"nice guys"

This topic is designed to spin off from the conversation that's going on elsewhere (V or NorthwoodsMan will likely find a link for everyone--I'm lazy) about the idea of "nice guys."

I'm a reformed "nice guy."

(pause for laughter)

No, seriously. In my scrawny, no-self-confidence, hard-core nerd days, I was totally a "nice guy" where that's actually code for "weenie whom no one would date."

http://www.laddertheory.com/

The above theory was a great solace to me. Nonetheless...I kinda think it's bunk.

I guess, mostly, I thought that thread was worth perpetuating in its own line.

Forums: 
TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

I didn't see the edit button.
Here's the link:
http://www.meilinmiranda.com/node/1453 (admittedly ugly. my html is weak. also, I couldn't tie it to the specific part of the thread...see above, re: my html)

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Here's my pretty link which will take you right to the start of that comment thread, for people too lazy to scroll through the massive amount of replies to that topic.

I'll even give you a copypasta version:
<a href="http://www.meilinmiranda.com/node/1453#comment-25418">Here's my pretty link</a>

ETA: I take out my wizard cap and gown...

Also, the edit link is actually a tab located directly above the OP.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Disregarding anything he may have been hinting at, I agreed with some of it, but it had the same feeling as another website that I disliked and cannot remember the name of. All I remember is he was a guy with a bunch of viewpoints I thought were misogynist and inflammatory, but a lot of my teenage male friends were quite taken with him and he was very popular among that demographic online.

Either I was mature enough to shake my head an move on or I was not filled with nearly as much righteous fury as I remember xD

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

I'm feeling lazy tonight. Or maybe it's just exhaustion from chasing a two year old and five year old around a park for two hours...

Either way. I'm agreeing, the ladder thing is a generalization. I'm sure it's true for some, but eh.

And ya, more often than not, I was a nice guy that girls wanted to "just be friends" with.

That is until my last year of college when the girls in the capstone classes realized they were about to graduate and had no serious relation ships. I'm saving up for an engagment ring and have an average of 1.5 girls a week asking me out. I found a twisted pleasure in turning them down...

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

with multiple personalities do you? Must be awkward to have half of one ask you out and the other half spit in your face, huh?

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

I knew this would be comming as I typed it. One on one week and two the next, averaged out.

But ya, it was a bit awkward. A girl that wouldn't say hello as she walked past the door of the bar I was working at is asking me out to dinner. Sorry hun, ain't gonna happen.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

"what, was she a stroke victim?" which is insensitive and I am appalled that my brain came up with it. D:

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

Well, considering that Warrin the Foolish died of a strok a couple chapers ago, not too bad...

Vandole's picture

Postulant

I've read the site before and agree with some parts. For instance, I was a "cuddle bitch" as he called them (friend who finds himself cuddling his crush and consoling her every time something goes wrong with her boyfriend etc) for two girls in high school, one I was convinced I loved and the other one I mostly just lusted for. I guess I was sort of a cuddle bitch in the first term at university too. (doesn't count as much though when the girl takes a break from her boyfriend to figure out who she wants more)

The truth is that nearly everyone's attracted to confidence and self-assurance. (There are obviously exceptions like doms and people who have a "white knight" fantasy) It's kind of a feedback loop, because the people with the most confidence and self-assurance are the ones who are comfortable with relationships because they already have a good amount of experience and so on. So ironically if you value relationships and you don't have one, the best way to get one is to stop caring about having one, increasing your overall self-worth. Not easy to just change your mind like that though.

Honesty time now, I cannot put into practice what I preach at all. I'm a (recovering) Nice Guy with a capital N capital G; an asshole in sheep's clothing in other words. I had all of the indicators, feelings of entitlement, drastic attitude change towards girls who weren't available, all that. Now, I'm trying not to be (and simultaneously being more of an asshole on the surface, which is probably not a good thing) though I'm having trouble with the whole confidence thing. (I'm a cynic and have low self-worth) Oh and I have feelings for my best friend whose latest ex was overly controlling and is trying to get back with her and she may or may not have feelings for me. So I'm not doing so well on that count. I would normally try to move on or ignore it, but at the end of march she kissed me, now we're just friends (and not even cuddly friends) so I'm quite confused as to what that kiss meant for her, if anything.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Quote:
The truth is that nearly everyone's attracted to confidence and self-assurance. (There are obviously exceptions like doms and people who have a "white knight" fantasy)

Dom/Sub isn't linked to confidence or lack thereof. You can have any combination of these traits. I'm very sub but I'm also very confident.

Re: your situation - it's been HOW MANY months since she kissed you, and she hasn't talked to you about it or tried anything else? Um, yeah, she's not interested. Sorry. Sad

Vandole's picture

Postulant

Durr, brain not work, it was actually April, right before I went home from exams. She asked me if I still had feelings for her, I said yes, she kissed me, I put my foot in my mouth, we've been just friends since then (we live near each other too, and I see her about weekly, so it's not just distance).

I'm pretty sure there's nothing there, but the kiss confused the hell out of me.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

She satisfied her curiosity, and doesn't want more. End.

And yeah, April...still too long ago, especially if you two have that level of contact.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

As I said over there (and I agree also with those who replied to me), and reworded here for precision:

Many women, especially young, inexperienced ones, confuse 'asshole' and 'confident'.

Many men (sadly, they don't seem to grow out of this as much) confuse 'nice' and 'passive'.

That really about sums it up. I disagree with the ladder theory because I don't agree with the money/power thing and the 'exclusion' of other personality traits ('things women say they care about but really don't) - if you INCLUDE positive personality traits in money/powers, which is my own personal view, then I think the ladder theory is a pretty decent generalisation.

ETA: This really bothers me, it's a myth that I do NOT find to be remotely true:

Quote:
That being said, usually women are more interested in long-term relationships than men, and consent to this form of relationship because there is ladder disparity in favor of the male.

It's nearly always been the opposite for me.

eloriane's picture

Devotee

There are sort of two things that bug me here. One, most self-described "Nice Guys" (as in, "girls won't date me, even after I'm such a Nice Guy to them!") have fundamentally misunderstood what is meant by "nice." It's nice to listen to a woman talk about her problems in order to make her feel better. It's NOT nice to listen to a woman talk about her problems in order to get a date. The difference is, if you're doing it because you think then she'll "owe" you something, you're NOT doing it to be nice or to make her happy. So maybe she doesn't want to date you not because "women like jerks," but because she can see right through you and knows you're not being nice, but being A Nice Guy. This xkcd comic is a good illustration of the concept. (Please note, I'm not saying this applies to you (!) -- just that I've seen it, including among my friends.)

The second thing that bothers me about the site is that it's so... sexist. I mean, "people categorize acquaintances as potential-romantic-partners or as friends, and it's hard to move between categories" - that's probably a true statement. It may even be true that certain people's relationship problems are based on constant categorization of "friend" contrary to one's intentions.

So why talk all this rubbish about how men ONLY have a romantic-interest ladder? I mean, I always got the impression from the men who are my friends that they are capable of being interested in a female person's company as a person, not just as a potential sex-partner. Otherwise, as a lesbian, I'd never have any male friends. (Side annoyance: the Ladder Theory also assumes everyone's straight, but that's a more normal annoyance.)

I think it's telling that a woman's "relationship ladder" is often called her "good" ladder-- as if it's no good spending time with a woman if you're just going to be friends. It just reeks of, well, misogyny to me.

I'm sorry to rant like this-- my fraternity brothers were discussing the site last week and I got very annoyed with them. It's hard even to address the central idea-- which may be basically true, as a totally-without-prospects lesbian, I have no experience to say!-- because it's wrapped up in so much other rubbish that I have a hard time getting through.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

I agree with your first point, and I think that goes along with my statement of 'many men confuse ' nice' and 'passive''. I consider that sort of behaviour you described WHINY as hell, btw, and no one likes whiners.

Quote:
So why talk all this rubbish about how men ONLY have a romantic-interest ladder?

That sort of ticks me off, too...but when I think about it more, and if I'm honest - it's true that I've never had any single, straight male friends who WOULDN'T fuck me. Never. I find it hard to imagine that very ugly girls would have the same experience (that sounds so awful, but I'm just being honest) - but I bet this applies to most women who are at least non-ugly. Regardless, I think the author could word things a bit less offensively - I agree that it's lame to call the 'would fuck' ladder the 'good ladder' - but then, if men want to fuck all their female friends - the only the 'would fuck' latter is desirable, so it's not totally inaccurate FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF MEN - but nonetheless, I dislike how it discounts women's non-sexual value.

eloriane's picture

Devotee

I think our experiences must be very different, because I know quite a lot of men who wouldn't be interested in just anyone, and specifically, my male friends have never been interested in sleeping with me-- if they had, I would never have been able to bear spending time with them, no matter their other traits. (And yes, I have ended friendships with men who expressed an interest in dating me. I... have issues.)

It could well be that I'm oblivious, but I prefer to think they they were just interested in a friend.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Any male friends who weren't interested in you (and I'm sure they're much rarer than you think) would fit into one or more of the following:

1. The guy is gay
2. The guy does not find you attractive
3. The guy already has a woman much higher than you on the ladder

Plenty of guys may be interested and just never express that interest, for various reasons.

ETA: 'fucking' != 'dating', and that applies to both men AND women. I think a lot of guys (and also girls) who 'don't want just anyone' may actually have sex more readily than date - I know it's true for me, and I think I have a rather 'masculine' sexual attitude, in some ways. Also, some people ARE very picky generally - see #2 above.

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

FairNymph wrote:
Sex is NOT dating!

So if that friend decided they wanted to be more than just friends and we already hang out together, neither is dating anyone else, do things solo, but not considered to be dating, how would the relationship evolve?
fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Or unequal 'relationships' where one party thinks it's dating and the other thinks it's FWB. Nyah

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

or, just as awkardly, FWB that one person wishes were something more...

miserable game, that one.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Delusion or fully conscious misery...they both suck hardcore, and I've experienced both.

eloriane's picture

Devotee

Oh, but I also wanted to say that I think we're on the same page re: "Nice Guys" being whiny, passive, and generally not actually all that nice. So I don't disagree completely, haha!

Wren's picture

Petitioner

Totally agree!!!
had a buddy who was constantly complaining that he was always considered "Nice Guy" and "FRIEND" and blamed that for his being a virgin at 23 or something. when I was first getting to know him, I actually had serious interest in taking that V-card away. (partly out of pity, partly to stop him bitching, mostly cause I actually thought he was kinda cute).
We had internet fun, but when I met him in life he was so self absorbed and whiny that I changed my mind. I had never promised him I would fuck him, never even a little. always think you should meet the person in life a couple times eh? anyways, when I outright turned him down he threw a hissy fit saying I promised him sex or something. deffinitely not attractive.
Whiny is big fail

Davik's picture

Embodiment

You know, without even reading the base theory behind all of this, I just want to call bullshit. I have plenty of female friends who I consider to be physically attractive, but would never do anything physical with. It's as simple as the fact that within a week after we'd try to kill each other; it would completely wreck our friendship even if it was fun. We might have a hell of a time for a night, but trying to turn that in to a relationship dynamic would be awful (and at least one of said friends would leave me in a shallow hole in the middle of nowhere). Hell, I even have friends who I've slept with in the past, and it just didn't work out, so we transitioned away from that. We got the sexual tension out of the air and that just left the friend dynamic (though the friend part took a hit in the process, another reason against it).
I will admit that there's always a part of me that is looking at a woman as a potential girlfriend, but personality can instantly turn that off as well as relationship status and sexual orientation. I wouldn't have had nearly as many lesbian friends as I have if I couldn't automatically switch them from the "potential girlfriend" category to the "friend" category. But hell though, let's face it, we aren't playing the same sport, so there's no point in trying Blum 3

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Your argument here isn't actually disagreeing with the Ladder Theory

Davik's picture

Embodiment

Put it this way, we could have easily transitioned to the dating stage, the sex was damned good, she was/is quite smart, and she was modeling at the time. I didn't pursue anything because we'd have driven each other nuts within a month. So ending it was based purely on personality, does that violate this ladder theory? If it doesn't, I'm going to examine ladder theory and either declare it to be accurate or broad enough to not produce negatives.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

However, I would say possibly the 10% other (in how men rate) could include 'unworkable personality'. Yes, it's a very broad and generalised theory!

Davik's picture

Embodiment

You know, at this point I'm going to have to throw this whole thing out of the realm of theory (given how the general populace has redefined theory). Yes, I found a model attractive, but I'm going to need something other than that to explain why we slept with each other then went our separate ways but kept talking. I'm a scientist; general theories don't mean much to me Blum 3 Of course that could be my basis for doubting this whole ladder theory in the first place...

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

is not to explain relationships. It's to explain why women will have sex with certain men and not others, despite the others having many qualities that would make them good in a relationship.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

Davik wrote:
I'm a scientist; general theories don't mean much to me Blum 3

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't one of the most important parts of science observing trends and forming theories based on them? Sure, it's a little different with people vs. laws of nature, because the observing scientist is a person, but a scientist could observe a species and form theories based on observed trends. I think this theory could perhaps use further testing or modification, but I'm not sure you can throw out the whole idea that general theories are useful in the right context.
Davik's picture

Embodiment

My gripe here comes from there being too many theories without evidence. The vast majority of scientific theories were ultimately shown to be false (that is the scientific process after all). A theory on it's own isn't worth much; a theory with evidence is a whole other matter. This is part of why I have issues with all the high energy theorists making claims like "the Higgs exists" when all they have is some math and not a scrap of data. String theorists are even worse, since they're putting out a theory that can't be tested by any means we're likely to possess in the next couple of hundred years.

Vandole's picture

Postulant

I have the same problem with string theory, especially since string theorists and their followers always claim that the math is so elegant (and I bet most of the followers don't have a clue what they're talking about). I don't know how you can consider something elegant if it requires there to be extra infinitesimal dimensions (or even what the kind of thing that produces that conclusion would look like).

I'm a little more accepting of soft science theories because they're so bloody hard to test. Especially something like the ladder theory, which seems to be more descriptive than predictive and so doesn't seem falsifiable. It's pretty much the new Freudian psychodynamics, except without a shred of dignity or professional merit to its name.

Davik's picture

Embodiment

See, I have the same problem with the "soft sciences" just because you can't really test them in any meaningful way. This is why my friends and I came up with a division scale for majors in undergrad: techies and fuzzies. Techies were anyone in engineering, science, or some technology, where everything has a definite right and wrong answer. Fuzzies were people in any major where the answer was subjective Blum 3 That said, the "without a shred of dignity or professional merit to its name" is hilarious Smile

PS: There was one visiting speaker who came here and made the claim that he would eat his hat if they didn't find the Higgs. I'm giving the LHC a year from full operational status before I take a road trip to show up at his office door with a fork, steak knife and bottle of steak sauce. I will take great pleasure in watching him eat every bite of his hat }:) Scientists shouldn't make judgments like that before any evidence is in, and a stomach full of hat might serve as a good reminder of that...

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

Davik wrote:
I have plenty of female friends who I consider to be physically attractive, but would never do anything physical with.



fairnymph wrote:
Your argument here isn't actually disagreeing with the Ladder Theory

So is that to say you can't look at a woman, decide you think she's attractive and move on from that? Standing in line at the gas station, I checked out the woman in the next line over, thought, she has a nice ass, paid for my gas and left. I didn't compare her to the woman in line in front of me, any friends or Acarophob. Even friends in general, I don't compare them. X has a more pleasing figure than Y, etc.

In general, I found friendships with women to much more easy going and relaxed when one or both of us was in a committed relationship.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

I believe, was that if that woman turned around, ripped off her clothes, and asked you to have sex with her, would you? Especially if she was someone you knew instead of a potentially disease-ridden stranger or psychopath.

If you weren't thinking about sex with your female friends, it wouldn't matter whether or not they were in a committed relationship. The fact that they are means you can't pursue sex, which prevents you from screwing up your relationship and makes it easier for you to ignore the possibility.

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

kawaiikune wrote:
if that woman turned around, ripped off her clothes, and asked you to have sex with her, would you? .

If I was single, and she was single, it would depend on the relationship. Would our relationship be the same after? Certainly not and so probably not. Though that hasn't happened. I don't, nor have I, had any female friends that would do that. Playfully, and trustingly, taken an item of cloths off, yes, asked for sex, yes. But not both at the same time.

If I decided I wanted the one night stand, it would be the potential stranger or maybe an occasional aquantance. But not a friend.

Acarophob wrote:
A woman plays sex to get love, a man plays love to get sex.
Lemur's picture

I actually had a friend of my (now) ex tell me the same idea as is on that site. As someone who's always had an easier time relating to guys (I still don't understand many other women) it was an incredibly depressing thing to hear, especially at this stage in my life.

I like to believe there's a difference between "Would have sex with me" and "Is my friend because he wants to have sex with me" though.

My friend and I are having troubles with a guy friend who has a "Nice Guy" attitude. He tried with me, and is now pushing himself at her as she's single again (anytime she's single, for almost nine years now).

MeiLin's picture

Most High

Thread pirate! :pirate: Tell me more about the "not close to women" thing. I have had the opposite problem my whole life. I have always had good female friends and trusted only women until my 30s. (This is where Ansella gets it.) I didn't have a real male friend until I met Sir's best friend, who is now one of my best friends. I'm pretty sure that having sex with each other would feel really weird and incestuous, so I don't think sexual attraction is why we're close.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

But I also get along better with guys than with girls, but I think this was mostly an age thing. When I was younger, I was usually more interested in talking to adults, because no one my age liked the things I liked. I also was more interested in hanging out with boys, because they didn't talk about all the trivial drama shit most girls my age liked, and I've never cared about clothes and parties. Plus, it was easier to find guys to hang out with from tagging along with my older brother. They didn't mind me hanging out with them because I wasn't annoyingly girly, and sometimes it came in useful (I was a tiny kid, and I've always been really smart, lots of opportunities to con me into doing mischief).

As I've gotten older and girls have discovered things beyond the narrow high school world, I can relate better to them. My best friend is a girl, and we've been friends since we were four years old, but she's not very girly either and was a tomboy like me.

MeiLin's picture

Most High

Maybe it was just the high school I went to. We had a high number of talented-and-gifted types, and the TAG girls weren't all "zomg, the quarterback smiled at me!!!1!" types. We were silly like all teenaged girls, but it wasn't all parties and clothes and boys. For one thing, I never got invited to parties, for a second, I was a size 16 and there was nothing in those days for girls my size that didn't look like a big black muumuu, and for a third, boys wouldn't give me the time of day (smart boys--as I said earlier, I was a mess).

I dunno. I have one close friend left from high school (who I rarely see), and one close friend from what would have been my college years (who I see every week on Skype). In RL, I have A and Ima, my two bestest friends, I have my old boss, who I talk to now and again and who remains close emotionally, and that's about it. Lots of casual friends and acquaintances, but when the shit hits the fan those are the "girls" I think of, them and my family.

My criterion came to be: Did you come to the hospital to see me when it looked like I was dying? Did you get in touch with me in any way, shape or form, during or after? Did you offer to help (and then follow through), even if it just meant giving Sir a sympathetic shoulder? No? Then you're not my friend. Not really. A came and read to me. Ima came and brought me books and flowers. My brother became my brother when he told the CICU staff he was my brother so they'd let him in after visiting hours. He's still my brother, always was, and always will be.

You find out who your friends are when times are bad. We sure did.

Boy. I must be tired.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

I was never popular, but when I was little it was mostly because of the lack of common interests. In jr. high it started to be about my weight, because that was when it started to be noticeable that I was overweight. I was born premature, and until I hit puberty I was very small. We moved away from where I had grown up (in the suburbs) and into the city. The neighborhood used to be the Italian district, and my family knew everyone because the community was very close knit, but as all the families died or moved away, trash has moved in and it's not a very safe neighborhood anymore. In addition I was sent to a Catholic school outside the city, because my mother didn't want me in the city schools.

So I knew no one who lived near me, had no way of meeting anyone who lived near me, and even if it did, it wasn't safe to play with them anyway. My physical activity went way down, and my grandmother tried to cheer me up with food (typical Italian response :P) and then it started to be about weight.

I know one of the reasons I've always been an outcast is because I read so damn much. People see you with your nose in a book not related to school and they assume certain things about you. For one, that you're a nerd (and thus smart, which is intimidating). For two, that you must be stuck up, since you'd rather read than talk to people. And then there was also the assumption that I was just weird because of the number of books I'd get from the scholastic book order. Mom made sure I had as many books as she could afford to get me when I was younger. She was ecstatic that I read so much. So when it was time for the scholastic thing every quarter, she'd give me a dollar amount and I could pick out a bunch of books. The teacher who did the thing would hand them out when we got to that class, and she usually skipped me. I had to come back during study hall because most of the books in the box were mine and it was easier to just let me take the box home.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Oh man, the reading thing. I was just like that too when I was a kid. I learned to read at about 3.5, before I really talked much. As a result (and due to living in Connecticut for the first chunk of my life :P) I talk ridiculously fast and quietly so it's hard for people just meeting me to understand what I say, which really didn't help the tiny nerdy kid make any friends.

I feel your nerd pain!

applejax's picture

Supplicant

but everyone from Connecticut does usually talk fast! I thought it was just me! Now i live in Boston, so I have a silly accent and I talk fast. My dad can't always understand what I'm saying so my mom has to translate for him. Blum 3

Shade's picture

Supplicant

People talk muuuuch slower out here. My parents tried putting me in speech therapy to get me to slow down but I didn't think I had a problem :P.

Marri's picture

Supplicant

I can get along with both just fine, and would probably be lost if I had to stick to friends of one gender. That being said, I almost always prefer the company of men. I can't blame a brother, since I just have a younger and quite girly sister; I can't blame school, since I went to an all girl's school from kindergarten until 8th grade. I suppose you could say it's reactionary, but you'd think there's be SOME left over "I had 9 extra years to talk to girls" factor. But if given the option between visiting my friends from Roth (the all-girl dorm) and my friends in the Phi Psi frat, I seem to pick Phi Psi 99% of the time.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

since it's not the first time it's come up, but I almost never have friends who are women. I think it largely has to do with insecurity. In my experience, girls almost always find something to be jealous about and it ruins friendships. I also think that most girls are too image-conscious and it drives me crazy. Most women of any age compete in some way, I think. When we're younger, it's who is prettier, who has a better boyfriend, etc. Maybe when you get older it's something else, like who has a cleaner house or a better job or better kids or more income. Men compete, too, but in different ways and not usually with women. I'm much more comfortable with the way men compete because I'm better at winning those type of competitions. I don't know how to dress myself so that I look better than another woman with an identical build, and I'm really more comfortable without anything on. I feel like women's competitions are more subtle, and half the time you don't even know when someone is competing with you. With men, competition comes in the form of a basketball game or something...and you know you're playing. I even like competing with guys for a girl, because at least then I know I'm playing the game. With girls, I feel like the stupid games never end, someone is always trying to flirt with or steal my boyfriend (who is really faithful, but also pretty hot...and that really does keep happening), someone is always trying to make me look worse, and there's always some catty bullshit going on that I don't have the energy to keep track of. With boys, it's low-pressure. I can relax completely because I don't have anything they want, unless it's the high score on a video game or a consistent reverse-layup, and those are just games. They don't matter like people do, and they don't ruin friendships like flirting with someone's boyfriend does. Boys are also less sensitive about things you say. I can tell really dirty jokes and no one is going to give me crap for being sexist. I can check out other girls with friends who are boys. With girls I always feel like I have to sensor myself or I'm going to get the feminist tirade again. Don't get me wrong...I fully appreciate the things that feminists have accomplished in this world, but I think that people who call themselves feminists today embrace a whole different set of ideals and are often extreme and are quickly defensive.

Maybe that's the real problem that I have. Almost all the girls I know (with one exception, really) are either extremely image conscious and like to shop, wear makeup and generally worry a lot about what they look like, or they take everything extremely seriously and you can't joke around with them like you can with boys. That means that I don't usually like them, or they don't like me.

This also doesn't mean I don't believe awesome girls exist. I just haven't met very many awesome ones yet. I'm going to keep looking, but in the mean time, it's really just easiest to be friends with boys than put up with the drama and bullshit that comes with girls.

Why didn't you have male friends until you were older? Was it not considered appropriate for a girl to have male friends or were you afraid of men for some reason? Or it just never came up and you don't know why?

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

kawaiikune wrote:
I'm really more comfortable without anything on.

And when do we get to see pictures of this?!? }:)

kalinka's picture

Postulant

When I was little, I had mostly female friends, and they were exactly as you describe. However, I've always had one friend (daughter of my godparents) who has never been like that, and is still my best friend. I met another like her when I was a senior in high school (she was a freshman) and now the three of us + my little sister are really like sisters. My school was sort of small and insular and I knew the same people from 1st to 12th grade with some additions, so I sort of by default had male friends. I don't talk to any of them anymore, though, so that makes me think it really was just a situation thing.
In college I met a group of people in my dorm (it was co-ed) and we managed to all stay friends until graduation. It's a mixture of guys and girls, but the girls have NEVER been like that. None of us are terribly into shopping (well, we like to do it sometimes) and looking a certain way. This group of girls is really amazing, and I'm not sure how I managed to find them. Maybe it's because we're all comfortable hanging out with the guys in the group, I'm not sure.

Anyways, those girls who are around you must really suck. I'm sorry you've experienced so much cattiness. Friends should be able to be who they are with their friends, no matter what the situation. In general, people who take themselves too seriously and are too exacting with their appearance are the ones I don't like to be around. Also those who can't take a joke without doing the PC-freak-out. I have this one female acquaintance who was really close to my roommate. I couldn't stand to be around her because every time she spoke (it seemed to me, probably not true) she would say things like, "oh my thighs are too big" and "oh, look, cellulite." This girl has what is probably the closest to the "ideal female figure" I've ever seen. Basically, she's hot. And it drove me insane. So yeah, I understand what you mean, but I hope you find girls who aren't like that to hang out with.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

It's funny...I'm actually really happy with my friends. They just all happen to be guys.

You sound pretty cool, though, and I'm really glad you've found so many awesome people. Can I ask where you're from? (Feel free to be non-specific...I know this is the internet.) Thanks for your kind words Smile

kalinka's picture

Postulant

Ha, thanks. I'm glad you have a good group. Well, at the moment I'm in the south. I'm from Georgia originally. I'm relocating to Vermont next week until August, and then Ohio for the next five years. Woo grad school. I don't really know anyone there, so it will be interesting.

Where are you from? This is actually one of the places on the internet where I would feel most comfortable talking about my location, which may be naive. @TB and Davik before they can respond -- no lulling me into a false sense of security, now. Wink

Shade's picture

Supplicant

I have had the same experience with most women in regard to games I don't know are taking place. It's frustrating that you have to continually watch your back to make sure you're not breaking some stupid unspoken rule.

Lemur's picture

A little responding, sorry.

I think being unable to connect with girls stems from missing out on most of the social learning girls do together.

I've honestly always related more to guys. As a child I had friends up until the "cootie" stage, at which I got stuck with not so nice people because boys were less likely to hang out with girls at that age.
I didn't make good friends again until junior high, when I started hanging around with guys again.

I think, partially, I simply didn't understand the social dynamics in female relationships (even six-year-olds). I still have trouble with social dynamics, so I think there's something beyond just having different interests there. This disconnect continued throughout my life, and I've only just started picking up on relating to girls (now that most people I know are growing out of the teen/young adult stage). Guys were always easier to understand socially. Well, except for the really cool preppie smart guys (as opposed to the normal smart guys I knew), who were actually as catty as the girls I grew up with.

I missed to make-up, clothes and boys stages because I was, by then, too involved in books and my own head to notice. Heck, while I had a 'boyfriend' (in an innocent, childhood sense) I didn't really notice guys until I was 15 and still have little desire to date.

Because I didn't understand female social politics, and never tried, I got stuck as a last resort friend. The people I was friends with were the ones who weren't cool enough for the popular crowd, but were willing to drop me in a second to hang out with them. I was also bullied more by my female friends than anyone else.

Even now, my closest friend, while female, is someone I can shove around and wrestle with, and is only slightly girlier than I am. We play rough games, and the two of us hang around mostly with guys.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

a back-burner friend. It wasn't for the reason you mention though. In Jr. High I had a couple popular friends I'd hang out with when the other popular people were occupied or when one of them was the current social pariah. So they'd shift me from the back burner to the front. I had a different clique I hung out with every year in high school, but I talked to pretty much everyone. My senior year I was the back-burner friend again, but I was mostly just bored with everyone. I would eat my lunch by myself and read, and if someone had nothing to do, they'd swing by and chat or play a card game or some dominoes. Sometimes a group would come, sometimes just one or two people. Most days of the week someone would eat lunch with me, but I never really sought anyone out like I had, unless there was a specific reason. Like, say, bringing a carton of strawberry milk (there were probably four cartons available two days out of a given month) to one of my friends, because it was his favorite, and by the time he got his lunch they were usually gone, or someone asked me to help with homework, or there was some sort of event going on.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

I've never been able to be friends with women, there's just a fundamental disconnect. It's much easier for me to hang out with guys, though I've had the same experience you described. I used to live with a bunch of engineers and science geeks, and it was awesome. There wasn't any drama and I thought they accepted me as one of the guys (there were also a great deal of "hehe, Shade secretly has a penis" jokes due to professors thinking I was male for some reason, but those were usually well-timed and hilarious). I went up to visit them recently and instead of the 'hey, one of us is back' I got bombarded with really tasteless sexually charged comments. Stuff like this: Yeah, it's a good thing you left because I would have fucked you and ruined your life.

That's never happened to me before and it was honestly really depressing.

Wren's picture

Petitioner

I've had situations like that. One of the guys,... then suddenly... wow your boobs are huge I am going to throw things down your shirt! that is quite mild of course, but the most common occurance and still annoying when you just wanna be laid back.

sorry to hear about your upsetting douchebaggery incident.
hug!

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Quote:
Stuff like this: Yeah, it's a good thing you left because I would have fucked you and ruined your life.

Yeah, that IS really depressing. Nyah

Shade's picture

Supplicant

I took it worse than I should have because I have next to no friends where I'm living now and I was really looking forward to hanging out with all of the guys again. It was pretty harsh though :P.

sherinik's picture

Postulant

would be not the sudden reversal to general sexist idiocy, but the assumption that YOU Shade would have had no option but to allow it! I mean really - "I would have fucked you"? Not I would have TRIED or WANTED to fuck you? Did the fact that he suddenly realised there was a gender divide lead him somehow to assume that you too must now suddenly realise you were a vapid female who would compliantly go along with whatever He-Man wanted?

I think he left half his brain behind at school when he graduated. The better half.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

And if I'd been really thinking about it, I would have latched onto that too. I was more in shock that one of my (now former) friends would say something like that to me.

He hasn't graduated yet either, will be a senior in college this coming year. Too bad it hasn't taught him a damn thing >/

Oddfish's picture

Postulant

This discussion is everywhere lately! A friend from another site recently had problems with a guy who was trying to get cuddly with her "just as a friend" after she made it clear she was not a physical person, or interested in dating anyone right now. Someone linked to this article in that discussion, and I think it's an okay analysis of the problem in a lot of cases. No, it's not perfect, but it does make it clear to the hard-headed types that certain behaviors are not hot or okay. I thought I should link it here since it's on-topic and is at least guaranteed to get a chuckle or two for whatever reason.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Thanks for the link - very well said!

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

Thanks for that link. I wanted to highlight a couple parts:

"Self-confident, caring, decent-hearted women find "Nice Guys" to be too clingy, self-abasing, and insecure.
Nice Guys go overboard. They bring roses to a "lets get together for coffee" date. They try to buy her affections with presents and fancy things. They think they know about romance, but their timing is all wrong, and they either come-on too strong, too hard and too fast,..."

and

"This ultimately boils down to the fact that Nice Guys don't like themselves. Is it any wonder women don't like them? In order to truly love someone else, you must first love yourself."

and

"You don't have to be an ego-inflated, arrogant jerk. You just have to LIKE yourself. You have to know what you want out of life, and go after it. Only then will you be attractive to the kind of woman with whom a long-term relationship is possible. "

I just want to say that those statements apply to BOTH genders and to ALL relationships, not just guys trying to romance women! I have had SO many acquaintances who are insecure and it drives me up a fucking wall! And now I have an employee who has insecurity issues (among other problems), too! GAH!

General note to humanity: if you fake-slap yourself, or suggest that I slap/hit you because I just disagreed with/corrected you, then you have PROBLEMS and you just lost self-respect in my eyes. We can get along fine - I'm good at being polite and maintaining working relationships - but we will never be bosom-buddies.

I don't have a lot of friends and right now the only one in my life is my husband. A lot of it is because I'm an introvert, and more of it is because I have eclectic tastes in lots of things, so I don't fit social peg-holes nicely. But certainly some of my friendlessness is due my impatience with other people's flaws, and insecurity/low self-esteem is right up there at the top of the "Can't Stand It" list.

Sorry for the ranting, but this is one that's been simmering for awhile (see: insecure employee) and this seemed an appropriate place to let loose.

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

Idunno...

if you correct me on something that I definitely should've gotten right, I might play-slap myself...half a facepalm, half a "stupid TB."

It just is what it is.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

Really? I have a hard time seeing you doing that. I'm not talking about facepalm-to-the-forehead-"oops", I'm talking about a slap to the cheek kind of thing. The couple times I've encountered it IRL was in young men who definitely had self-esteem issues. It annoys me because it imposes their self-valuation on *me*. Sort of like non-verbally putting words in my mouth. I usually end up saying something like, don't hit yourself, if I had actually wanted to hit you, you would've gotten hit.

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

occasionally.

Usually after I do something really dumb. sometimes, it's just a swat to the back of the hand. typically done for a chuckle, and to let the person know that it's something I know better than to do.

jtok202's picture

I have never fallen into the "Nice Guy" category, I am a genetically blessed individual, I actually have more difficulty not being arrogant, or overly confident. The few times I have had more difficulty with women has mainly been because my head wasn't screwed on straight. I think that the real secret of being desired is desiring yourself first, its kinda backwards, but I have a great time in life, and sometimes people come along for the ride. the need to be acknowledged by other people, other stimulus or something to derive some worth or value are never going to be able to succeed at being a generally attractive person. I have seen that this is the fundamental flaw for most guys who fall into the Nice Guy category.

