek downward to second class status, with not only covert discrimination, but also overt and flaunted.
@M3 i said the same thing when this first came out. Where’s the backlash on the articles on woman complaining about the lack of “good men” ?, complaining about the rise of the “man-child” ? Entitlement is the #1 problem people have with these nice guys but I’ve never seen these womans article taken to task by woman for their sense of entitlement. Nice Guy = do whatever i tell you to do and smile while you’re doing it.
@Martel
I hear you. It’s not immoral to have your own best interests at heart but it can be a quite a dilemma to settle for one’s self.
I think that liberals like Huge isn’t logical enough. Hugo: “Sex with other people may be a basic human need, but unlike other needs, it can’t be a basic human right. It’s one thing to believe that the state ought to provide food, shelter, and health care to those who can’t afford these necessities of survival. It’s another thing to say that the state should ensure that even the hideous and the clueless have occasional orgasms provided for them [by] others.” Really? If it’s a basic human need, then it’s a basic human need. Then, of course, it can be… Read more »
This blog is equivalent to a bunch of guys sitting around and mocking fat and ugly women. The only difference is that guys won’t lie to themselves and say that they’re answering a higher moral calling – trying to “start a dialogue”.
I seriously considered starting an “uglygirlsofokcupid.tumblr.com” blog, just to prove the point, but since that blog got taken down there’s nothing left to parody.
Hugo Schwyzer reminds me of what Nietzsche would call a priest. “So long as the priest, that professional negator, slanderer and poisoner of life, is regarded as a superior type of human being, there cannot be any answer to the question: What is Truth?” By making the case against nice-guy males he does two things that benefit himself. He redeems himself of his past behavior which is not nice and sets up a standard by which he is nice via shaming those are not. His past behavior was womanizing, cheating, sleeping with students, etc.. He redeems himself of that past… Read more »
I have been thinking about your last post a lot. Now this comes along and seems to affirm what has been circling my brain these last couple of days. It appears to me, that this feminization of society has other consequences within the growing radicalness of our times. I think a perfect example is the group Annonamous. A collective (femine trait) who disguise themselves (FT), attacking, by their description, bad entities (FT), for the betterment of society (FT), whilst hiding (FT) behind their computers. Hmm, sounds like The Borg. It is kinda scary that the condition of the western world… Read more »
” The obvious moral to this story is to drop the pretense of being a ‘nice guy’ and embrace a self-concerned Game perspective. In other words, unplug.”
One can only hope that this happens
I think social media is also playing a huge role in the diminished role of the beta. Females need (or at least really like) orbiters. Alphas throw them off guard, but betas reassure them of what special snowflakes they are. It arms their confidence for the Alpha. Hence, Christine’s line in “In the Company of Men” when she told beta Howard she wanted Alpha Chad, “I shouldn’t have needed both of you.” However, with social media, the value of each individual beta is diminished. That video a few weeks back of troll Ashley, in which she did absolutely nothing remarkable,… Read more »
Somebody told me when I was 14 that girls like being treated like shit as if somebody had died. His tone is very telling looking at it now but I didn’t listen then and learned my lesson later.
” That being the case, the very concept of reciprocation is foreign to women. Even prostitutes get paid after the act.]” — Bullshit. Prostitutes ARE women. Or are you referring exclusively to male pros? “Arousal is not Attraction.” — And neither arousal nor attraction is a choice. There is a baseline of attractiveness that must be met before “nice” can even be considered. Just as you get boners, we get lady boners, gina tingles, clit twinges. Call them what you may. They are not a choice. Either you pass the boner test or you don’t. That goes for both of… Read more »
Women are like the Manosphere’s beta orbiters. Every couple weeks a new one latches on, texts us all the time about their feelings, then eventually gets fed up, calls us a superficial whore, and never talks to us again.
We need to stop giving out our number.
The biggest denigrators of “nice guys” are the Manospherians right here online, with all their “alpha males rah rah” cheerleading from the sidelines.
Did you say ‘superficial whore’?
@UpFed: We denigrate nice guys, but there’s a limit because most of us used to be them.
We rip into nice guys as a way of shedding our old selves and to encourage any nice guys who might be paying attention to change. “Lift that fucking weight, pussy!” is a very effective man to man encouragement tactic.
Femblogs try to tear down their very souls. Big difference.
Fed Up is right. I see a lot of Manosphere commenters relishing in seducing the wives of “beta chumps” while the beta chump foots the bill. They also talk a lot about the glories of cuckolding and how those men “deserve” to be cuckolded because they are “beta chumps”. Unlike the universal sisterhood of Feminism, there is no “brotherhood” in the MRM. Its dog eat dog. Whether race against race (and what IS up with all the racism in the so called “manosphere”?), proles against elites, alphas vs betas, you name it. This is why the MRM will get no… Read more »
SUPERFICIAL WHORE!
