HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » Men's Group (Group) » An Ugly Attack on Lonely ...

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:44 PM

An Ugly Attack on Lonely Males and What it Represents (Beta Male Infighting)

Here is the hate-spewing, mocking article by a major jerk named Hugo who writes for Jezebel. This article:
http://jezebel.com/5972788/no-one-is-entitled-to-sex-why-we-should-mock-the-nice-guys-of-okcupid?popular=true
This article is in response to lonely men on OK Cupid who try to make appeals to prospective partners on the web by saying that they are "nice men". The article by "Hugo" mocks them and makes a point of trying to show how they are entitled and not even REALLY nice men in the way that he ACTUALLY is. This is a form of "Beta Male Infighting".
The concept of Beta Males is a bit too much to go into here, but I encourage you all to read up on it if you want to understand some of the more vicious attacks from other men that you see here on DU.


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.

-------------------------
Commentary on the above nasty piece of work by Beta Male representative Hugo:
http://theredpillroom.blogspot.jp/2013/01/humiliating-omegas-for-greater-good.html

That's right. These men don't deserve to have sex, according to Hugo. They do deserve to be pilloried in public, humiliated and openly demeaned because they want to have sex but are unclear about how to do that. Reproductive rights are for women, not men, apparently. The right to express your sexuality and sexual desires is for women. If men do it, it's "creepy". Women have all sorts of rights to all sorts of things, from the concrete to the nebulous. (Excluding, of course, the right to be compelled to die for their country -- let's not get unreasonable, shall we?). But men don't have a right to have sex. Especially ugly men with no social skills. You're a LOSER, and Hugo thinks you should suffer for it. You, as a dude have NO RIGHT to have sex.

51 replies, 10008 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 51 replies Author Time Post
Reply An Ugly Attack on Lonely Males and What it Represents (Beta Male Infighting) (Original post)
Bonobo Jan 2013 OP
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #1
libodem Jan 2013 #2
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #3
libodem Jan 2013 #19
Bonobo Jan 2013 #4
libodem Jan 2013 #5
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #7
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jan 2013 #13
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #24
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #26
libodem Jan 2013 #20
Bonobo Jan 2013 #23
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #25
caseymoz Jan 2013 #6
Bonobo Jan 2013 #8
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #9
Denninmi Jan 2013 #10
NYC_SKP Jan 2013 #11
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #15
NYC_SKP Jan 2013 #17
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #18
lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #21
Bonobo Jan 2013 #22
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jan 2013 #12
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #14
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #16
radicalliberal Jan 2013 #27
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #28
radicalliberal Jan 2013 #29
Denninmi Jan 2013 #30
radicalliberal Jan 2013 #31
Denninmi Jan 2013 #32
radicalliberal Jan 2013 #33
Denninmi Jan 2013 #35
Dash87 Jan 2013 #34
ElboRuum Jan 2013 #36
redqueen Jan 2013 #37
ElboRuum Jan 2013 #38
redqueen Jan 2013 #39
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #40
redqueen Jan 2013 #41
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #42
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jan 2013 #44
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #47
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jan 2013 #48
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #51
ElboRuum Jan 2013 #43
Dash87 Jan 2013 #45
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #46
Dash87 Jan 2013 #49
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #50

Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:00 PM

1. Isn't the whole point of something like "OK Cupid" to put oneself out there as a potential partner?

I mean, why is it "asking, begging for, being entitled to sex" when these guys do it, but not when every single damn other person with a profile on a "dating" site does it?

If someone started taking apart, psychoanalyzing or otherwise belittling the personal ads put out by overweight, unattractive or obviously needy women, maybe ones who had the nerve to say something like "I deserve to be loved" (aha! entitlement!) I have no doubt that assorted corners of the blogoverse would go completely fucking bonkers.


This is just more fodder for my conviction that there are roving packs of angry axe-grinders out there looking for reasons to be outraged and excuses to give people they've never met, shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:11 PM

2. Ah, come on

You know anybody can get laid if they set their standards low enough. Nobody is entitled to anything however. Go pay for it, if all you think you have to do is ask, when you don't know the person. Or are you talking about establishing a relationship based on something besides sex, in common. Ugly guys deserve love too but they must earn it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:15 PM

3. Isn't the whole point of a dating site like "OK Cupid" to promote oneself to potential partners?

Why is what these guys are doing, "entitlement", when that's what dating sites are in general?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 05:44 PM

19. Hi

I don't think I read the op very well the first time. I think Hugo, is saying something different than I thought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:25 PM

4. Where did the false flag of "feel entitled to" come from?

Who EVER said they were "entitled to sex"?

