• Ilya B Shambat
    110
    When I was on an internet group called alt.romance, there were young men there who called themselves “nice guys.” These people would befriend and counsel young ladies, only to watch them pass over them in relationships and go with men whom they saw as being “jerks.” I watched these young men become more and more aggressively misogynistic as they went from “women only go with jerks” to “women make irresponsible choices in relationships” to “women are stupid and evil” to “women should be played, controlled and abused.”

    Now leaving the issue of whether or not they were actually nice – their behavior obviously shows to the contrary – there is something here with much greater implications. While being a player can work in getting casual sex, in long-term relationships it is a complete disaster.

    The relationship starts with a lie. What can a lie not handle? Either truth or any other competing fallacy. The process of defending a relationship that starts with a lie involves weaving an ever-more-elaborate, an ever-more-oppressive, and an ever-more-transparently-ridiculous web of deceit. This creates a hell for everyone involved, including the man who does this. Either the woman or the children – or both – eventually learn to see through the deception; and one winds up either with a hateful wife or with rebellious kids.

    At this point the man responsible for the con job starts using moral or religious arguments. He has the right to neither; he is a con man. He had no ethical considerations in going for the woman; he went for her because she was hot. He deceived her and built a relationship based on deception. Neither of these are the actions of an ethical man.

    So when we see young men being encouraged to play women, what we are seeing is encouragement of a highly unethical behavior – behavior that ends up being totally self-defeating. The man does not love the woman; he has played the woman. And that is a completely rotten foundation for a relationship and an even worse foundation for family life.

    Now there have been any number of women in feminist movement who have taken the experience of their parents and used it to claim that love is a patriarchial racket. Love is not a patriarchial racket; playing is. Love – even love at first sight – worked for many women in the World War II generation; and their daughters who likewise believed in love did not believe anything irrational or unrealistic. Their problem has been that they kept mistaking false fronts of salesmen for goodness of character. They were being played, and women who have been played wind up in a marital hell – for the reasons stated above.

    Playing and misogyny therefore work very well together. The player uses misogynistic attitudes to justify himself in playing women; and when the woman starts hating him or tries to leave him he uses that conduct to claim that women are bad. I have seen this done extensively in player cultures; and I seek to correct this state of affairs.

    Particularly, I want to see women who are vulnerable to this behavior to see through it.
    I was not born yesterday, and I know that women are just as capable as men of dishonest and malicious behavior. I seek to empower both the men and the women who are vulnerable to such behavior, whether it be done by women or by men. Neither men nor women are either evil or good; both are capable of both. That is because people have the capacity of choice. And anything that has the capacity of choice regardless of gender is capable of both right choices and wrong choices.

    Love is not the same thing as playing, and it is wrong that women's experience of falling for fronts of players be used to impugn love. Similarly it is wrong that the behavior of women fleeing such things be used to foster misogyny. If you have pulled a con job, be ready that the next person see through the con job; and there is nothing in this that justifies slanders against women as such.

    So that while playing can work for a one-night stand, it is a completely inadequate basis for a long-term relationship. That especially is the case if there are children involved. They will see you and they will judge you even if your wife does not.

    What is a valid basis for a relationship? There are any number of them. Even if you have no use for romantic love, you can still found viable situations based on such things as similarities of values and interests. Even such relationships can turn sour; but they are less likely to explode in hatred and violence. Go for a woman whom you actually value and create something better than an inevitable player hell.
  • Hanover
    4.5k
    I'm in favor of deceit in all its multitude of forms, whether it be to obtain undeserved money, a better job, or the fleeting pleasure of a woman.

    I'm being sarcastic, which is only to say I don't see where you've advocated a position that is reasonably disputed. Whoever might say they openly lie to women in order to have sex with them can no more justify their position than any liar can.
  • Not Steve
    18
    The fundamental problem is that our culture teaches us to pursue ephemeral pleasure and avoid commitment whenever possible. Of course a healthy, intimate relationship is more fulfilling than a constant stream of one night stands, but people have been conditioned to give up on the former and glorify the latter. This lack of delayed gratification is a problem in all areas, not just relationships, although relationships are one area where it becomes painfully clear.
  • boethius
    109
    I'm in favor of deceit in all its multitude of forms, whether it be to obtain undeserved money, a better job, or the fleeting pleasure of a woman.Hanover

    How are you sure others haven't deceived you into having such a belief (i.e. that the philosophy "deception in all it's forms is good" is unfounded, but deception was used to lead you to believe it true), and, if so, would you view such deception as bad if it was?
  • I like sushi
    617
    This is telling enough

    When I was on an internet group — Shambat

    If people are going online to seek help and advice from a bunch of random strangers it tells ou something about their approach. No doubt they may also be reasonable people simply using what they believe to be a useful source to understand a man’s perspective ... yet they find the kind of guys pretending to be nice in order to fool themselves into thinking they’re nice by claiming to be nice and then finding justification to be not nice at all because “the world is against them” or some such drivel.

    People are stupid. We’re all people. Some people fixate on one stupidity rather than exploring the full extent of their stupidity; those fixated people no doubt end up full of resentment :)
  • Possibility
    115
    What is ‘nice’? It’s such a non-word, really. A ‘nice’ guy is a guy who doesn’t behave disrespectfully towards you, who appears to take an interest in who you are as a person. The problem is that this describes behaviour, not intent.

    I’m going to put forward my point of view as clearly as I can here.

    Back when I was single, I encountered quite a few ‘nice’ guys who turned out to be real jerks, as well as ‘players’ who turned out to be kind and genuinely considerate. The behaviour of ‘nice’ guys in the dating game is always suspect, so I think there is a tendency for women to adopt a ‘wait and see’ approach when faced with someone who acts like your ‘friend’. As for ‘jerks’, we’re at least aware of their intentions going in (for the most part, they’re not fooling us), so there’s no nasty surprise.

    It’s the ‘nice’ ones you’ve gotta watch, because their intentions are unclear. Are they being nice because they want to be ‘rewarded’ for it, or are they genuinely kind, gentle and generous? Do their actions match their words and their words match their thinking? This is difficult to work out, and takes time, because experience tells us that boys have a tendency to do or say anything and even employ elaborate, long term strategies and lies to get what they want. Many of these ‘nice’ guys have been acting nice so long, they’ve started to actually believe that this pretence is who they really are.

    These guys may genuinely want a long term relationship, but if they’re going to readily employ dishonesty or underhanded tactics to get it, then they can’t be trusted in a relationship. A jerk who is not afraid to be honest up front can be refreshing for a woman who is continually tricked by monsters under the mask of ‘nice’.

    My tip for guys chasing a relationship: be honest, be genuine, even if they don’t like what you have to say initially. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Women might chase the illusion, but just as men are happy to enjoy meaningless casual sex until they find the right girl, I think women are happy to enjoy being treated like a princess until they find a ‘real’ man - and they don’t mean macho, they’re actually looking for integrity.

    Of course, I’m stereotyping here, and going on my own experiences. Men also tend to reject women on the first impression of her being a ‘bitch’, which is often just her being honest and not trying to be ‘nice’ so you’ll like her more. Men like to chase the illusion, too - probably more so than women, if you ask me.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.