Daveysil15 wrote: » And you know what all women are thinking do you?
audi12 wrote: » I was wondering how long it would take for a comment like that to arrive on the scene ..some or a lot of women i should say
Daveysil15 wrote: » So you can speak for some or a lot of women?
audi12 wrote: » I speak to a lot of women and men who know a lot of women so yes i can
audi12 wrote: » Maybe they are but i have my own past experiences with women to back up my claims also
Daveysil15 wrote: » Ahh so you've anecdotal evidence. Case closed so.
I am not sure how much more evidence you need
I know a lot of women are full of crap when they talk about wanting a nice guy common knowledge not as if it is some big secret
Daveysil15 wrote: » I think I've enough. I mean its your own personal experience so it can't exactly be considered fact. That would really depend on your definition of a nice guy though. There's a big difference between nice guy and dormat/whinger.
Karsini wrote: » The thing is, stuff like this seems to fuel the "women love bastards" or "treat them mean, keep them keen" generalisation. I just can't treat someone that way, it makes me feel horrible. I'm more outgoing than I used to be but still feel rather dull and boring at times; it's like I never found myself and still live by what others tell me to do, to the point that I find it really hard to make decisions on my own. My fear is that it could be something like Aspergers or AvPD which might make it impossible for me to change things. I've suspected the former for a long time. I recently turned 30 and unfortunately feel like I've been left on the shelf and may remain that way. However I'm starting an 8 week CBT course on Wednesday and I'm really hoping this might do something for me.
audi12 wrote: » why dont you tell me what you think for a change you seem to disagree with me
Piliger wrote: » Nice guys get the vast majority of the best women. That is the simple truth of it. The guys who lose out are the ones that buy into this losers interpretation of their own personal failures.
LiveIsLife wrote: » You're confusing nice guys with guys who are doormats and don't have the confidence to go after what they want
Roquentin wrote: » i really think it is pathetic that posters are debating the personality of men who "get women." Surely there is more to life than this pseudo popularity contest
Roquentin wrote: » or schizotypal or borderline maybe. You can only be who you are and you cant be what you are not
Daveysil15 wrote: » ^^^^They love been chatted up by guys that look like Mr Hemsworth lol.
paddy1990 wrote: » It doesn't matter if you look like Hemsworth or the elephant man. Women like guys chatting them up and you'll never know unless you try. There are no "leagues". Looks don't matter. I know a guy who looks like the elephant man and gets more women than anyone else I know. It's all about personality and confidence. I know loads of girls who don't even think Hemsworth is attractive.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » What happened to your Looks, Money & Status philosophy?
audi12 wrote: » Women like guys that are ugly and not fit because they can control them it was proven in studies done
macplato wrote: » And who are the women you are referring to? All of them, yeah?
audi12 wrote: » As you know i was not referring to every single woman in the planet so i really do not see the need for you to ask a question when you already know the answer
macplato wrote: » Well, you said "women" - that suggests that you are thinking "all women". Otherwise you'd specify, and said "women, who...", or you'd say "according to studies, such and such percentage of women...". You know, so people can actually engage in a sensical conversation with you, because by the way you are phrasing your thoughts, it seems that you're just trying to provoke a reaction, which you will later aggressively dismiss.
audi12 wrote: » Point taken i am not trying to provoke a reaction just giving a view
macplato wrote: » It's absolutely true - some women choose men who they consider somewhat beneath them, so they can effectively control them (and of course men do that as well). More often than not, this doesn't happen consciously - it's an entirely instinctive strategy designed to protect the person's insecure self. We all have and use those unconscious strategies, both men and women - the more positive experiences a person has had in life, the healthier, more functional strategy they tend to develop. Many men (and women of course), who have problems with intimacy, adopt an inner strategy that makes it impossible for them to make a meaningful connection with a person of the opposite sex. Psychologically, it's just more bearable to not have an opportunity to be intimate with someone, than to be in an intimate situation and feel this excruciating emotional pain of being touched by another human being - of being open, exposed and vulnerable. Some people can't cope with that, and so they avoid facing their own 'issues' by blaming the 'evil, controlling bitches' or 'selfish, self-centered male chauvinistic pigs' for the lack of intimacy in their lives. The truth is, if someone is consistently unable to make a meaningful connection with people of the opposite sex - the problem lies somewhere inside of that person, and so does the solution. This world is full of healthy, lovely men and women, but the only way to have those people in our lives, to even notice their existence, is to become healthy and lovely ourselves. There is no other way, because we gravitate towards each other at our common level of emotional damage. Messed up people attract messed up people. Healthy people attract healthy people. It's really that simple.
Roquentin wrote: » the only way to have a friend is to be one---ralph waldo emerson
audi12 wrote: » what is that supposed to mean