That is a fucking strawman.

The irony is that these weak-kneed men asking for love and connections by internalizing their sense of what women are demanding (nice guys who both "respect" them AND will treat them like princesses) are now being attacked as not genuine "nice guys" for the sole reason that they are doing it simply to make a connection.

But more disturbing is the mocking and emasculating being done by this sniveling Vichy-male, Hugo Schwyzer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:09 PM

5. okay

Maybe I put that wrong, nice guys seem to have a tough time sometimes, they deserve a chance at finding love like anyone. Of course.
The last sentence in the op just sounds desperate to me.

I know nothing about online dating. Well veryittle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:19 AM

7. The idea that Hugo is promoting is bullshit

He's saying if a guy reports that he is "stuck in the friendzone" that what he's really saying is that he's entitled to sex. It's nothing more than a rant based on a false premise, or in other words classic strawman bullshit. There may be some of these men who do think they are entitled to sex, but I suspect most of them see it as most men do which is a privilege granted by consent of both parties.

Taking the statements of these men and then assigning editorial comments on what you think it means is one thing, but ascribing the worst sort of stereotypical behavior to them en masse is sexism and assholery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:18 PM

13. If "friendzoned" is such an offensive term....

....then women should stop using the phrase "I just want to be friends" to blow off men.

Of course, that man is always looking for dirty, filthy fucking....not a romantic relationship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 08:04 PM

24. And i would add that There is nothing wrong with anyone- of either gender- looking for

"Dirty filthy fucking", OR a Romantic Relationship, OR a combination of the two.

People who post profiles on dating sites are often lonely, and dissatisfied with the interest level expressed in them by prospective partners?

shit, stop the presses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 08:07 PM

26. Sounds like "Hugo" has some issues of his own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 05:53 PM

20. hey

I think I was wrong about what I was reading last night, some misinterpretation, took place.

It is an interesting topic to discuss. If I offended you, I regret it. I hope you will forgive me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #20)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 07:57 PM

23. No problem. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #20)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 08:04 PM

25. Its a confusingly constructed article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:13 AM

6. The article wasn't aimed at nice guys.


It was only about guys who describe themselves as nice in their profiles who then act like total dicks, which is what the first paragraph says.

In other words: I don't think it meant nice guys are actually dicks. I think it was a qualifier; it's talking solely about nice guys who turn into dicks when they don't get sex from their date. That is they feel meeting or knowing the woman entitles them to sex, and then they whine about how it doesn't happen.

There's no communicating if you're arguing against the former, but the writer here meant the latter. Unfortunately, it's a pretty badly written article if it has that kind ambiguity. It could create a nice guy stereotype by accident.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caseymoz (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:29 AM

8. The ambiguity in the tone of the article stems from the phenomena I am getting at.

Namely, Hugo's ingrained strategy of sucking up to women as the "White Knight" or "sensitive male". It is ironic to see him attack other men for being poorly disguised "nice men" when it may in fact be the case that he is merely more clever in his subterfuge and camouflage.

It as if he is saying "They are not REAL 'nice men', I am!

The subtext is that (most) men are squarely creatures (all except, presumably for Hugo) who will say anything to get the sex they believe they are "entitled" to (the true chestnut in the article).

Men want sex as well as relationships and the culture that exists demands that they primarily must pursue it and that women are the 'gatekeepers' who decide whether sex happens or not. In such a context, it is hardly surprising that men will have become trained to ape and imitate what they are told women want to hear in order to "woo them".

Mocking them as sleaze bags, unintelligent, pathetic dopes is not helpful in any way in order to foster a conversation and I can see straight through Mr. Hugo. He is like a Republican Black man railing against the sins of the Welfare State at a company lunch with his white counterparts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caseymoz (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:35 AM

9. The problem comes in with his definition of "dick"

Which evidently includes something as ubiquitous as declaring a preference for shaved legs. It only gets worse from there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 06:15 AM

10. Well,speaking as an epsilon male.

The world is a hard enough place to live in without being mocked and ridiculed just for trying to find a little happiness.

I wonder what that jerk would think of me? Half the word already thinks I deserve to be locked away, or worse, because some sociopath 600 miles away in CT massacred a bunch of innocent people. Guilt by association. I'm sure he would just love me.

I'm off to stick my head in the oven now. It's that kind of day all around.