(Apologies, Rollo, but the timing is positively serendipitous.)
[…] More awesome stuff from The Rational Male. […]
1 Woman’s View Unlike the universal sisterhood of Feminism, there is no “brotherhood” in the MRM. Its dog eat dog. Whether race against race (and what IS up with all the racism in the so called “manosphere”?), proles against elites, alphas vs betas, you name it. Yes, women are smarter like that. Women are more realistic, men tend to be idealists. But that’s both good and bad. Women fall victim to group manipulation both from within and from outside the group. Also women are much more easy to convince/scare by pushing various buttons. Men have more of a range and… Read more »
FedUp: How can the biggest denigrators of Betas be the manosphere when the femisphere created a blog and PUT THEIR EFFING PICTURES ON IT???
Roosh, Heartiste, etc. all have commenters that might razz Betas, but do ultimately try to help them.
“Yes, women are smarter like that. Women are more realistic, men tend to be idealists. ”
What exactly is “realistic” about racism, classism and other isms against your own fellow man?
I mean what exactly is more “idealistic” about the above?
NGOKC is a natural response to the slaves to the Feminine Imperative (the nice guys) starting to ask questions of their masters. Obviously they will need to be whipped back to total compliance, pronto, and the worst offenders publicly hung and made an example of.
Just be sure to wear kevlar if you frequent women’s pilates classes (for pickup, of course). I fear they’re rapidly creating new Sodinis.
@Rollo
I can’t say more than an incredible piece. Keep up the great work……hattip…
Paul
It’s funny to come across nice guys who see what’s happening and call the bs rather than acting on it. It’s like they’re gonna wait for women to say “ok you’re right we don’t really find nice guys attractive” before they quit playing the chumply nice guy role. If you wait til you have her explicit permission and approval it won’t be worth anything.
Nice Guys of OkCupid provides an excellent opportunity to reiterate a basic truth: there is no right to have sex. Hun, I never would have expected Hugo to come out against the Flukian “you owe me free birth control because rights” position. I mean, he is opposed to the notion of an entitlement to BC, right? Because, if there’s “no right to have sex”, then, obviously, there’s no right to force someone else to pay for the incidental costs of your sex, either. Of course he is. Good ol’ Hugo would never adopt a series of internally inconsistent positions that… Read more »
@Retrenched:
“I think a lot of women’s (especially feminists) hatred of “nice guys” is their rationalization for the disconnect between their stated preference for kind, unselfish, considerate, and sensitive men and their actual sexual disdain for those men.”
Right on. If they were honest, those are the guys they would also end up having sex with, which they don’t want to. This is their reaction to getting exposed, to be called on on their hypergamy.
@1 Woman’s View
You not shaving your legs is not the equivalent of hubby not shaving his beard, but it is the equivalent of him turning beta on you.
When will women understand that men are attracted to physical qualities of women and women are attracted to behavioral qualities of men?
I pity your husband.
“The biggest denigrators of “nice guys” are the Manospherians right here online, with all their “alpha males rah rah” cheerleading from the sidelines.” I ‘rah rah’ from the experience of having my heart broken by these so-called “nice” guys who leave you feeling used. The two men I’ve been involved with since my divorce who I’d consider alpha are men who would NOT sleep with me. That is the only kind of “good” guy: one who acts with some kind of conscience when he knows he’s not interested in a relationship. “Nice” guys will sleep with you and then, because… Read more »
With broads, it’s doublethink all the way down.
Nice guys = the real assholes! Cads and PUAs = the real nice guys!
Manosphere = the real denigration of nice guys! Manboobz and Jizzabelles = the real appreciation for nice guys!
@ 1 Woman’s view:
“and what IS up with all the racism in the so called “manosphere”?”
Racism is basically just a code word for anti-white or anti-european.
Accusations of racism are only raised against whites.
Multuculturalism and feminism have the same origin and the same purpose:
destruction of white european societies. That may be the reason for the
so-called rasism in the manosphere.
@Fed up The biggest denigrators of “nice guys” are the Manospherians right here online, with all their “alpha males rah rah” cheerleading from the sidelines. As a former nice guy, and a current denigrator of nice guys, i can tell you there is a difference between the way feminists and at least some manosphere members do this. We make fun of nice guys and beta males as a way of pointing out to men that its detrimental to your life to be “that guy”. And then, at least at blogs like this one, men are given advice on what to… Read more »
here are 40 pages + in a thread mocking OK Cupid Hamsters
http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-11111.html
good stuff
Women really do have no clue about cause and effect. It is like think they live in a static world where nice guys will always be there to support them. Rattle the cage, he can’t possibly get out.
I ‘rah rah’ from the experience of having my heart broken by these so-called “nice” guys who leave you feeling used. The two men I’ve been involved with since my divorce who I’d consider alpha are men who would NOT sleep with me. That is the only kind of “good” guy: one who acts with some kind of conscience when he knows he’s not interested in a relationship. “Nice” guys will sleep with you and then, because they have these ridiculous ideas about women, lose their idealization of that woman and move on to the next thinking some other one… Read more »
If a man is an alpha (in control of his sexual desires) he can actually be a good guy as in doing the right thing. Someone who is not in control of his desires, will only care about doing what is right for him.
I don’t see how this benefits the feminine imperative. I thought the feminine imperative was to sleep with alphas and have beta providorship. If you’re not getting anything from anyone, you can hardly be said to be benefiting.
“I don’t see how this benefits the feminine imperative. I thought the feminine imperative was to sleep with alphas and have beta providorship. If you’re not getting anything from anyone, you can hardly be said to be benefiting.”
Serious question, Do you actually read the posts by Rollo or CH?
@1 Woman & Fed Up “The biggest denigrators of “nice guys” are the Manospherians right here online, with all their “alpha males rah rah” cheerleading from the sidelines.” What is the better medicine; denigration with the intent break a guy down from the same party that subjectively defines the criteria for his qualifying to them, or a painful self-exposition objectively reflected to him with the intent to better him? Even in the link backs I get from the 4Chan forums guys are supportive of guys; same on the reddit forums, they’re harsh, but they’re supportive. They may get a kick… Read more »
The last paragraph might be your most concise summary of the war we are fighting.
If a man is an alpha (in control of his sexual desires) he can actually be a good guy as in doing the right thing. Someone who is not in control of his desires, will only care about doing what is right for him Why should a man only caring about himself not “be the right thing” for him? The problem with your fem-centric understanding is that, to women, “doing the right thing” always benefits the feminine. You’re not even consciously aware that you’re stating this. You see, in girl-world a man “in control of his sexual desires” does the… Read more »
One reason women always default to the female imperative is an understanding deep down that they need men to survive. Theoretically if men abandoned them they know their world would collapse. It’s a primal survival reflex.
Perhaps admitting this hurts their pride? Sure it’s an uncomfortable truth, but remember women, men have to read that they’re the “disposable” sex. That’s not something that brightens a man’s day when he first hears it.
If a man is an alpha (in control of his sexual desires) he can actually be a good guy as in doing the right thing. Someone who is not in control of his desires, will only care about doing what is right for him. The “right thing” huh? Right according to whom? Thats a rhetorical question by the way. Myself and everyone else who read that knows that the answer you are implying here is “like, everyone”. As in, “like, everyone” knows that a guy controlling his desires and not using women just for sex is the “right thing” to… Read more »
“One reason women always default to the female imperative is an understanding deep down that they need men to survive.”
Which they will quickly realizes when this corrupt government finally crashes and burns. I’ll be dancing in the flames.
Well, at least I’ve been amusing 🙂 I do see what you and Rollo are saying now about the difference between what is objectively and subjectively right, so that was very helpful. Thank you. I guess that since I feel (whether I am or not) that I am looking out for the interests of others, I’d like to have that returned. I’m not sure I’d agree that women are inherently self-centered as opposed to men. I think everyone is self-centered to varying degrees. Men sometimes say they like sluts because at least they’re honest. I guess that is the point… Read more »
The link I just posted above I highly suggest being watched by everyone. It changed my entire perspective on everything and I think will only help people men and women.
“What’s more sexually appealing to you; a guy who’s reserved in his approach, withholds from initiating, forestalls sex for fear of seeming out of control – or the guy who’s forthright and impulsive in his approach, a guy so enamored and aroused by you that he can barely contain himself in your presence? Which guy flatters your ego more? Which guy makes you feel more desired?” I wouldn’t present those two as the only options. The second one would be more appealing, initally, but its a passion that would most likely burn itself out quickly. Initiating, forthright, and impulsive are… Read more »
Well, at least I’ve been amusing Making people laugh is never a bad thing. 🙂 I do see what you and Rollo are saying now about the difference between what is objectively and subjectively right, so that was very helpful. Thank you. Youre welcome. I guess that since I feel (whether I am or not) that I am looking out for the interests of others, I’d like to have that returned. Not sure what youre getting at here.. I’m not sure I’d agree that women are inherently self-centered as opposed to men. I think everyone is self-centered to varying degrees.… Read more »
I’m going to put on my sappy pedestalization hat. Much of the time men are nice to women because, quite simply, men experience great joy from making a woman happy. I used the word joy, no apologies. We can be reductive and make everything about sex, but that’s boring. Giving a woman a small gift that hits all the right buttons, and watching her face light up with a genuine, bright smile, and her eyes water, is one of the great feelings for a man. You hear me Kate? Obviously you’ll never truly understand because you’re not a man, and… Read more »
I’m in a committed relationship and I don’t shave my legs
oh look, sundeep’s back again, trolling under yet another alias from the dell tech support call center in mumbai.
get your hair self the fuck back to work, it’s people like you that cause me to stay number 8 in the online chat queue for half an hour.
@LOL- Well, now you have amused me, Apollo. What time shall I expect you for dinner.
Its hard to call men liars, truly. Its more like, in their eagerness, they overcommitt or overinvest themselves. And then when the rose tinted glasses come off, they seem to conveniently forget what they said beforehand, making them look like liars. And this isn’t exclusive to men. Women “lie” too without thinking they are or meaning to. We all do it unintentionally. Intentional is a different story. It would be a good strategy to avoid making promises and creating false expectation.
Yes, I hear you Madvillian. I’m moved.
Good first comment here about your mom saying, “Be nice and be yourself” and then you get out in the real world and find the opposite is true. What I don’t get — as discussed here frequently — are the mixed messages sent by women. If a woman said, “Look, I want a bad boy, cocky, bad-ass dude,” why not admit it? I won’t be offended and might find the honesty refreshing. (Or maybe women don’t know what they want despite many protestations that they do think they know what they want?) On another post I mentioned a painful AFC… Read more »
This is humorous…all of this attention given to a couple of female trolls. Attempts to reply to their posts with some sort of logical reasoning in order to enlighten them? Fools work…
Lets count how many times they write “I” or “I’m” or “Me” or “My” in their posts…nauseating.
“A man only begins to be a man when he ceases to whine and revel, and commences to search for the hidden justice which regulates his life. And he adapts his mind to that regulating factor, he ceases to accuse others as the cause of his conditions, and builds himself up in strong and noble thoughts; ceases to kick against circumstances, but beings to use them as aids to his more rapid progress, and as a means of discovering the hidden powers and possibilities within himself.” ~James Allen
I only posted the above quote because I’m just reading alot of bitching and moaning here. Rollo I like your spin plates articles better.
@Westcoaster: Telling us flat out what they want (if they actually know, which is debatable) would be like giving us the answer key to the shit test. She instinctually knows how much BS she’s full of, and she needs to find a guy who can overcome it. Taking her too seriously means you can’t do that. Therefore, telling you she wants flowers is the best way to identify you as a weakling if you actually listen to her. Women have always been like this, and there has always been the FI shit-test for men to overcome. The problems is that… Read more »
Martel, so true. I’m lucky, had great parents, late father was honest, upfront without being a bully. Mom is a straight shooter.
So rtue on the sh-t tests, yep. I find the (former) male code the best. What you say and your actions are true to who you are. The guys I hang out with are honest about what they want, even my PUA friends, they don’t lie about who they are. No sh-t tests, they are who they are. My AFC friends? They have more problems and change their identitites to fit the female agenda.
Plus, the FI has been served by the lie that men and women are basically the same. As a male, you assume that people say what they mean because that’s what you do. Therefore, if a woman says she wants a sweet guy who gives her chocolates, that’s what she means. Obviously not true. Also, anybody can be selfish, but I do believe that men have a stronger innate ability to step outside of themselves. You can discuss the political situation in Portugal with a man and he won’t necessarily have to relate everything you’re saying to yourself. This is… Read more »
“So it cames that Man, the coward, when he gathers to confer / With his fellow-braves in council”
Actually, men can’t “gather in council” either, because when they do that they’re told by other men they’re “bitching and whining”.
Men, remain stoic and never say anything about anything. See that monster over there called feminism? Don’t mention it, ignore it, and pretend that philosophy is not why it became a monster in the first place.
@Westcoaster:
https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/just-get-it/
Relevant.
“If these ‘nice guys’ are guilty of anything, it’s in their ego-investment in the lie that any woman might have the capacity to appreciate his investments in them. That rage isn’t about the disappointment of not getting an expected lay, it’s the self-rage associated with the disillusionment of a belief in a relational equity that women (often times the same women they want to become intimate with) continue to convince them of. It’s a rage that comes from the loss of investment and being ridiculed for ever having invested by the same women who convinced them to invest.” Well said.… Read more »
Contrary to the femanine imparative and AFC agenda, real men don’t want to be sh-t tested, they want to be loved and respected and shouldn’t have to jump through hoops or take sh-t tests to get those two things.
This is humorous…all of this attention given to a couple of female trolls
kate’s not a troll. she seems to have a genuine desire to be a red pill woman despite the fact that such a thing is an oxymoron. but we applaud her efforts and can even appreciate the entertainment value of her solipsistic lapses in logic.
1 woman’s view, on the other hand, is a troll. rajesh has trolled here before using other aliases (sexual marxism, hopeless romantic, and others i can’t remember) and on other blogs as well.
@Westcoaster: Sometimes “should” has nothing to do with it. We do have to get shit-tested unless we want only low-value women, and that’s how it’s always gonna be.
The good news is that as we increase our SMV the shit-tests can lessen in frequency and intensity.
However, we’ll never be loved quite the way we wish we could be. Rollo’s post called “Men in Love” examines this brilliantly.
Sometimes life sucks, but it is what it is. Each of us just has to make the best of it.
Agree again, Martel, this site helps one conquer sh-t tests. I appreciate honesty and straight-forwardness and realize that receiving that from a woman in today’s world is a rare thing indeed.
Hypergamy in its natural state isn’t nearly as destructive. If hypergamy is the continual desire to trade up, the security instinct is the fear of going too far down. Women have always been hypergamous, but they also had to fear ostracism, raising their own kids, being labeled as an old-maid or a harlot, or in extreme cases, death, if she acted too boldly on her hypergamous instincts. We’ve countered all of these with gov’t paid abortions and birth control, the sexual revolution, the emasculinization of the church, slut-pride, the FI ruling our entire culture, and overall societal prosperity. Before, taking… Read more »
But even if the risk is added back into the equation, all that’s happening is the imprisonment of hypergamic impulses. They’re still there and can’t be denied. Therefore, marriage will always be the ultimate act of beta submission for men. It is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears to drown out the cacophonous truth.
“Drop any expectations of a mutual respect, shared purpose or infantile visions of an idealistic love – because you have no ‘right’ to something women fundamentally lack the capacity to reciprocate. Your idealized relationship doesn’t exist in a feminine frame, it only exists in a positive masculine frame of your making.” Of course, another truth. But I do have one question. Given this fact, how could any SANE man enter into marriage? Nice guy is not the “pump and dump” type. He wants to enter into serious business with women. He wants to MARRY them for god´s sake. He wants… Read more »
@ falconer “Hypergamy is brutal, and it can’t be ignored. If you have fully digested the red pill, you should never be able to respect, love or trust a woman again.” Unfortunately, this is the truth. And – according to my opinion, this is the ultimate source of pain for nice guy. He WANTS to respect, love and share his life with women. He wants to sacrify for them. “Seduce, ignore and debase are the only options.” Nope. You can do what you want. You are free now. If you FULLY understood yourself AND women, you can do what you… Read more »
“Unlike the universal sisterhood of Feminism”
The crazy pakistani lady on Roosh’s site was spouting this exact same line yesterday. Ponder. I vote one in the same person. And yeah, you ladies are so nice to each other, that’s why my sister became bulimic and later killed herself, because you gals are soooooooo supportive.
@falconer, gregg “Hypergamy is brutal, and it can’t be ignored. If you have fully digested the red pill, you should never be able to respect, love or trust a woman again.” This is unhealthy thinking, the kind of cynicism/pessimism that turns people away from experiencing all there is in life and growing as a person. I used to think that way too when I came across manosphere stuff. Believe it or not, it is possible to love again. The love is different- it’s not that head over heels follow you to the end of earth adolescent love, it’s a reality… Read more »
True, Nate. Yin/yang is exactly it. Gentlemen, let go of the fairy tale of romantic love.
When you don’t *need* her, when you can live happily without her, if she is worthy, you can *choose* to love her.
Being mad at women for being hypergamous is like being mad at your dog because he can’t mow the lawn.
They’re not rational in the same way we are. All that means is that we’re supposed to be in charge, not that they deserve a slow and painful death.
Actually, Nate, this isn’t unhealthy or cynical or pessimistic. It’s a warning, a reminder that women do NOT love in the same manner as men do. Expecting the same thing in return is dishonest and foolish.
Men experience love as men; but, this does not cause (any) woman to reciprocate or confoirm to the same ideal. Knowing the harsh reality lets you choose the best path. That’s all.