"Self-confident, caring, decent-hearted women find "Nice Guys" to be too clingy, self-abasing, and insecure."
God yes, btw unless I have a white knight complex this is a two way street.

"You don't have to be an ego-inflated, arrogant jerk. You just have to LIKE yourself. You have to know what you want out of life, and go after it. Only then will you be attractive to the kind of woman with whom a long-term relationship is possible. "

I actually find that relationships are more impermanent with strong people, If a women is truly independent and has her shit together then she will do what makes her happy. If your lives happen to cross and work out together for a period of time thats great. But its not like a path is going to be changed just because of you. That has some grounding in my need to be on the move and doing something new every 6 months too :).

Oddfish's picture

Postulant

It makes long-term relationships harder until it makes them easier, that's for sure. To elaborate on that load of waffle, you tend to date through people when you have a life plan, but when you meet someone whose goals work with yours, it's pretty smooth sailing. I'm not the type-A personality with specific goals for every year of my life, but I have general plans that do not include not working, and do not include raising anyone. It took a while to find a guy I didn't have to parent (and who didn't want to be a parent), but once I did? Soooo much less angst than people who settled, or who didn't want to be alone, or so forth. Yeah, it was slow and brief going at first, but for me it was totally worth the low drama index later.

jtok202's picture

As my life goals have not congealed a lot I think that it will be a experience.
I can't wait to find someone who is on the same wavelength I am, My current relationships are open, this has actually helped with stability as I don't get bored moved on as quickly.
I am on a Anti-Moss agenda

Oddfish's picture

Postulant

Fer sure. Of course mileage may vary, but since most people tend to get a little mossy (and enjoy that), it tends to be a few years of bitter struggle and then it's all good.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

regarding the "you don't have to be an arrogant jerk" comment, I find that arrogance is often strongly linked to insecurity. People who are the most arrogant often hate themselves the most and feel like they have to act like they're "all that" to compensate for it.

Wren's picture

Petitioner

While the theory is obviously generalized for clarity, P.O.V., and so on, I think it could use some more groupings or catagories.

I'm not sure about men, (or even other women, I can only talk for myself), but I think the ladder has more give than the theorist admits to. The lady ladder(s) could use some more clarification, like the male ladder diagram with "would have sex with drunk, but not admit to" "would have sex with drunk, and admit to". There really is no talk about relationship status' (aside from asshole boyfriends and buddies with benifit), which has a definite impact on someone's fuckability.

it's easy to see where "would have sex with, but not a relationship" could fit on the ladder. But what happens when you start rating guys on how long and when in your life you would consider dating them? Or someone who would be typically at the top of the sex ladder based on your attraction to them, but you can't actually stand them as a person? or the opposite? and where in that ranking does peer pressure fit in?

Aggggh I have written a dozen different things but none of them really make sense/convey what I am trying to say.

Please ignore me. I read what I wrote and it really won't come out how I am thinking it, but if you think you can untangle or clarify or elaborate on whateverthehellIactuallymean, please, go ahead!

Basically I think there should be catagories on the ladders, but it is still hard to place people, because the different points that determine the classifications can be a factor that raises them on the ladder in one way while it lowers them in another according to criteria of sex, relationship, how long you can stand them, the severity of the bad points over the good points.

It's really hard to be clear to guys as to what "ladder" they are on if you can't figure it out yourself.

Earlier in May had a bad breakup with longtime bf (yay being called a whore and getting your first marriage proposal in the same sentance. it is funny though. at least it is funny when said out loud) and recently had to tell a guy very firmly to stay in the friends column because he was coming on so strong and even though I may have seen possibilities for a future relationship, I wasn't there at the time because still confused/healing and hadn't even had a chance to get to know the guy even a little. So things just get so confusing!!!!!
I do agree with the site that the worst thing a guy can do is show (WAY) too much interest. you don't need to be aloof, but pressuring a girl is nearly certain to get you a rejection. Show you are interested, make your suit, but don't push it if you and she aren't banging the next day! give people a chance to breath damnit!!!!

Well, that is my verbal (well. typed rather) diarrhea rant for the day. 1 part catharsis, 12 parts frustration in not being able to convey what I mean.

Marri's picture

Supplicant

I saw this:

"But what happens when you start rating guys on how long and when in your life you would consider dating them?"

And thought of my sister. She has a friend Will whom we refer to as her "future husband" (she came up with the name) because she has decided he is perfect for her but she won't get into a long distance relationship (it was NH to NY for the last three years and will be NJ to CA for the next four). So I guess he's in that limbo you mentioned?

Wren's picture

Petitioner

I guess. But if they were in the same place, would she sleep with him/be with him now? or is he stuck on the friend's list until she decides she is ready to consider marriage and start dating with that in mind?
I think that is the limbo I was trying to get on about. the "I would love to love you, you are perfect for me, just not right now (because I don't want to settle down just yet/don't want to ruin it forever with bad timing in our lives/etc"
would those fellows be on the friend ladder for the time being because of whatever only to be switched to the sex ladder when ready? or are they always on the sex ladder even if you wouldn't have sex with them at the time because yadda yadda?

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Once you are on the friends ladder you cannot move to the sex ladder. So these guys are on the sex ladder, but they're close to the bottom. They can move up or down later.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

That is . . . ridiculously offensive and demeaning to both sexes.

This really got to me: Bitch -- 99.999% of women. Note for men: I know they are. Note to women: yes, you are in this group. More accurately it is a woman who is not honest about whyshe won't sleep with you. Or sometimes, just a woman who won't sleep with you. And of course women who won't admit the basic truth of Ladder Theory.

. . . so because she's not fulfilling her obvious and only task on this planet of providing sex whenever a guy wants it for whatever reason, she's a bitch. If she has an objection that the guy doesn't believe, she's lying.

Stuff like this just makes me want to hole myself away from all people and become a hermit. I have neither the inclination nor patience to play these stupid games and try to defend myself from assholes who won't listen anyway >/.

MeiLin's picture

Most High

Women are a commodity. Considering western society, that attitude isn't hard to come by. It's still shitty.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

how to properly handle that attitude. It's only a slight step removed from the way I'm viewed in my area of the country and I can't figure out how to get them to see me as a person and colleague first. Yeah, I can pass for a guy pretty easily, but I don't want to have to resort to that to get some damned respect :P.

kalinka's picture

Postulant

If you don't mind me asking, what's your area of the country? Your comment made me curious.

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

I think it's Utah...(please correct me if I'm wrong).

I recall some complaints about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

kalinka's picture

Postulant

On a side note...

I found it really interesting that a large portion of the students in the grad program I'm entering are Mormon, because BYU has such a good language program. As in, more people of that faith than I had ever met in my life. Just an interesting tidbit.

/End side note.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

It's the crappy part of Idaho :P. Might as well be Utah, really . . .

And it's not so much the church as a whole as the assholes I'm surrounded with . . . though I do take issue with the "women should be educated in case something happens to their husband but until that happens they need to pump out babies" attitude Blum 3

But yeah, a condensed version of the complaint for those who didn't read the other: Because I'm a woman, I'm less of a person. Because I'm young, unmarried, and don't want children, I'm even worse. It doesn't matter that I get better grades than they do, I'm simply seen as less deserving and wasting everyone's time.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

is this exchange:

"You really don't want kids?"
"Nope."
"Why not?"
"There's enough babies already and I don't find the drooling and shitting and puking cute."
"It's different when they're you're own."
"I hope never to find out."
"You'll change your mind. I used to be just like you, but then I hit this age/got married and hormones just take over, you know?"
"In the unlikely event that I want a baby after permanently sterilizing myself, I will adopt."

Shade's picture

Supplicant

My big problem is this attitude: You're selfishly taking away from your future children because you're wasting time educating yourself when you should be raising a family, and you're failing God's point of making you a woman because your only real task in this life is to be a subservient and nurturing shield for your husband and children.
Most of the men in my class see me in those terms and I don't know how to get rid of it so I can be considered a freaking colleague.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

the area you live being the reason for that attitude. The only place I have ever encountered that is online and it was sarcasm. Even the right-wingers I know won't stop their daughters from going to college and studying in male dominated fields.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

It's absolutely the culture of this area and it's hard to stomach. I had a friend in high school who wanted to be a vet. Her parents told her she wouldn't use that, they wouldn't help her pay for that, and that she should get a home ec degree instead because she could use that when she had children.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

And that's why I'm glad that I live in a (relative to Idaho/Utah) socially and religiously diverse area. I have my faith, my understanding of my relationship with God and so on (which does NOT involve automatic female subservience - is a cow subservient to a bull???), and I do not appreciate have my take on God and universe dictated by someone else. So living in an area where people are used to their neighbors being of different religions, much less different sects within a specific faith, or of no particular organized religion at all, is much easier than living in some homogenous-to-the-point-of-insular-insanity. Living in New York does have the occasional upside.

Granted, I still wouldn't mind if NYC and it's immediate downstate environs decided to secede and form their own state Wink

Shade's picture

Supplicant

that I can tell this hellhole to kiss my ass :P.

To be fair, the program I'm in is really good and I do have an excellent job in a small business owned by non-mormons. I'm just sick of dealing with this sexist and religiously biased crap.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

the secession of NYC from the rest of the state.

sherinik's picture

Postulant

I mean, a milch cow, chooks and goats would be perfect for the little lady's white picket fence house, wouldn't they? And basic biology is basic biology - she wouldn't even have to go to a nasty hospital and have strange men looking at her - she could do the whole birth thing at home for herself!

Please tell me you can read the tongue firmly stuck in the side of my mouth, and the dribble of sarcasm running down the side. I have to ask, because anyone who would spout that nonsense would probably take me seriously.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Sarcasm received loud 'n clear ;).

I think it's because in their eyes women aren't supposed to have careers or be self-sufficient at all. We are here to be protected by teh_mens and to do as they say. If said friend had higher education and a career, it would take away from what she's supposed to focus on? Maybe? I have no idea.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

hahahahahahahahahah!

Oh man. Sorry, but as someone who's a regular animal midwife, I'm trying to imagine a woman being her own midwife/obstetrician and getting stuck on the picture of her shoving her own hand up her vagina in an attempt to pull the baby out when it gets stuck in a breech presentation or something.

*snickers*

And yes, totally got the sarcasm there Wink

MeiLin's picture

Most High

I wanted kids, always have, since I was a kid myself. I love kids. The puking/drooling/shitting part is over much faster than you think it'll be, and it *is* different when it's your kids doing it. Not that I'm trying to talk you into anything, far from it. People who don't want to be parents should never become parents, because you have to want this. It's really hard work, frankly, and it doesn't get easier though it does get less time-intensive. And it's your job until you die. You are always a mama or a papa to your children. That never changes, even if your relationship sours.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

worrying over something I've seen someone do, or something I've heard happened, and I'll think, "When I have kids..." stop and replace the thought with, "I'm not having kids." I feel relieved when I remember it, and I know part of the reason I even think the first part is because of stereotypical gender roles. I remember thinking about what I'd name my children.

I don't want kids because I'm barely responsible for taking care of myself. I am far to preoccupied with the world to remember to do things. Maybe that changes when it's a baby. Maybe I wouldn't forget it somewhere like I do with my wallet that has $300 in it, to be deposited into the account of someone who's entrusted me with it (yes, this has happened... found the money, but not until after a parent had to temporarily bail me out). Maybe I would feed it regularly despite often forgetting to feed myself, and my cat having to let me know it's time to eat.

But if I don't, it's not like a pet, where I can just put an ad up on craigslist and find a better home than I can provide for it (something I have had to do with a sick pet that I could not afford to care for). I can't financially support someone else and I don't want to be like my sister and my best friend's sister, where I'm struggling to get by and am too selfish to skip buying a snowmobile or a riding lawn mower (yes, they did this). My mother would gladly bankrupt herself to help me out, and I doubt my aunt and my grandmother would leave me hanging, but I need to be independent before becoming the whole world of someone else.

kalinka's picture

Postulant

I completely respect you for that. I wish more people would look at having kids as an important decision they have to make rather than a given, as in "of course I'll have kids, why wouldn't I?" regardless of their situation in life. I'm not saying that you shouldn't or anything (don't take it that way, please!), but the fact that you considered yourself and the people around you makes me really respect you. I hope you take that as the complement it's intended to be.

ETA a word I left out.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

And even if you had said I shouldn't have kids I wouldn't be offended. Since I quite clearly agree with you Blum 3

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

I'm at the opposite end - I've always wanted kids REALLY BADLY, and I've always wanted them young - I hate myself for not having kids yet, and so I've received slightly differently-couched but similarly-intended version of this:

Quote:
"You'll change your mind. I used to be just like you, but then I hit this age/got married and hormones just take over, you know?"

No, I won't change my mind. No, not everyone is like you, and you were never like I. Fuck off.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

go watch the movie Idiocracy. Smile

I definitely think that people shouldn't tell you how you will feel about things or how you should feel about things, and that it sounds like most people have been dicks about the baby thing. I would like to add, however, that for me personally, permanence is terrifying. A few years ago, I decided that I wanted to get a tattoo. I had the tattoo picked out and I was all set to do it when someone I really didn't like showed up with a very, very similar tattoo. I decided not to get it as a result, and since there was nothing else I could think of that I wanted, I didn't get a tattoo.

That tattoo had a lot of religious symbolism and, seven years later I don't believe in God. If I had gotten it, I would have absolutely hated it now and probably would have paid to have it removed. Tattoos are somewhat permanent, but not as permanent as sterilization (I think, for some people). Obviously you're going to do whatever you're going to do with your own body, and obviously you have every right to do that. With the availability and effectiveness of birth control, I guess sterilization just seems extreme. Maybe you know exactly who you're going to be, and what you're going to be like, and what things will happen to you in the next ten to twenty years, but I don't...and I was really, really wrong about a decision that was less important than having kids or permanent sterilization, but that could have been a decision I would seriously regret.

ETA: I don't really want kids either...the puking/shitting/drooling/crying/screaming thing is super unappealing, and I really can't stand infants, and for some reason everyone always wants me to hold their stupid babies. Blum 3 They're also really boring. On the other hand, though, I really like kids once they learn how to talk, so maybe someday I'll change my mind. I really like 3-12 year olds. Infants and teenagers *really* don't interest me at all, though. But, hey, birth control is pretty much the best thing ever.

The Which's picture

Embodiment

IMO, kids stop being likeable when they hit middle school. That 11-14 range is the age I'm dreading the most!

(Also, my daughter is a birth control failure :X Not that I regret her, but she certainly wasn't planned!)

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

I would also be able to afford freezing some eggs or something. IUD's would seem appealing if we had more long term data about them. I can not remember to take pills (a shame, I need pills to help me focus so that I remember to do things like take my pills...), and I'm not sure I'd want to deal with injections either.

I have seen Idiocracy. Welcome to Costco, I love you.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

I had a hard time remembering to take the pills, too (I'd take them, but not always at the right time each day). The answer for me was the patch. Absolutely love it.

Ergh, now I need to go look up the old birth control discussion thread to link here...

Marri's picture

Supplicant

I was so bad about taking it, it finally started playing bloody havoc with my body. Got fed up and switched to NuvaRing after a month of various physical issues and now the only problem I have is "Hmmm, there's something in the way while I'm trying to have sex!" and/or remembering to put it back in.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

Found the link to the previous discussion for anyone who's interested: General opinion: favorite form of birth control?

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

Quote:

Now, the title bitch don't apply to all women
But all women have a little bitch in 'em

That better? }:)
I think it's at least closer to the truth.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

Got a little bitch in you? D'ya want some? }:)

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

And how exactly does that work?? :?

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

We're just a vagina with a mouth attached. We have limbs, you know. Blum 3

ETA: And guys have holes... >.>

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

fists, fingers, feet...
elbows, forearms, calves, if you're ambitious.
Biceps, thighs if you're nuts.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Noses, tongues...

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

Raigne wrote:
You act like we're just a vagina with a mouth attached. We have limbs, you know.

I am quite aware. I wanted to see what kind if kinkiness would come up... }:)
Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Me or TB?

ETA: I thought about including strap-ons, but those aren't an actual body part...

Wren's picture

Petitioner

Elbow!
teeeheheheheheheehe! Jumpeveryone

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

he was joking about that:

Quote:
And why does everyone always say I'm bitter just because 99.999% of chicks are bitches?

Maybe it's just me, but that sounds like sarcasm...

I also kind of agree with him on one point. I have known a *ton* of guys that were led on by a girl who didn't have the balls to say "Look, I really like spending time with you, but I have to be honest with you...I really am not ever going to be interested in dating you or having sex with you." Maybe she would have missed out on half of a really rewarding friendship, but he wouldn't have wasted years pining after her and doing her bidding. If a guy doesn't have a chance, you need to tell him he doesn't have a chance. If he chooses to spend time with you regardless, maybe he is a real friend or maybe he's just stupid, but you really *are* a bitch if you have a guy that goes above and beyond for you and is your best friend and you haven't told him, firmly and without leaving room for hope, that you're never going to date/sleep with him. Even if you're not lying with words, you're lying with actions, and it's still a dick move. You're still giving that guy a false hope. It breaks my heart every time I see one of those "best friend' types of guys. They'll never let go and recover unless you're honest with them.

And yes, I know that maybe some of the nice guys are insecure or whatever, and that you have a very good reason for not wanting to sleep with them. They're still people too, though, and it's still pretty heartless to string them along, *especially* if you consider yourself to be one of their friends.

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

To be fair, I think girls don't do that intentionally - I think most of the time, they either a) don't fully CONSCIOUSLY realise that they guy likes them (though there may be an element of denial), or that they are sending mixed messages OR b) are confused themselves about how they feel about the guy.

I am sort of in a similar situation atm, and partly it was because I DO sort of like the guy, and for a while I wasn't sure if there was 'potential' or not. Of course, I stupidly slept with the guy (multiple times), so shit's all fucked up. Nyah

Oddfish's picture

Postulant

I think a lot of people are confused, at least when they're younger, and just honestly don't know how to put on their big-kid undies and say what they want. It doesn't make them bitches or dicks, it just makes them people who are, hopefully, learning.

Although you can't win with some even if you are honest. I make it a policy to be tactfully straightforward with anyone who wants more than I can give them. A lot of people appreciate this, but some people will still insist that I led them on, or that I only date assholes (Which I definitively don't, because I took enough crap growing up that I don't do it as an adult), or some such ego-bandaging lies. So while the majority appreciate honesty, there are still people out there who will skewer you no matter what. They suck and are not worth your time, but that doesn't mean they don't exist and that they don't trash on honesty.

MeiLin's picture

Most High

Oddfish wrote:
I think a lot of people are confused, at least when they're younger, and just honestly don't know how to put on their big-kid undies and say what they want. It doesn't make them bitches or dicks, it just makes them people who are, hopefully, learning.

Having just come off a conference call with Nettah the Edittah, I can tell you that this is going to be more of a theme in book one.

jtok202's picture

It isn't exclusively to women, men do just as little introspection.
Ehh she fucked me, thusly .....
Not why did we have sex?

Ely's picture

Petitioner

Denial is so easy !

About three or four years ago, I spent a week in bed with a good friend of mine, to the tune of "sex is not going to change anything between us". I believed him, and then ignored all the signs for a few years, until another (girl) friend tried to date him and got the full story. Hopeless crush, not saying anything and all that.
I was mad at him for quite a while... Of course, I should have known better. But then, who wants to cut ties with someone you think is a friend ?

Now, my boyfriend has noticed the poor puppy look, and I'm dreading the following future conversation:
- "but why didn't you tell him he had no chance ?"
- "well, I did, only after, uh, I.. slept with him ?"

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

I hope I don't run into the same problem as a result of my actions! Are you still friends with this guy?

Ely's picture

Petitioner

I know it's stupid, but except when he starts pouting and making vague comments about how much happier he could be if I was willing, I tend to keep in touch. He invited me and my boyfriend for a few days this summer - it might mean he got over it. Or he might start acting all miserable again and I'll want to throw him overboard.

It ultimately depends on how emotionnally intelligent your guy is. In my experience, this kind of thing only worked once, and failed multiple times. But then I'm mostly talking about computer nerds Wink

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

I think that was a big part of the point of the Ladder Theory website. It was partially a joke, and partially a message to girls who have strung along a guy on the "Friend's Ladder" and don't realize they're doing it. I know it's pissed a lot of people off, but I think that it wasn't meant to be taken quite this seriously, except as a message to those people who are "best friends" with someone who wants to have sex with them. I think on the whole, it's not a bad message. I've definitely had a really close friend that was definitely on the friends ladder, and who I found out later wanted to date/sex me. I didn't find out until much later. Now I'm much more careful with my male friends, especially my single male friends, from the outset. It helps that I'm in a committed relationship, but I'm careful not to complain about my boyfriend or vent about little things he does that irritate me. I make it clear at the beginning of friendships that friendship is all I'm looking for and nothing is going to change my mind about that.

Maybe it is making a social statement, but I think it's important, in the interest of learning and trying to be better people and more honest people, that young girls, especially, (although maybe this applies to guys, too) know what they're getting themselves into with cross-gender friendships. I think it does help raise self-awareness and reduce confusion, and I think on the whole, it's right, even if there are (as always) exceptions. Most guys who are best friends with a girl want to take that relationship to the next level or at least have sex with her. It sounds like a lot of you have had experiences that indicate that that is at least partially true, and I know I do.

V's picture

Embodiment

Have some points.

kalinka's picture

Postulant

Well well well, someone's got a shiny new avatar.

Pedes's picture

Postulant

And starting from the very graphs... Women's part is just like BULLSHIT! If it was not some of my male friends would not be single and I would not want to give could shoulder one guy that is trying now (I have no idea how to bring it up, though).

Ah, too lazy today to write more -_-.

The Which's picture

Embodiment

who were supposed to be firmly on the friend ladder. (Alcohol was involved)

Not one of them was unwilling.

So yes, your friends might want to fuck you, but that doesn't mean they dont want to be your friend. To the author of that peice, women are only accessory to what's in their pants, where in real life there are many men who realize you can be attracted to a woman but still enjoy conversation and company without the sex.

On a side note, nowadays I am so paranoid about male/female relationships that when I had a direct question for a man, I went through his wife rather than call him. Possibly silly, but I get very uncomfortable around men.

I only have one male coworker with whom I would get a beer after work, and I'm pretty sure he's just not out of the closet yet.

MeiLin's picture

Most High

Quote:
On a side note, nowadays I am so paranoid about male/female relationships that when I had a direct question for a man, I went through his wife rather than call him. Possibly silly, but I get very uncomfortable around men.

I could barely be in the same room as guys unless I was working or they were gay, until I met Sir.

jtok202's picture

In regards to

"So yes, your friends might want to fuck you, but that doesn't mean they dont want to be your friend. To the author of that peice, women are only accessory to what's in their pants, where in real life there are many men who realize you can be attracted to a woman but still enjoy conversation and company without the sex. "

I really wish more women understood this point. I am a straight man involved in activities and life that is greatly female dominated. There are very few who I am not sexually attracted too and could have a good romp with, however I can be solely platonic friends with someone without ever worrying about sexuality being a issue. If more people just hung up their issues at the door, and accepted that a man can be interested in you as a person regardless of being sexually or not interested in you it would be great. I do realize thats a unrealistic wish.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

if one of those friends came out of the bathroom nude, and asked you to have sex with her, would you say no?

[/devil's advocate]

Ely's picture

Petitioner

I did that once (well, bathrobe. But still).
He rolled his eyes, called me dangerous, and said yes.

In hindsight, I think very few guys would have said no; but it was like jumping from a cliff for me. Best self-assertion thing I ever did Smile

It was seven years ago; he's still one of my best friends. We understand each other frighteningly well, in and out of beds, but we're just not a romantic match.
Still, most of my other 'friend with benefits' attempts backfired...

Vandole's picture

Postulant

The truth is, and I think the Ladder theory guy mentioned this somewhere, is that the the majority of guys have very little reason not to take up an offer from a friend like that. In terms of the Ladder theory, men would only turn sex down in such a situation because the girl is too far down the ladder (especially if it's in the looks department) or participating in that act impairs their chance at reaching or keeping someone they rank higher. (In the real world there's fear and commitment and all of those things)

Anecdotally speaking, I would go for it unless I was already involved with someone. I am definitely at least somewhat attracted to all of my female friends, though I'm not exactly sure what the causal relationship is there. I think just about all of my (young) female acquaintances are cute and wouldn't mind no strings attached sex with any of them (Even the ones I don't get along with normally), or a relationship with most of them. So I guess I'm just horny. It also helps that I don't believe in true romantic love, so a relationship is more like two people who get along well (or don't, if you fancy that) who have sex to me. It's different from being friends but I don't believe in any love part of it, just compatibility.

MeiLin's picture

Most High

So young, and so cynical. True love absolutely does exist, my friend, and I didn't think it did either. I found it where and when I least expected it. Which is what everybody says, but in my case, my hand to the gods, it's true.

Oddfish's picture

Postulant

I stumbled into it talking about zombie movies at a party I'd only come to to be my roommate's wingman (or wing-girl, as the case is), because I didn't think dating was really my bag at that point in time. This after years of being one of the guys, and after wanting to be a pretend bridesmaid rather than a pretend bride when I was little (because I thought it was more fun). If I can manage to wander into it, then at least theoretically anyone can.

jtok202's picture

I really wouldn't think about it till I'd done it, and never feel weird about it. Has happened several times.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

are irrelevant and your personal views are not at odds with ladder theory.

jtok202's picture

1. lol, if the situation happens how is she not stepping into the sexual territory?
2. Never a paragraph of simplicity.

sherinik's picture

Postulant

While I applaud your ability to relegate biology to its proper place in an evolved organism, my experience tells me you are in a minority. More males than females seem to have this evolutionary deficiency, but it definitely occurs in both. The fact that it 'has happened several times' tells me that your female friends believe you can separate eros from filios, and I can only repeat - where can I get one like you? I'd prefer to be good friends with a casual partner, but I'm not game to try it, because a couple of the few good friends I'd consider taking to bed have already tripped over this issue. So, better to keep them as good friends, and have the occasional wistful lustful thought in private...

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

I have serious trouble finding men who can separate those two! At least, men I want to fuck...

Gudy's picture

Embodiment

... as the proper place of biology in an evolved organism. Biology is central to our existence, and ignoring that simple fact is nothing short of self-delusional. Case in point, the fact that oxytocin is released during the sexual arousal cycle, and that oxytocin relieves fear, increases trust and likely facilitates bonding means that any prolonged sexual relationship is likely to end up with the people involved developing feelings for each other, though not necessarily synchronously. Note that I said 'prolonged'. Someone who confesses his everlasting love after a one night stand is just clingy. Blum 3

jtok202's picture

There is a large difference between someone who you would like to spend 6 months to a year with and someone who you may just see for a few months. The happy bonding part of sex is very useful for normal white picket fence relationships. I think that at least for me I found it easier to be un-bonded with people even after long periods of time, when many of them I met because they would trust me to throw them through the air, hold them 30 ft above the ground, or just generally take their well being as my total concern. I think that a bit of meditation and self introspection as part of daily practice is a large part of separating the emotional and physical states. If you can establish why your feeling the way you do its much easier to acknowledge accept and move through your experience whether it hurts or not.

jtok202's picture

I really enjoy having good friends who I am close with who can also be sexual. Of course my normal barometer is a bit abnormal.

"I'd prefer to be good friends with a casual partner, but I'm not game to try it, because a couple of the few good friends I'd consider taking to bed have already tripped over this issue"

It sucks that they have tripped over it,?! (not sure correct punctuational intent there)I have always felt like many people have trouble reading and understanding when they are being shutdown or being encouraged. I know that I more consciously flirt now, as I have spent years being accused by girlfriends of flirting with everybody, by being more aware of how interaction with people is perceived for them and myself its a lot easier to make that transition with the couple friends who will be good bedmates too.

Gudy's picture

Embodiment

... I would, even if I totally had the hots for her and she offered me sex with no strings attached. I might regret it afterwards, sure, but that's a different question, really.

Someone's picture

Postulant

so, it says that men pretty much categorize women on "how much I want to have sex with her". And to some extent, I have to grant that (this is all assuming heterosexuality). but that rating doesn't necessarily hold. I.E. over a year ago, I met a girl who ranked very high on the "would like to fuck" scale. Several months later, she told me -- effectively -- that she would hop in my pants if I but said the word. now, there are some complicating factors, but I have not said the word. additionally, I do not think I would say the word, even without the complicating factors. It's not that she's not attractive to me any more, but ... I don't think I would actually want to have sex with her if the opportunity were to arise. even though she still ranks pretty high on my "would like to fuck" internal scale.

does any of that make sense?

as to the claim that women are attracted to assholes, I find that harder. as a genuine nice guy (I.E. nice to people, not in an attempt to get into their pants, but because that's just who I am) I observed a lot of that (especially given that my best friend is a genuine asshole at times). but of course, assholery isn't attractive. But it tends to come with dominance/controling-ness, and self confidence. the latter is attractive, and the prior is attractive to passive girls with low self-esteem. who happen to also be the attractive "popular girls" in a high school setting. as for the rest of the world, I'm too much of a hermit (and happy in my relationship) to know.

does that make sense/not come across as sexist?

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

It pretty much makes sense and I pretty much agree with you Wink

The way I've always put it (including to my husband) is that "just because I'm committed, doesn't mean I'm blind." You can absolutely find someone to be physically attractive and not want to actually have sex with them, much less be in anyway disloyal to your significant other. Doesn't mean you get to rub your S.O.'s face in the fact of someone else's attractiveness (that's called being cruel and undermining their self-esteem), but it doesn't mean you have to be blind.

In fact, I find many women physically attractive, but I don't consider myself bisexual because I never want to have sex with any of them.

V's picture

Embodiment

viruslife wrote:
I don't care where you get your appetite, as long as you eat at home.
AKA: Look, but don't touch. I like this approach Biggrin

Capriox, is it fair to say you have a very well-defined gap between "want" and "want to"? Wants being the physical twinge (he's physically attractive, she's physically attractive) but the "want to" (have sex, take other action) occurs only after you consider the rest of the situation (I'm married, so no interest)? I'm not sure everyone else can do that particularly effectively and I think the ladder theory is trying to talk more to the "want"/desire than the "want to"/actual action. He just explains himself poorly by beating the one "give them a chance" example to death.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

Erm, I don't think so, exactly. It isn't just about being monogamous (definitely applies to my views on men, but not women), it really is a separation between "attraction" and "would actually have sex with". So when I meet at a woman, sometimes I'll think she's beautiful, or hot, or has nice eyes, or a nice smile, or a fun personality, or whatever. I can even look at pictures of naked women and sometimes find them arousing in a general oooh-sexy-atmosphere kind of way. But when it comes to trying to imagine actual intimate acts with women, my response is indifferent at best and usually more along the lines of a major "ick" turn-off.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

that when you're straight, acknowledging the attractiveness of the gender you're not attracted to is very, very different from seeing someone of the gender you are attracted to and knowing you shouldn't have sex with them. I'm bisexual, so that doesn't necessarily apply to me at all, but you like sex, you know you like sex, and as far as I'm concerned, there is no difference between being attracted to someone and wanting to have sex with them unless those factors are purely "love" or personality related.

The only time I see a hot guy or girl and would turn down sex with them is if it made my boyfriend uncomfortable or I hated their personality (or, idk, I thought they were diseased or something). Largely, I never turn down sex with girls that I think are attractive because my boyfriend has no objection to that, and I always turn down sex with boys I think are attractive because my boyfriend does have an objection to that. That doesn't mean my body doesn't want to have sex with them. That doesn't mean I wouldn't get wet if I saw them naked or were watching them play with themselves or have sex (or depending on the level of attraction, spent some time in the same room as them). It doesn't mean I'm either going to fantasize about them later or have to put conscious thought into *not* fantasizing about them later. It just means that I love my boyfriend more than I want to have sex with them. I still want to have sex with them, but I can acknowledge that it's more important to me to be with my boyfriend.

I totally agree with the rest of your post. I just think that in most cases, finding someone attractive (not just acknowledging that they meet some standard of attractiveness or beauty or that they are nice to look at like a painting in a museum or something) is the same as wanting to have sex with them, and that you can't compare attractiveness of women to men if you're strictly straight (or strictly gay/lesbian).

fairnymph's picture

Embodiment

Finding people nice to look at is not the same as finding them attractive, which as you said, implies you would fuck them barring any extreme circumstances.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

Ah, see now, I would say that attractive *does* mean "nice to look at" in either an purely aesthetic manner or a sexual one. We're getting into splitting-hairs territory here.

I think I just don't have as sexualized interactions as you do. Men and women are equally pleasant or not to look upon (mostly not), and I don't get all rawr-lustful unless there's an established relationship in play (or in the case of lit-porn, I'm putting myself in the head of someone who has the relationship while I'm reading). That's my personal argument with this sex vs. friends ladder theory - for me, sex will ONLY happen if the person is already a good friend. One night stands just aren't a part of my psychological make-up.

kawaiikune's picture

Embodiment

So...you would like to fuck her, she would like to fuck you, but you won't fuck her? You won't fuck her because of complicating factors, but if the complicated factors were removed you still wouldn't fuck her? What the fuck is going on here?

Why exactly won't you have sex with this girl?

I agree with the second half of your post, but could you clarify a few points in the first half? Thanks Smile

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

I found this confusing also.

Gudy's picture

Embodiment

... that it is, at this point all about the difference between fantasy and reality (or call it theory and practice). The former says 'hot, I'd hit that' while the latter is more like 'nah, not really'.

Someone's picture

Postulant

I totally would (/have) fantasize(ed) about her. But I don't think I actually would have sex with her.

The reason I bring this up is that I think "ladder theory" fundamentally miscategorizes attraction. You (or at least I) can be sexually attracted to someone without actually wanting to have sex with them, illogical though that may seem.

in other news: I love the odd grammatical structures my name causes.

Gudy's picture

Embodiment

... when it comes to sexual attraction. And likewise, the miscategorization of attraction is one of the (many) problems I have with "ladder theory".

As for your name, that's nothing. Wait till you have someone on the forum whose handle is 'nobody'. Those jokes never really died... Biggrin

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

You could have more fun with Everybody than you could with Nobody. That would include You, Me, Someone, Anyone, Us, Them...

april.raines's picture

Petitioner

Guh, this topic bugs me soooooo much. I got through (skimming) three pages and could take no more. Having been 'accused' many times of walking all over my husband - who is a definitive 'Nice Guy' - it just pisses me off! It is not my fault that he is more introverted than me, and doesn't share his views with the general public. grrr

'The Ladder', uh ya, it's called 'immaturity'. Girls do want 'nice guys', the girls who are mature enough to see more than looks & $$$. Sure, you could say I saw $$$ when I started dated my hubby, he was majoring in Comp Sci. But then again, he came from a 'working class' family and I came from an 'upper middle' class family - which is the relevant factor?

So far as I can tell, same goes for guys. Maturity = broader viewpoints. Understanding that sex is not everything, no matter now big a part it is.

Are these thoughts foremost when checking someone out? Unlikely, but they do come in to play when seriously considering a relationship - not just a fling. Well, ok, I speculate. I've never done a fling.

Oh, and FairyNymph, you don't have to be ugly for guys not to want to have sex with you. I was 'The Brain' throughout highschool. And in second year university I once had a guy friend say to another one (over the phone) 'Ya, I'm here with the one woman with whom there is no sexual tension'. Umm... what? He meant it as a compliment - I think - but it didn't come off that way.

Okay. End /rant

Marri's picture

Supplicant

a) I don't think they said any relationship between a woman and a "nice guy" is the one being talked about in the rant in that link. The Heartless Bitches rant was specifically about guys who are considered Nice Guys or call themselves Nice Guys BUT are nice specifically because they are emotionally dependent rather than out of a true enjoyment of being nice for nice's sake. And of course there are people who are truly nice but are also emotionally dependent, and the rant probably applies to them as well. But my point: if your husband is nice and not in a "I am being nice because I am obsessed with you, too needy and clingy to live without you, feel I can't live without you, etc etc" kind of unhealthy way, then the above ranting does not apply to your relationship. My last relationship was with the "clingy and dependent" type and my current relationship is with a "I'm perfectly functional thank you but still enjoy spoiling you rotten" type, so I'm very sensitive to the difference, because the first type drove me UP THE FRICKING WALL. And Ryan is adorable. And presumably so is your husband.

b) From what I can tell, no one here believes 100% in Ladder Theory. There've been discussions about what aspects are more correct than others, but I don't think anyone thinks OMG THIS IS SO COMPLETELY RIGHT. People are welcome to correct me on this one, though, it's late and I'm tired. Having a non-Ladder-Theory relationship probably makes you the rule, not the exception.

c) I don't think all of it is immaturity, I'm sure some of it is biological. Like so:

His idea that women are attracted to money and power = Evolution wants women to find strong/healthy/powerful/etc males to protect them. Yes, I know, modern women are perfectly capable of taking care of and protecting themselves, but back when we were evolving, way less so. Won't bother going into the biology, I'm not very good at. But I'm pretty sure that biologically speaking, women are typically smaller than men, and with less upper body strength. So evolution made us find bigger stronger people.

His idea that men always want sex = Evolution wants people to breed as much as possible so we can continue our species

His idea that men and women factor in attraction a LOT = Evolution wants you to breed with someone healthy and with good genes, and so you are programmed to respond to people who look as though they are healthy and have good genes. And healthy and fit and etc etc usually means more attractive.

d) If I remember right, FairNymph (who is very protective of her name) said that there could be more than one reason, but that a lack of physical attraction was the -most likely- reason to be turned down for sex. I could TOTALLY have just made that up, though.

kalinka's picture

Postulant

Also, this sentence made me giggle:

"but back when we were evolving..."

Oh, you know, back when we were evolving, blah... :biglol:

MeiLin's picture

Most High

Marri wrote:

d) If I remember right, FairNymph (who is very protective of her name) said that there could be more than one reason, but that a lack of physical attraction was the -most likely- reason to be turned down for sex. I could TOTALLY have just made that up, though.

...or, you could be batshit crazy, which is what kept me celibate for large swathes of my life...

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

Good thing you're only butterflyshit crazy now!

*grin, duck, & run*

MeiLin's picture

Most High

I just found a man who saw through the crazy and loved me anyway. Poor guy. I did get better, but I don't think I would have without Sir. I'd probably be dead.

Marri's picture

Supplicant

Always knew I was batshit insane. Boyfriend seems to like it, fortunately. On the other hand, in this case I was thinking more "I blame this on the fact that I'm running on three hours of sleep and a lot of adrenaline and caffeine" than "I blame this on the fact that I'm insane." Cause if it was the second one, I couldn't say ANYTHING Blum 3

april.raines's picture

Petitioner

- I write things I really shouldn't. So, uh, clarification time.

a) I didn't read the whole thing, and only skimmed what I did look at, so it was more the general vibe than the specific content I was 'grr'ing about. And if those are the definitions, no my husband wouldn't fall into the neurotic nice guy version, just the real one. Glad you found one, too.

b) Oh, man, I'm soooo sorry. That was not meant as a rant at anyone here. Everyone here has brains and uses them from what I've seen. That rant was slowly directed at what was on the linked site. Banghead Sorry if it sounded otherwise.

c) Coming back to that, 'cause that's another grr - but not at you, just in the 'I love a heated debate' sense.

d) Oops, sorry FairNymph, didn't mean to botch your name. I was responding to:

That sort of ticks me off, too...but when I think about it more, and if I'm honest - it's true that I've never had any single, straight male friends who WOULDN'T fuck me. Never. I find it hard to imagine that very ugly girls would have the same experience (that sounds so awful, but I'm just being honest) - but I bet this applies to most women who are at least non-ugly.

Basically saying, I'm non-ugly and have had that experience of a guy who definitely had no sexual interest in me.

Ok, back to (c).

Ah, evolutionary biology/ psychology, another thing that makes me grr. Why? Well, one of the things we evolved were these big squishy frontal lobes - the ones that give us things like higher reasoning and self-control. So, even if I buy into the idea that we look at people based on evolution, and not socialization (which I don't really), we have the ability to control what we do about it. To me evolutionary biopsych always comes across as a big excuse to be stupid and inconsiderate.

And then there's the differences between the sexes part, which I'll try to keep short. Actually, it is short. It comes down to one statement by my Gender Psych prof. Sure there are statistically significant differences between the sexes in bio & psych - but are they meaningful Statistically significant is 5%, and sometimes only 2.5% - which means the differences among women are bigger than the differences between men and women. And really - 5%? Not usually enough to make a meaningful difference.

Marri's picture

Supplicant

My response was written at ~7:30am before going to bed, so I hear ya Biggrin

b) Actually, I got the impression that his website was rather tongue in cheek. That it was designed for something like what KawaiiKune said here:
http://www.meilinmiranda.com/node/1465#comment-26055

Every time he went "And these graphs are NOT made up arbitrary ratios! They're based on MATH" my brain was going "sarcasm bell! sarcasm bell!" but that could just be me. I had the feeling that he thought a lot of his points had basis in fact, in that they're fairly common (I mean, I think even people who hate-hate-hate his theory will admit that girls who accidentally lead on interested male friends happens more than it should?). But I don't think he thinks it's a "this is how the world works OMGALWAYSALLTHETIME."

c) I'm not very good at biology, as a disclaimer. I'm a CS major. Knowing the design of my skeletal structure does not help me program. But still, I didn't mean to say that that's the ONLY ways we evaluate relationships. Just that it probably does factor in. I think people who decide who to marry based on their 100% instinctive "this man is attractive/looks rich/looks confident" first impression are likely just as rare as those who decide to marry based 100% on logical evaluations and said higher reasoning abilities.

And yes, that's a lot of "probablys" and related words, but again, I don't really know enough bio to back this up. I just think that we consider people based on a combination of factors, and that biological imperatives are included in those factors. Not all or even most of the factors necessarily. Just included, in some way.

Soooo repetitive...sorry... I blame the CS. I've been typing the same frickin' snprintf() functions for hoooours.

Wren's picture

Petitioner

is that biology and our evolution effects how we feel, and our feelings affect our actions.
Because we are rational thinking beings, we can choose whether or not to act on our feelings, but our biology is what inspires them in us. Not everyone will feel the same reaction from similar stimulus, because we all have different experiences shaping our lives and have developed different survival skills, which is the basis of evolution (right?).

Attraction is usually more of a feeling than a conscious decision, so factors that make someone attractive because they offer protection (physical, financial...) or increase the 'quality' of our potential spawn (good looks increases likelihood of future generations, diverse genetics make for healthier children...) are probably constantly being evaluated without our realizing and potentially even ranking everyone we meet subconciously.

This feeling of attraction is strong, but being the rational beings we are, we think things through (often) before acting and only consider our gut feelings as an influencing factor, not the whole decision, but definitely a big part.

So we are both creatures of our evolutionary history, as well as independent, logical thinkers who make choices for many reasons outside of attraction.

Really interesting article from a skeptics blog I follow that sorta goes into this a bit. about critical thought and how our personal feelings influence it. http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/560-can-you-apply-too-muc... (sorry for ugly, ungangly, link)

Oddfish's picture

Postulant

Marri pretty much nailed it. There are, after all, "nice guys" and nice guys. The latter are cool, nice people who happen to be dudes. Presumably, this is your husband. The former are guys who form dishonest friendships with women, and try to emotionally manipulate them into relationships or sex. When these women either shut them down or don't notice their attentions, the women are "bitches" who "only date assholes," even though the men in question either were too passive or were in fact lying assholes themselves. When you see "nice guy" in quotation marks like that, we're talking about anything but, because that indicates the kind of guy who thinks booty handouts are the only reason to make nice to a girl.

seia's picture

Devotee

It looks like utter bullshit to me. It claims to be scientific and it's filled with charts, but nowhere can I find any kind of reference or proof of actual data.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Look up the wiki article on it. It was started as satire and has gone on to be debated the same way we're doing right now.

seia's picture

Devotee

Unless you happen to wiki it, that's not too obvious. I should've read the rest of the thread before posting, but there was a bit too much of it Blum 3 .

V's picture

Embodiment

There's a clear lack of references, explanation of the sampling procedure and methodology, and quite a few other red flags that jump out at me above and beyond the writer's vitriolic style. I can understand skimming something and rejecting it before you note how thin it is, but if you read it carefully I would hope that it's painfully apparent that no actual research was done. Otherwise you're at the mercy of anyone with a pie chart...

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

There must be a relevant pie chart joke comic or something to link to here. I'm almost tempted to make a pie chart that's randomly split in half and labeled, "Percentage of this pie chart that is incorrect" or something equally asinine.

The Which's picture
V's picture

Embodiment

I-m so happyBiggrin Of course, if it was MY chart the percentages would be reversed--or more.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

And, I have been craving pie for over a week. I may have to make some crust (will be easier now that I have the right tool for cutting the butter into the flour. I previously used a pair of butter knives to do it) and find something to fill it with. I am dying for some damn pie.

Davik's picture

Embodiment

You know, I'm not sure I've ever made a true pie crust from scratch. What is the tool you're talking about?

Shade's picture

Supplicant

One of these?

http://holybasil.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/pastry-cutter.jpg

Davik, are you sure you haven't? O.o It blows my mind that, as prolific a baker as you are, you haven't made pie crust from scratch. (side question on pie: how the hell do you get a blueberry pie to not be liquid gooshy mess?)

Davik's picture

Embodiment

One of those Blum 3 I don't actually have one, but now that I see the picture it's kind of an "oh duh" moment. That said, while I bake a fair amount I really don't do much in the way of dessert (prefer savory dishes), and most of my desserts are in the flan/creme brulee/cheese cake kind of range. I don't honestly remember the last time I made a pie. I've done some random stuff in the pot pie kind of regime, but not much I would consider as using an actual dessert pie crust. That said I know the basics and science of most desserts (yeah, I watch way too much in the way of cooking shows), so the answer to your question about blueberry pie is: pectin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pectin

Most basic way is to add something with a lot of pectin to the pie filling, but that changes the flavor, so ultimately you should look for packets (I believe that's how it comes) of pectin in the grocery. Without finding some recipes or doing some experimenting I couldn't tell you ratios, and since I have a pretty major "hot damn that's amazing" recipe in the works I doubt I'll be doing much experimenting until I get that one ironed out and written down.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Okay, the lack of pie makes more sense now :P.

Thanks for the advice. I've got some knox gelatin I was thinking of attempting to thicken it with, or maybe corn starch . . . but I'm not really happy about the change in flavor that would cause.

Also . . . hot damn that's amazing? . . . do elaborate.

Davik's picture

Embodiment

I need to do a few trial runs and play with the seasonings, but I'm aiming for JerkWurst. Take pork and add Caribbean jerk seasonings (allspice, chile, nutmeg, etc.) add mango and grind that in to sausage and stuff in casings Blum 3

ETA: I'd really suggest you try to find pectin rather than gelatin or starch, as pectin gives you more the consistency you'd be looking for.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

that's amazing.

Don't suppose you'd be interested in sending some my way? Wink

Davik's picture

Embodiment

Tell you what, when I get a batch I think is good enough I'll post the recipe for everyone Smile Other than that I'm going to guess that sausage wouldn't ship well without a fair amount of expense and a lot of dry ice.

PS: also contemplating playing around with a pineapple sauce instead of ketchup, but have to get the sausage right before I start playing with condiments.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Stupid reality ruining all my fun.

And I'll go on a pectin hunt before resorting to what I've got, for the sake of delicious blueberry pie.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

have been wanting to make meat pies for awhile, but she wants mutton. We need to find some ground mutton. :x

Crust is something I do very well. As much as I hate cooking, I love to bake. It is not uncommon for me to be suffering from insomnia and make a batch of cookies or muffins at 3:30 in the morning. I also make fresh bread a couple times a week, with the help of a bread maker, but that's less because I want it and more for dietary necessity. All things considered, it's one of the positive diet changes I've had to make in the last year and a half.

Davik's picture

Embodiment

How does a bread maker tie in to dietary necessity? I make a fair amount of homemade bread, and while I have no problem letting the mixer do the work combining and some part of the kneeding, I have to get hands on for the last few minutes at least. After that I abandon the machine completely for a hot oven, baking stone, and pan of water.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

The bread does. Blum 3

I can't eat whole grains or commercial white bread. Has to be fresh white bread. Reread the comment with the bread in mind and it'll make more sense.

ETA: Well. I can eat commercial white bread, but for what I need the bread for it's not as efficient as a hearty home-made loaf is. Plus... it's kind of gross.

Davik's picture

Embodiment

Still not sure of the why without going and searching through a backlog of comments to other things that might hold the answer, but hey, whatever works for you. If you post a more definite set of guidelines at some point maybe I'll try to come up with a few suitable recipes to be tried (though I'm not a terribly good baker).

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

I don't tolerate insoluble fiber very well, so I can't eat stuff that has a lot of it. So whole grains are out. As well as every kind of bean, most green leafy vegetables, broccoli, bran, corn...

The bread helps absorb excess stomach acid the same way oatmeal would. I have to be in the mood for oatmeal though, and bread I am fine with eating a lot of.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

I know people who sell meat lambs. I also know of at least one slaughterhouse were you could take the lamb and have them turn it into ground meat and/or whatever cuts you want. You'd probably end up with 20-30lbs of meat.

Just saying.... :whistle:

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Lamb we can find. Mutton is an older sheep. It's the mutton we want, not the lamb Blum 3

If these places also have sheep, that might be an option, but I'm not entirely sure what we'd do with that much meat. It's just the two of us that want it, though I could probably get my aunt to take some, and possibly my mother or one of her friends...

I dunno, the only time we ever end up with a whole animal is when my mother goes in for halves on a cow with a friend or after hunting season when we usually have a couple deer worth of venison. Which does not last until fall.

Then again... I could make plenty of meat pies with that.

Capriox's picture

Embodiment

Oh, you *want* it to be mutton? Yeah, then if you buy a sheep yourselves and get it slaughtered, you'll end up with more like 55-75lbs of meat, which is a lot unless you really really like mutton.

I know there's a meat shop at the Rochester Public Market that sometimes carries lamb. I don't know if they have mutton too or not.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

I will mention it to her. We're going with lamb if we can't find mutton, because she doesn't like pork, and I could not convince her to go with beef. She's obsessed with the mutton. I can't understand it, she's not even Scottish. Her mother's ex-husband was. She is not.

I may make extra crust and make both, because I bet a beef and mushroom marsala pie would be good.

MeiLin's picture

Most High

why can't I come up with a good gluten-free crust!

Davik's picture

Embodiment

You know, if I didn't have so many other things to work on, I might take on the challenge of making a gluten-free crust. Of course certain other readers ( ::cough:: shade ::cough::) might be better suited than I am if you wanted to offer up a few points as reward Smile Hell, I might even throw a few points in myself if someone came up with a viable alternative... I've actually been considering starting a recipe challenge of my own looking for out of the mainstream food, so maybe this could qualify as a warm up for people.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Hmmm, is someone hinting something? *whistles innocently*

I'll give it a go - my mother is celiac too and might have some good suggestions.

As for out of the mainstream - I've got two generations, close to three of recipes from norwegian women :P. Want anything from the frozen north of Europe? Be warned, a lot of it involves cod and lye.

Davik's picture

Embodiment

Yeah, sorry, if I'm going to start that contest I'm looking for something both that I haven't seen before and that is appetizing. Lutefisk sadly fails on both of those Blum 3 But hey, even if MeiLin doesn't do anything formal if you come up with a good alternative for her pie crusts I feel I could spare 10 or 20 points Blum 3

PS: I do some new respect that you know what lutefisk is, even if it is a part of your culture...

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Lutefisk pretty much fails on all counts for everything. *shudder* Christmas tradition with my grandparents, bleargh. Lefse is much more palatable (though I remember having to sing a song at norwegian camp about using it to patch holes in boats . . . )

There's a lot more in my grandmother's cookbook than lutefisk, though :P. To be honest, I was pretty surprised you knew what it was.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

All the traditional food from my people (Italian) is mainstream or food I don't like. Don't know enough about the Anishabe part beyond the stuff you need to have manoomin (a variety of wild rice that grows in the great lakes region) for.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Is manoomin the wild rice that you eat with the little husk thing still attached? My parents are from Minnesota so I've eaten a kind great lakes region wild rice :P. It always makes me choke though. Stupid husk of death.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

You are supposed to remove the husk.

What the Anishabe do before using it in their food is heat it until the husk cracks. After that they step on it, using their feet to stir it and their weight to crack the husks off the rice. Once that's done, they bounce it around in a shallow basket and the wind blows the husks away.

Then it's used for cooking.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

And my parents always told me I was overreacting when I hacked out a lung. Good to know, good to know . . .

Davik's picture

Embodiment

You don't get to be the kind of hardcore cooking geek that I am without knowing a few of the weirder foods out there Blum 3 I'll admit that I've never actually had the chance to try it (and I would, just because I'll try just about anything), but it sounds horrific. But hey, if you have some truly off the wall bizarre yet tasty recipes save them up; I figure I'll end up posting the challenge out of boredom in the next few days. Just keep in mind that no matter how weird it is I've probably either heard of it, eaten it, or made it myself (though I'm still working on getting the heart, liver, and blood of a pig [have some orders in at local butchers] so I can make sorpotel, and I think that sound delicious Blum 3 ).

Shade's picture

Supplicant

It is worth trying, even if it is pretty awful. As kids, my brothers and I got shipped off to Norwegian camp every summer - a week of being surrounded by crusty Norwegian immigrants who taught us Norwegian, how to do the dances, how to cook the food, etc etc etc. Supposedly lutefisk is palatable if you drown it in butter, but I've my doubts :P.

Regardless, I'll poke through the cookbook and see if I can find anything unique for the sake of seeing what's in there.

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

I hate to dissappoint, but both Lutefisk and Lefse are available in the grocery store here...

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Not so much a disappointment :P. Where do you live?
Nothing can make lutefisk more palatable, so store-bought probably doesn't change it too much, but you really ought to find fresh-made lefse if you're going to try it.

NorthwoodsMan's picture

Embodiment

I live in western Wisconsin. There's quite a few Norwigens in the area.

Not that I've tried either.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Yeah, that would do it :P. If you get the urge to try either, look for big parties around May Day and in the middle of winter . . . the Sons of Norway organization in the US usually has its members try to organize big celebrations about twice a year, and that's when all of the old people get together and cook.

V's picture

Embodiment

Ya try any of that tasty surströmming? I think it's more swedish, but it's canned herring with a little extra zip.

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Oh God, herring. My dad eats surströmming, and when he can't find it he eats regular herring. That and sardines. *shudder* It's worst around Christmas when I guess he gets nostalgic for groups of Norwegians or something, because he always buys a ton.

Last Christmas I went to Holland and thought I'd be free of herring. NOT SO. Ze boyfriend's friends kept trying to get me to eat it too.

Marx's picture

Petitioner

I'd probably need more than an hour to read through ALL the comments on this, therefore, I've only read the first 5 ones...

Nice Guy, been there, done that. Not interested anymore. I've got my fantasies about some of 'em, most of 'em purely physical, wouldn't want to deal with their shit and/or baggage if it came down to that, so therefore no hit-ons, not even wanting to be hit on by them except for the small confidence boost it'd mean. Also, no breaking up relationships - I wouldn't want that happening to me (if I had a relationship), so I try my best to not do that to anybody else.

I'm currently hot for a female co-student of mine, anyways. Currently undecided as to what to do, since I see her maybe twice a week (since 1 or 2 months), and I definitely don't wanna scare her away by going all Romeo. But yeah, trying my best to avoid the Nice Guy routine, which would entail not hitting on her at all, instead trying to be her bestest friend ever, and in the end wondering why she chose someone else.

And if all else fails, I've still got my hands. They'll always stay true to me Blum 3Biggrin

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

you develop ALS...

(Was that insensitive?)

Shade's picture

Supplicant

Jest a weee bit.

Wink

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

but if I were sorry, I wouldn't have posted it. I'm too tired to be PC right now anyway. :x

TheBoy's picture

Embodiment

Parkinson's, though...that could go either way.

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

Because I had to read that one twice before I got it. :biglol:

Marx's picture

Petitioner

...Look it up, because I didn't have a clue as to what ALS is. An MND, right? Yay, two terms I learned through one quick look Blum 3

Yeah, ALS could potentially lead to great pain, and a dislike for manual work... now imagine your hand cramping during a masturbation session - or better don't. Wink

Raigne's picture

Embodiment

I was more referring to the eventual loss of control over the limbs.

Add new comment

Get an exclusive free ebook from the world of the Intimate History! Exclusive content, contests, new releases and more.