Actually, I'm off to the gym, I should feel better after that. Maybe the kid will work me so hard I can get this feeling of despair out of my system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:08 PM

11. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
At Sun Jan 13, 2013, 10:32 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

An Ugly Attack on Lonely Males and What it Represents (Beta Male Infighting)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11146220

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

"Reproductive rights are for women, not men, apparently."

Did this MRA asshole just compare women's right to control their own bodies, and decide for themselves if they want to carry a pregnancy to term, to getting laid?! Why yes. Yes, he did. (MRA asshole referred to is the person who wrote that offensive bullshit, not bonobo who simply agrees with it and shared it here)

"You, as a dude have NO RIGHT to have sex."

The person who wrote this is maintaining rape culture. The fact that no one has a right to sex should not be controversial.

The nice guys of ok Cupid blog simply exposes the "Nice Guy TM" thing, where men say they can't get sex or get "friendzoned" because they're too nice, as a completely misogynistic pile of crap. That's it. They don't pick on actual nice guys.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jan 13, 2013, 10:37 AM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I think it is worthy of discussion and comments.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: What is this I don't even
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.


....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:46 PM

15. Hmmm. Would similar, enthusiastic defense of the pillorying of a "fat acceptance" blog for women be

okay, as it is apparently okay- necessary, even- to mock and slam the guys who claim to be "nice guys of OK cupid"?

One wonders (this isn't directed at you, Skip, more in response to the alert)

Would there be huffy protestations that "no one is entitled to demand a relationship with a man who prefers thin women?" "No one is entitled to have other people like them, even though they're overweight?"

There are lots of people, unhappy in their relationships or lack thereof, who complain about the expectations of the opposite (or same, as the case may be) gender. I'm sure a blog where overweight women complain about the societal conspiracy to convince all the uninterested potential male partners that being, say, 50 lbs overweight is unattractive- I suspect that, unlike the "nice guysTM of Ok Cupid", that would be fine.

So whether or not these "nice guysTM" come off as pathetic, it's just as legitimate for them to complain as it would be for overweight women to demand 'fat acceptance'.

Complaining is a fine American Tradition. It's what many people like to do with their time, apparently, as evidenced by some of the alerts DU gets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #15)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:58 PM

17. I think the men's group needs some sanctuary...

And I voted to leave it alone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #17)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 05:30 PM

18. Like I said, that question wasn't directed at you.

It was rhetorical. But I'm willing to bet that a similar blog of lonely women lamenting the fact that men are looking for skinnier mates, and in fact demanding that they not feel that way- would never catch the same level of shit for "entitlement".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 07:26 PM

21. The people trolling this group for reasons to hide posts are pathetic.

I'm glad the juries usually see through their sexist bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 07:36 PM

22. Wow.

Thank you to anyone who voted to keep. I DO think we need some sanctuary too.

I don't think that I ever said that men have a right to sex, I don't think the article ever said it either despite that picked cherry.

In general, I think that men have a right to ASK for relationships and even to pretend to be nice guys to get into a relationship. It's part of the mating ritual. Women demand certain things, men try to comply. That's the way it works. To make fun of men for trying to act in a way that women demand is not fair --whether they are GENUINELY nice according to some disgruntled toe-sucker or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:08 PM

12. The guy in the profile seems like an asshole

Granted, I'm sure the author picked the worst example he could find to mock, and then expand from there.

My big question is why should women get to define what the "Nice Guy" syndrome is? Of course, they immediately run to the "can't get laid" phrase, because we know men are drooling constantly masturbating cretins who have absolutely no interest in romance, intimacy, or actual love.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #12)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:38 PM

14. He didn't pick the ones that people were ridiculing

They were being posted on Tumbler and people were gleefully making fun of them. Some of them were undoubtedly assholes but many of them were pretty mild. Someone else pointed out how this was assholery, to which Hugo opined that it wasn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #12)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:47 PM

16. I can't make heads or tails out of it, because it's been photoshopped into illegibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 11:29 PM

27. Wow! I will admit that I haven't taken the time to study this particular controversy . . .

. . . in detail, but I will state my first impression. This seems to be a situation in which compassion is lacking. (And, by the way, I'm speaking as a man in his early sixties who's been happily married for over 30 years to the same woman -- not as a lonely young man, although I easily could have ended up that way.) It sounds a bit like cyber-bullying to me. Sounds like bashing strangers who aren't physically attractive or socially adept.

I get tired of the way people are put into boxes with certain expectations that are connected with those boxes. No one can be an individual anymore. All of us have to belong to a group. We all must be categorized. That way, no one has to make an effort to understand the other person. If you're not in the "right" group, then you can be bashed without hesitation. Reminds me of the mindless conformity found at just about every high school in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to radicalliberal (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 02:38 AM

28. There are a lot of axes- that need constant grinding.

That's what I have observed.

And the folks with the long list of demands about "friendly moral guidance" as to how others ought to be living their lives, seem to invariably be the most profoundly unhappy ones of all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #28)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 05:38 AM

29. How true! How true!

Too many people fail to understand that the way to make someone stronger (particularly a vulnerable person who is suffering from a weakness) is not by tearing him down. Empathy is in short supply in our society; so, it's easy to tear someone down, especially if he's not one of the "beautiful people."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to radicalliberal (Reply #29)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 12:31 PM

30. Oh, that would never happen. Never.

Says the guy who has had a lot of that lately. People can be kind, but some can be very cruel, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Denninmi (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 07:01 PM

31. I assume you're referring to Hugo Schwyzer.

When I started posting online in 2009, I discovered Schwyzer at a website of his own, if I remember correctly. At the time he seemed to reflect many of my views, but I didn't take the time to follow him in the next few years. I know he recently had a falling out with Good Men Project over some issue regarding rape, but I didn't have the time to find out what that was all about. This particular outburst of his is very sad. Seems like he was searching for a villain, but chose the wrong guys -- guys who are hurting, for that matter.

Incidentally (and this observation is not to be regarded as a criticism of any member of this board), I get tired of the categorization of men (and boys) into different groups (alphas, betas, etc.), which always carries with it the implication that one group is inferior to another. For example, the nonathletic male being viewed as inferior to athletic guys. Never mind that each individual has his own strengths and weaknesses. Seems to me that much, if not most, of the emasculation of guys is done by other guys -- such as the judo instructor of my teenage years (an instructor I was sent to against my will by a clinical psychologist, who turned out to be incompetent), a former college football player who believed that only athletes and men in certain blue-collar jobs were "real men" and that nonathletic men who had great moral courage (such as Andrei Sakharov) did not deserve to be honored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to radicalliberal (Reply #31)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 07:13 PM

32. Well, really I was thinking in more general terms,

Last edited Sat Jan 19, 2013, 09:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Of anyone who would kick a guy when he is already down.

I hope I didn't offend with my "epsilon male" quip about myself. I've been about as down, on myself and in general, in the past six months as I have ever been, and I feel like I'm at the bottom of the heap. You are absolutely right, there are a lot of judgements about worth or lack of in society, from both men and women. The point made above that we should build people up, not tear them down, is a good one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Denninmi (Reply #32)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 10:50 PM

33. I see what you were thinking. There is a lot of that going around.

I hope I didn't offend with my "epsilon male" quip about myself.

You didn't offend me at all. I was referring to those who use the "alpha male" label to put down any guy whom they deem to be deficient somehow.

I've been about as down, on myself and in general, in the past six months as I have ever been, and I feel like I'm at the bottom of the heap.

I know how you feel. I've felt the same way myself. There have been times when I've felt like my masculinity has been under constant assault for years. I hope your situation improves.

Actually, I'm off to the gym, I should feel better after that. Maybe the kid will work me so hard I can get this feeling of despair out of my system.


Hey, we have something else in common! Yes, I'm a nonathlete who became a gym rat! I'm working on a bodybuilding program in my early sixties. I've already spent a small fortune over a period of about four years hiring a succession of personal trainers. (There's been no trouble. Just resigning from the employ of the health club for the sake of career changes.) The health club is like a second home to me.

You are absolutely right, there are a lot of judgements about worth or lack of in society, from both men and women. The point made above that we should build people up, not tear them down, is a good one.


Thanks for the compliment!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to radicalliberal (Reply #33)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:50 AM

35. That is so cool. I love it.

I just got back from my Sunday am session. I did 10 laps around the gym to warm up, then an hour with the trainer, today was a lot of squats, step-ups with weights, dead lifts, rows, chest press, and one of my least favorite things, the damned Prowler weighted sled. My trainer loves that thing because he played college football, and it's essentially a football training sled.

I've only been at this about 4 months now, but I am totally addicted. The two trainers I am working with keep coming up with interesting new concepts, especially some different things we are going to do in the spring when we can move outside. Today, the one kids said he went yesterday with another client on a military style "rough march" - a fast hike over rough terrain wearing a 35 pound pack. I am so there. I never was allowed to do anything like that as a kid/teenager, so I'm making up for lost time.

Small fortune indeed, but so worth it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:12 PM

34. The point of the article, I believe, is sexual entitlement.

That is, the concept (or pointlessness and moral wrongness) of whining about how women aren't having sex with you just because you pretend to be nice to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #34)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 04:42 PM

36. To a degree.

And I am sure there are some "nice guys" on that list. However, it isn't sexual entitlement to believe you have the right to try to have a relationship or, for that matter, sex. Seems a disingenuous claim to make on a site dedicated to that very premise.

What Hugo seems to be implying that they are performing a service to the women of this site by "pre-screening" for people who seem to insist that while they have little sex appeal, they are people who have something else to offer, and bold facing the idea that this absolutely must be just self-puffery which hides insidious "sexual entitlement".

A person of at least a little cynicism might look at this as an attempt to point oneself out as a "nice guy" by pointing out all of the "fake nice guys". Some of these guys may very well pretend to be "nice", just to ingratiate themselves to the women on the site... and whether that's something scandalous or not is a debate for another time. Some of these guys may just very well be nice, just lacking in looks and social capability. Does their implied undesirability or their pointing out that they do believe themselves worthy of a relationship with someone obviate their right to TRY? Moreover, do I trust this guy to be the adjudicator of what is or isn't a "real" or "fake" nice guy? And really, what more is it than simple contempt to think anything noble in taking it upon oneself to be the judge, jury, and executioner in someone else's romantic life?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 06:29 PM

37. 'Nice Guy' #1 - Do you believe that men should be the heads of their households? "Yes."

'Nice Guy' #2 - "most women these days are bitchs, sluts or just a combo of the two which is pathetic."


So ... wait ... men (and one woman) here are seriously defending these assholes?

Seriously?

These aren't poor, misunderstood, socially inept guys.

They aren't misunderstood.

They are misogynist assholes.

fuck. ing. hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #37)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 06:57 PM

38. Apparently, at this time the point is moot.

In order to have a proper discussion about this is to address a primary contention, whether the roster of "nice guys" is fairly chosen or this is casting a much wider net, would require access to the roster itself. However, it seems, that at this time, the roster has been taken down.

I don't know what tumblr's TOS are, but if the site was nuked, I expect quite a lot of complaint was involved.

I'll check back later to see if it's just a temporary outage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ElboRuum (Reply #38)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:15 PM

39. Fairly chosen how?

Every asshole featured on the site openly, publicly shared their assholeness, along with bemused wonderings about how being such 'Nice Guys' as they are, they never got laid.

That's kinda the whole point of the tumblr.

There were lots of writeups about it. It was awesome. I guess one of those 'Nice Guys' managed to find a way to shut it down. It was far from the first attempt. Maybe this time they'll succeed. Ah well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #39)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:23 PM

40. That's one great thing about the internet.

When people are hate filled axe-grinders who express bigoted points of view, it's there for all to see.

But no one here was "defending" anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #40)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:29 PM

41. You compared misogynist assholes to overweight, unattractive women...

such was your zeal.

Talk about a false analogy. Bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #41)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:35 PM

42. If a woman posted on a fat acceptance blog that "most men are shallow shits who only want

A skinny woman for sex", wouldnt that be displaying a similar level of "entitlement"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #42)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 12:02 PM

44. It's a great question

But considering we are now apparently supposed to high five and say "Great post, dood!", I suspect it won't be answered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #44)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 06:33 PM

47. And the point isn't that these guys are shining examples of humanity.

The point is that when someone complains about not being happy with the interest shown in them by potential partners on an online dating site (lonely unhappy people on a dating site? Imagine that!) that does not mean they feel any more "entitled" to anything than anyone else on the damn site.

I mean, the bottom line here seems to be that any man who expresses interest in a woman is apparently displaying "entitlement mentality". It's the deliberate pathologizing of male sexuality, period. Same shit, diff. day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #47)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 06:39 PM

48. It was basically a "See....we found some assholes who say they are nice guys!"

"So all you guys who say you are nice guys are just assholes!"

It's the usual internet bullshit I expect from a third rate blogger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #48)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 12:58 AM

51. Again, it's this lame idea that there are these defective stereotypical "types" of men.

And it's gender based bigotry and hate, pure and simple- just as it would be if someone was axe-grinding about certain "types" of women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #39)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:56 PM

43. Fairly chosen as per the idea of the tumblr itself.

Of course.

1. Were they purporting to be a "nice guy (tm)"? I can't imagine that NG1 and NG2 were seen as anything by the assholes they were and certainly not "nice guys (tm)". If they were purporting to be, yeah, that would be funny. But that's not the point of it precisely, was anyone pulled in with that dragnet, who was purporting to be a nice guy but wasn't the asshole? Is the mere fact of purporting to be "nice" while at the same time not being immediately seen to be attractive or perhaps obviously socially inept or awkward or otherwise desirable enough to rate you a spot on the nefarious "list o' nice guyz (tm)"? According to some of the statements upthread (which I also can't verify) our friend Hugo pulled only the worst out for example. If true, I'm inclined to believe that any creature who had the audacity to be awkward, unattractive, and/or had a goofy profile on OKCupid was fair game whether they were "nice guys" or not.

2. Were they complaining, in reference to #1, to being "friendzoned" and "not getting laid" or some variant thereof? Similarly to #1, was anyone pulled into this callout in any mistaken way? Were they complaining in such a way where they believed that they were "entitled" to sex or a relationship, or is this perception of "entitlement" the audacity to try to start a sexual relationship with a willing partner on a site seemingly dedicated to the purpose? Or was the crime being ugly or inept and trying?

I suspect it may have gotten shut down due to a TOS violation. I don't have a tumblr account so I can't speak to it, but I suspect enough people got annoyed with being ridiculed on a completely different site than the one they signed up for that quite a bit of complaint ensued, from "nice guys" and any actual nice guys that got drawn in with the "nice guys".

The point is that the tumblr was set up for the sole purpose of the ridicule of people that some people view as sadsacks, misfits, and/or creeps by whatever definition they use. Maybe some are misogynistic assholes, certainly NG1 and NG2 are clearly this, but then maybe some aren't, and this tumblr was burying an axe straight in the heads of those people without much real concern for who those people were. And why would they have concern? Making fun of people we deem pathetic is the American way, isn't it? I've seen this kind of nonsense in real life and it isn't pretty. We called it bullying back in the day, but I guess I don't live in that world anymore.

I am an atheist and I don't believe in karma, at least not in the spiritual or religious sense. I do think, however, if you put negative shit out there, it tends to drop back on you. Not because of some spiritual connection to the universe, but because of simple human desire for equanimity and where necessary, reciprocity. And this tumblr account was all about the negative, and worse, they made it personal. I hope someone took enough umbrage to this to give it the reciprocity it deserved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #37)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 05:04 PM

45. +1. They feel like they're entitled to any women they want.

They aren't "nice guys" at all. They're hateful misogynists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #45)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 06:26 PM

46. And again, if you were to read, say, a "fat acceptance blog" where women complained about

being unable to find a man on, say, OK Cupid, who didn't want a thin partner, would that mean they felt "entitled" to any man they want?

If a woman on that blog said something like "Most men are superficial shits who only like skinny women to have sex with", would that be somewhat equivalent hateful misandry?

Why or why not?

You do realize that the whole point of a dating site is to try to attract a partner of the opposite (or same) sex, right? Why is it "entitlement" when these guys -who, again, no one is "defending"- complain, but not when others do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #46)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 10:19 AM

49. That statement would be misandry.

I would never defend a blanket statement like that. I don't feel like it's relevant, though, because misogynists can also be physically attractive. The problem isn't how these men (or the women in your example) look - it's their attitude and bigotry.

It's not the complaining about a lack of dates that's the problem. The problem is their misogynist statements about women when complaining about not having dates. Some examples can be found in the article. I would imagine that this is the real reason why they don't get any dates. They also feel like every woman should just adore them on demand, because they deserve it, being 'Nice Guys.'

They probably don't approach women at all, and just expect everybody to fall at their feet and beg them for a date. It doesn't work that way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #49)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 11:06 AM

50. I think the whole "nice guy" thing is a trope. It's a trope from the end of the guys who say

"but I'm a nice guy" (How many people don't think that they are 'nice guys'? No, I'm a dick, thank you very much) and it is DEFINITELY a trope from the angle of the blogs and online think tanks that have come up with the idea of the Nice Guy™ as yet another stereotypical model in the production line of horribly defective modern males.

And again, usually the people who are putting profiles on online dating sites aren't terribly successful at finding partners to begin with.

Edited to add: Also, the attitudes apparently displayed by some of these guys are really fucked up, no question- but with stuff like "I think men should be the head of the household" or whatever, you could probably find thousands of similar statements or attitudes on any "Christian" dating site. Which is, again, fucked up.

(It's odd that, isn't it, that certain corners of online thought give such a regular, reflexive free pass to the religious right. )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread