The ‘Real’ Nice

fake_nice_guy

I once posed this question to the SoSuave forum:

Let us say, in a strange alternate world, women would LOVE you if you were a Nice Guy. In this world, you could do all the things you wanted to do. You could be sappy. You could write her poetry and SHE WOULD LOVE IT. The more of a Nice Guy you were, the more women in general would love and appreciate you.

And in this alternate world, the jerks and players would be the ones sneered at by women. If you were a jerk in this world, no woman would like you. If you were cocky, they would dismiss you immediately.

Would you remain a Nice Guy if you were in this alternate world?

I got a variety of answers ranging from the want for clearer, but no less useful terminologies,…

First off, I object to the labels. I know they’ve been used here and in the seduction community for a long time, but I don’t really believe in the stereotypes. I’m not a ‘nice guy’ or a jerk or a bad boy. Having said that and cleared the air, let’s go back to the stereotypes:

How many guys came here to this forum as “nice guys”? They were probably perfectly happy with themselves and only decided to change so they could do better with women. So they became assholes. Just to please women. I don’t see why they wouldn’t do the opposite in this “alternate reality”. I don’t care for the stereotypes. Half the guys on this forum think a “jerk” or a “douche” is a desireable thing to be. Something’s wrong with this picture. Somehow a “jerk” has become a guy with backbone who stands up for himself. 

The definition of a “nice guy” should just be a man who respects others as well as himself. But instead, in dating circles, “nice guy” means wimp.

…to the hope for Relational Equity and an appreciation for being ‘nice’…

I don’t think it’s that simple. You can be compassionate and kind without supplicating–and the whole “nice” thing isn’t really about kindness, it’s about supplicating and expecting something in return. “Nice” is really just synonymous with needy, unattractive behaviors, as I see it-it’s not even GENUINE kindness, as when you expect nothing in return.

To me, being an alpha “bad boy” just means going after what you want. It means pushing the envelope and being aggressive in pickup. It doesn’t mean being antisocial or violent, or being a dick to people. It often happens that an aggressive guy has these tendencies, but I don’t think they contribute to his success with women unless they bring him some fame, too. I think women DO have a capacity to appreciate kind gestures, and will certainly judge a man by how he treats his family, etc. The “protector of loved ones” is an attractive archetype to women. 

The guys that lose out are the ones that do “nice” things in the hopes that a woman will grow attracted to them. They let the women control the frame in this case, and act like children trying to please their mother. This is always an attraction killer–it doesn’t matter if they’re a jerk or an alpha in every other aspect of their life. Lots of really tough dudes are complete wussies around women. 

It is truly one of the cosmic ironies of the universe that women should completely lack the capacity to truly appreciate the niceties of men – yet still perpetually claim to desire those niceties.

With the notable exceptions of natural born Alphas, I believe most men would overwhelmingly default to being compassionate, empathic souls, steeped in romantic notions of chivalry, dedication and honor. Whether this sentiment is the result of a genuine dedication to principle or inspired by a hope that women will appreciate his sacrifices to principle and reciprocate with her intimacy is really a Crisis of Motive.

That was really the gist of my question – are guys just playing nice to get laid or is “niceness” (for lack of a better term) something deep rooted that they have to necessarily repress in order to be taken seriously as a sexual competitor because women would despise him were he to be as ‘nice’ as he really has the capacity for.

Most guys make lame attempts to redefine raw, natural, Alpha masculinity to fit into accord with all these noble qualities. Tragically women and reality prove them wrong at virtually every instance, but their fallback denial is an easy one (ironically provided for them by the Feminine Imperative) – “those women who don’t appreciate your niceness are just Damaged Women®, no quality woman would value an asshole above a real Nice Guy.”

Men are simply never rewarded for displays of these higher-self aspirations with genuine appreciation of women. They certainly appreciate them on a by-need basis, and as a ‘value added‘ benefit, but the esoteric, self-actualizing concerns men believe women should prioritize as primarily attractive aspects of themselves are never what they hope women will appreciate. If anything overly ‘nice’ men are punished for it, either in the instance or progressively over time.

The only way to garner true appreciation, true valuation, truly inspired displays of affection, from women is to covertly imply the risk of losing a high-value Man. Whether the man is even truly of a higher value is irrelevant, only the perception needs to be reinforced for her. Risk of loss is all that factors. Risk of losing an investment in optimizing hypergamy is weighed against her own perceived sexual market value and the effort needed to reinvest in another, potentially higher SMV man. Risk of loss is why her imagination furiously spins the wheel in her head.

That sounds horrible, but the truth often is. Women’s lack of appreciation for the more compassionate natures of men, and their consuming regard for rewarding men that appease their hypergamy is so well proven it’s become predictable enough to develop techniques and behavioral modifications to exploit it (i.e. Game). Most guys would like nothing better than to honestly play the loving, white knight, romantic who women bemoan a lack of in the world. Yet for every sonnet composed, every provision met, every compliment delivered and every well planned candlelit dinner conversation, there’s a woman feverishly fucking her Alpha bad boy in his low rent apartment for fear of losing him to the competition.

Attraction and Arousal


Occasionally we return to a common theme of debate with self-proclaimed ‘red pill women’ in various manosphere comment threads about how women may be attracted to certain characteristics men would like to identify as being ‘nice’, but no woman is aroused sexually by these qualities. As I’ve argued in the past, attraction and arousal are two separate elements of hypergamy. Alpha Fucks is arousing, Beta Bucks is attractive.

A couch surfing Alpha will be arousing enough to bang women indiscriminately despite his impoverished condition. He has no relational equity, and so frustrates the efforts of men who believe that the definition of Alpha ought to be based on the equity they hope women will appreciate. Women will return (even if just mentally) to the callous or cavalier Alpha because he arouses her, but she will stay faithful to her well-providing husband because what he offers is attractive to her.

This is why I say, by and large, women love most men for what they represent – once they cease to represent that, once they stumble in maintaining that, hypergamy is free to run. On a personal level this may be you losing a job or how you failed a shit test, on a meta scale it may be women’s social capacity to provide for themselves.

A lot of guys get lost in these definitions. They believe a woman at her word in what she finds attractive in a man, but then conflate this list of qualities (read any woman’s online dating profile) with what a woman finds arousing. While there may be attraction without arousal, there is never arousal by way of what makes a man attractive. Your respectability, sterling character and being good with kids doesn’t make you look any better when your shirt comes off.

The New Nice

There’s an interesting social convention that’s developed as Game-awareness has become more widespread. As with all social conventions it provides a convenient rationale for women to cling to in order to alleviate uncomfortable truths, but the dilemma of the Faux-Nice Guy has picked up a lot of steam in the feminist / feminine-primary set of women. I covered this a while back in Play Nice, but since then I’ve been reading more about how this convention is dovetailing into the re-imagining of a so called Rape Culture.

As women become more aware of Game (even if just peripherally) there’s developed a convenient distrust of men’s ‘Nice’ qualities. The dynamics I put forth in The Savior Schema all become suspect for what in essence is really a tit for tat exchange of services rendered for intimacy at a later date (once his niceties have proven his worth).

The problem with this is twofold, first, the guy’s relying on Beta Game, convinced that what women say they are attracted to is what they are also aroused by, believe that faux Nice Guys are blowing their chances with the women they believe will eventually come to love them for their earnest Niceness. If all these charlatan Nice Guys are jading their pool of prospective nice-appreciating women it ruins their Game. Consequently they get agitated by women doubting any man’s sincerity and by extension their own. This then leads to Nice Guy infighting and greater, more sincere displays of a Niceness that really only ruins their Game that much more.

Second, women’s doubt of a Nice Guy’s sincerity and unsolicited ‘niceness’ is really a red herring meant to distract men employing Nice Guy Game away from the point that they simply don’t find them all that attractive (and certainly not arousing). Being nice, supportive, dutiful and possessing all the intrinsic characteristics on her list of attractive traits in the hope of proving his worth and qualifying for her intimate acceptance is really one long Appeal to a Woman’s Reason. It’s very convenient for a woman to enjoy (and often become dependent upon) the services a Nice Guy renders to her, but when that Nice Guy is discovered to have a sexual interest in her the “you weren’t really nice, you just expected something sexual in return” social convention finds its use.

Women have been aware of this Nice Guy Game, prequalification schema for generations, because it used to actually work in a time and culture where the Beta Bucks / parental investment side of women’s hypergamy was the predominant factor for determining of a man’s intimate acceptability. The problem now is that the deductive reasoning men use – find out what women want in order to become intimate, become it and solve the problem – in order to achieve a woman’s intimacy comes from an old set of books that no woman is still using. However the reliance on the responsibilities outlined in that first set of books are still useful when it comes to control the intents and actions of men.

Chivalry is an anachronism in a post-feminist society, particularly where equalism is concerned, but it’s a liability when it’s useful to the feminine imperative. It may be a man’s duty not to expect sex in exchange for his niceties and services, but when his chivalry is useful to her then it becomes his responsibility.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

125 comments on “The ‘Real’ Nice

  1. Pingback: Purgatory |
  2. @kfg (19-May 12:45pm)
    “I think your premises being fabrications has a negative impact upon the validity of your conclusion.”

    Spot on. I stopped reading Chokma’s comment at this point. Ignorance or carelessness regarding facts is a non-starter for any intelligent discussion. Next!

  3. @ Scott. Very true.

    This part is something I do as well:
    “So yes. You can be a nice guy – as long as you explicitly demand their appreciation of your “niceness.” You cannot leave it to them to appreciate your nice gestures. You must DEMAND their appreciation of your “niceness” under threat of removing that niceness. Is that ideal? No. But that is how it is.”

    I won’t resort to dread as quickly as that though. I prefer to keep it playful instead.
    You: “Woohooh, BJ!” Her: “You can’t ask me for that.” You: “I’m not asking you, I’m telling you” (introduce wolfish grin). Her: “Yeah, good luck with that.” You: “That disobedience will have to be punished”. She: (amused look). You: (slap her on the ass and go do something else).

    I would dare say that women do appreciate kind gestures most of the time, but won’t return the kindness when they’re not in the mood. That’s when you need to step up and demand it, unless she really isn’t feeling well.
    In my opinion, this is no different than rewarding your wife’s excellent cooking with a dinner in a fancy restaurant: it’s about reciprocity.

    Reciprocity is also why being “nice” to a girl you barely know is inappropriate: you haven’t yet had her unspoken consent, so any nice actions on your part leave her feeling forced to either sexually respond or verbally sort it out (“the friend zone”).

    1. They think now he had brain cancer. From Wikipedia “In 1898 and 1899 Nietzsche suffered at least two strokes which partially paralyzed him, leaving him unable to speak or walk. He likely suffered from clinical hemiparesis/hemiplegia on the left side of his body by 1899. After contracting pneumonia in mid-August 1900, he had another stroke during the night of 24–25 August and died at about noon on 25 August”

  4. To Bellum…

    The light side of Game is holding onto your frame in creating a world of receiprocity around you. You can treat your woman and others around you with a lot of care, but they always have to know that they need to appreciate this fact. It all comes down to frame. Demand reciprocity and people will comply. If you give away your affection for free, then your niceness is used against you. But, it is not about the niceness or rudeness….but only about frame. You cant be afraid of someone hurting you. You live your life on your terms and keep walking……people will latch on.

    1. @jf12

      Rollo T must not get out much. Those who receive “reciprocity” after demanding it are only the ones deemed superior by those not delivering it prior to the demand being issued.

  5. Guys, be well too. I have nothing against studying the obscure aspects of the feminine and hence developing the essential awareness to be able to defend oneself from it, or managing risks as I say. I also think that getting a good knowledge of the obscure aspects of the feminine is an effective “preventative medicine” against being imprisioned by it. I have benefited a lot in this regard from reading some manosphere bloggers which I consider some geniuses.

    I do not have either any “priestess”, I do not support feminist in any way, even the old school feminism Aunt Giggles is in love with me, I think feminists are all psychopaths or mentally ill for that matter and I support banning feminism for the benefit of mankind. 🙂 Actually I was expelled also from HUS quite a long time ago, because I had an active role in denouncing her feminist beliefs and in supporting men’s rights.

    I just think the blog writers I got in touch with over these years were more inclined to a study of the obscure aspects from the feminine from a psycho-analytical point of view, and also fiercely combative of feminism from a philosophical and political standpoint. “Game” in this regard, was seen mostly as an effort to adapt to women’s need and deliver the entertainment they needed in an attempt to “fabricate value”. I do think that modern men’s greatest dilemma is their lack of value. This has already been discussed extensively in the manosphere blogs, but I think few guys actually realize what it means.

    There is also a paradoxical aspect to “Game” in that by pursuing promiscuity one is essentially wasting away one’s energy, instead of building it up, and is essentially slave to women’s desires. The source of feminine (or feminist) power is the male desire. Well, I do not wish to extend or delve into this discussion. But essentially, what I wish to state is that: feminism, fake “Game”, promiscuity, pornography, homosexuality all belong to the sphere of Lilith. Therefore “Game” cannot emancipate men from feminism. Quite the contrary, it is at its service, but in a different way from the naive “nice guys”, by providing the entertainment they need and facilitating their hypergamic optimization. As long as man is slave to his sexual desires, women have the upper hand. Think about it: in pornography, they have the upper hand; in prostitution they also have the upper hand; in “Game” they also have the upper hand and control the “joystick”. They associate sexual liberation with “empowerment”. What kind of “empowerment”? The power to control men and their resources. That’s also why intuitively virginity has always been associated with a kind of measure of character and value in women (even though not failproof, of course). Too long philosophical discussion… and this is not the place of it.

    I am checking out and will be off. Be well.

  6. The real nice guy is the perfect version for game for medium and long term practice, and you can trust this for sure.

    It’s the perfect Machiavellian tactic of the Perfect Prince, is the act to be able to destroy and even with that choose peace, but being able to destroy if you want.

    The difference between the real nice guys are that they are really nice, they aren’t like the fucked betas who display being nice to get sex at the end.

    Be nice to others and you will be social proofed and have a lot of guys and girls that can easily co-op with you and help you.

    Unite to conquer, this is the rule, the nice guy game is the perfect game.
    ””””””””””””””

    cool thought on the Machiavellian tactic
    works in micro but not on macro

  7. The One
    May 20th, 2014 at 9:56 pm

    If there is one thing you learn, learn this. Women Choose Satan.
    ””””””””””””””’
    i’m very far from being satan and woman choose me

  8. Women have it all wrong when they deride men for “playing the nice guy” in transparent attempts to get laid when their “true nature” is that of a manipulative, sociopathic asshole. I know this isn’t always the best way to gauge things, but my “smell test” for these sorts of social tropes is to look at my own peer group, and see if it is representative of what is being said, and this notion fails miserably. I know my fair share of assholes, but they’re spread evenly across both genders, and for the most part, the guys I know are legitimately compassionate, selfless dudes that want to get into (or are in) loving relationships where they work to make their partners happy. Just as well, the assholes are usually assholes the whole way through the courtship process.

  9. Being nice to a girl doesn’t obligate her to fuck you.

    Wanting to fuck a girl doesn’t obligate you to be nice to her.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: