To all nice guys: are you too nice?

[Sparkly Eyes]

Being wealthy gives you a huge advantage. It's nothing to do with being a golddigger, women want security, and they get that with a wealthy man.

 

lol, I don't care about that huge advantage if I'm not turned on enough by him. I can make my own money, I'd rather have an attractive guy I can't wait to go home to than some guy who I want to do nothing with other than using his money.

 

Hate to say it, but only insecure and incapable women or greedy golddiggers would want a very wealthy guy no matter how he looks or what his personality is.

[oldenoughtoknow]

A guy that's "too nice," is a doormat. No one wants to be with someone like that. They're needy and clingy. They do too much. They never lead. They never have an opinion. They think they're being compliant, supportive and unobtrusive, but on the receiving end, it comes accross as boring, wimpy and tiring.

[tiredofvampires]

The term "nice guy" is so completely the wrong word for men's behaviour in almost all cases it's used - it should really be "doormat" or "supplicant" depending on the stage of a relationship.

 

A guy that's "too nice," is a doormat.

 

Yeah, I wish we could just scrap the language. I know it's a semantic thing, but -- how come we never talk about a "nice girl" or a "nice lady" as being a bad thing? No one ever says, "So-and-so's a nice person" and read negative things into it. I think it's interesting (and perhaps indicative of something) that it always gets tacked onto guys. The behavior that's being criticized here is not really an issue of being very nice -- it's an issue of being insecure and passive. I love nice people. I love nice guys. I'm not into "doormats", or "yes-men". I like the word "supplicant", ha, good one. I like a guy who naturally wants to help out in any way he can, who's giving and generous, who is good-natured at heart, who gives the benefit of the doubt. I'd call that NICE. If he can't differentiate between someone taking advantage of him and someone who isn't, if he can't stop letting himself be taken advantage of when it's happening, if he cowers instead of asserting himself, if he defers to everyone just to be liked -- then that goes beyond nice.

 

Why can't we just say, "Guys who are insecure people-pleasers" instead? Or "doormats", for short?

 

I also don't know why there is so much more stigma about a male "doormat" than a female one. Think about it. It's true. That's why no one BRANDS a "nice girl" per se. Disturbing. On so many levels.

[frree]

lol, I don't care about that huge advantage if I'm not turned on enough by him. I can make my own money, I'd rather have an attractive guy I can't wait to go home to than some guy who I want to do nothing with other than using his money.

 

Hate to say it, but only insecure and incapable women or greedy golddiggers would want a very wealthy guy no matter how he looks or what his personality is.

 

You miss the point. Being wealthy opens a man up to more opportunities. For instance, you can afford to smarten yourself up. and even an ugly, out of shape man can look decent with a makeover. It also gives you naturally more confidence for dating. If you're wealthy, if you mess up with someone you know there's a good chance of finding someone else.

 

You say you wouldn't date a wealthy guy, there's many women who would.

 

Is the "nice guy syndrome" more of an American thing? I don't know anyone personally in the UK who fits the nice guy persona. Also someone can be anxious and nervous around girls but not necessarily a nice person or a doormat. I can be quite anxious around people and particularly women, but I wouldn't fit the nice guy model. I'm not a bad evil person either, but I've broken the law a few times. I'd never be a doormat for anybody, though my way of dealing with it is no contact with that person. So if a woman was taking advantage of me, rather then accept it or confront her, I'd probably not bother seeing her again and remove her number because I can't be bothered with the drama.

[Sparkly Eyes]

I'm not saying I wouldn't date a wealthy guy, I'm saying I wouldn't date a wealthy guy only because he is wealthy. I have to be physically and mentally attracted to him. And I think women who would date a wealthy guy only because he is wealthy are gold diggers or weak/incapable.

[TakingtheBlame]

I'm a little baffled at all the talk on "nice guys" myself, and I'm American. I feel like the whole "nice guys" vs. "bad boys" mentality is more of a high school thing...I don't feel compelled to label the men I meet and date that way; it doesn't even enter my mind at 30. I'm either attracted to a guy or I'm not these days...if I meet a guy who's socially awkward and carrying himself in a way that isn't attractive to me, I chalk it up to incompatibility and move on. I'm a pretty outspoken, motivated, social individual and I just wouldn't click with someone who wasn't. But I always assume guys like that would be great for someone else! I never think, ohhhh he's too nice, who would want him? Just sayin, I don't know where this while nice guy analysis came from!

 

As for the whole wealthy argument, I remember when I was accepted to a reputable college and one of my high school colleagues exclaimed "You must be loaded to go there!" I was quite offended and informed him that I had worked my arse off in high school to win scholarships, and I would pay for the rest in loans. My family was not wealthy by any means. And so there are ways to smarten up even if one isn't wealthy. There are also ways to achieve the other things you mention without being wealthy. Either way, why would anyone be impressed by some guy who can afford to get a makeover every weekend just because he's rich, when there are people starving in our own country? Money can indeed buy many things but there are character flaws that can come along with wealth as well, like arrogance, a sense of entitlement, etc. There are exceptions to this rule of course but being rich is not a guarantee that a man can attract and/or keep a woman of quality (or a woman of lesser quality...even Hugh Hefner just got left at the alter by his latest bimbo.) There are many women who might be attracted to wealth...but, as with most other traits, there are many women who would not be. I don't consider wealth more of an attractive factor than, say, looks, education, or personality.

[Stay_home]

On the first couple of dates I think the guy and girl should pay their own way into the theatre and drive themselves as well. Maybe then when you get to know each other you can pay the other portion. But deciding on money so early in the game and who pays for what just confuses things.

[Yaz]

I'm from Australia.

 

I think TOV is right about some things. Yeah, I've been exposed to sexist jerks a lot. But it's bipolar. Either go out with someone who cries because I didn't hold his hand in public, or go out with someone who treats me like a tramp.

 

What I want is a gentle strength - that doesn't mean being arrogant, not crying, punching on at bars etc. etc. I don't know... I just can't seem to strike the man with the right balance of manliness and sensitivity. I want a gentleman. Given a choice, I'd rather be with a jerky butt-hole who can protect me, than an insipid whimpering puppy-dog who I have to protect?

 

I don't know if it makes sense, maybe it's a personal preference...? Just wondering if there is a point at which men become too feminine, or take on too much of this 'feminine role', which prevents them garnering and maintaining a successful relationship? I think yes, but that's my opinion.

[Batya33]

I don't find people who are insipid, whimpering, or constantly seeking approval "nice" in the least. Nice isn't a feminine quality -it's a quality reflected by kindness, consideration and thoughtfulness of others where the person behaving that way is doing so out of a genuine desire to be kind, considerate and thoughtful - not solely out of a desire to please others or to get positive attention from others.

[Yaz]

I don't find people who are insipid, whimpering, or constantly seeking approval "nice" in the least. Nice isn't a feminine quality -it's a quality reflected by kindness, consideration and thoughtfulness of others where the person behaving that way is doing so out of a genuine desire to be kind, considerate and thoughtful - not solely out of a desire to please others or to get positive attention from others.

 

^^ This. But it's not neediness or clinginess. Those are different beasts entirely. I don't know. Language is such a poor tool for expression!

[greywolf]

I don't know if it makes sense, maybe it's a personal preference...? Just wondering if there is a point at which men become too feminine, or take on too much of this 'feminine role', which prevents them garnering and maintaining a successful relationship? I think yes, but that's my opinion.

 

I know this is a little off-topic, but have you noticed that you associate all these negative traits with femininity? Since when is being feminine a negative thing?

[Yaz]

I know this is a little off-topic, but have you noticed that you associate all these negative traits with femininity? Since when is being feminine a negative thing?

 

That's actually a very good point. Thank you - I didn't even realise! That's something I'll have to think about... wow.

[Alezia]

Probably because men get teased and made fun for having these traits more than woman. Strong women and their male friends don't tell to support these traits, so men are called up on the bad behaviour.

 

Somehow most guys I know endure their clingy women, which they then mock, but that's another story. It almost becomes acceptable or 'cute'. In that sense, I could see why you refer to them as feminine traits, even though in reality, they are not.

[Yaz]

Probably because men get teased and made fun for having these traits more than woman. Strong women and their male friends don't tell to support these traits, so men are called up on the bad behaviour.

 

Somehow most guys I know endure their clingy women, which they then mock, but that's another story. It almost becomes acceptable or 'cute'. In that sense, I could see why you refer to them as feminine traits, even though in reality, they are not.

 

According to the dictionary, you are correct:

effeminate |ɪˈfɛmɪnət|

adjective

(of a man) having or showing characteristics regarded as typical of a woman; unmanly.

[FathomFear]

Honestly, this really just stems from homophobia/misogyny. It's so ingrained in our culture that even some unfortunate women buy into it.

 

I'm not sure why you say that you'd prefer to be with an "butt-hole who could protect you". What exactly do you need protection from in this day and age? We left the caves thousands of years ago.

 

In any case, patriarchal societies tend to have an undercurrent of woman-hating and misogyny. "Feminine" traits are associated with weakness or inferiority. For example, have you ever wondered why "Don't be such a girl!" is used an insult amongst young boys but you rarely if ever hear "Don't be such a boy!" as an insult? Even words which are taken to mean female genetalia are also used to mean "weak". eg, "Don't be such a * * * * * " = "Don't be a wimp". This is not a conincidence.

 

A good friend of mine just started his second year in the military. He tells me that the most common disparaging remark aimed at men to demean them is to refer to them as well. "Come on girls, run faster!" Etc.

[ProtestTheHero]

I think men and women just assume the wrong things 99% of the time. I know a lot of "manly" dudes. I lean more that way as well. They're quick to protect their own ego, but I've yet to meet a "manly" dude that seriously considered protecting his gf as part of the role. They see their women as things they have to appease so that they get to enjoy what they want to experience (sex, validation, whatever). These are the dudes that could be verbally ripping on the girls they're dating in front of me and end a phone call from them with "see you later, babe" seconds after.

 

I'm a pretty strong willed person, but I'm not invested enough in any given situation to protect a woman -- not because I can't, but because I don't care to. There are definitely guys out there that can balance both, but you will not find the perfect balance. You'll have to find someone that's close enough to what you can handle and accept the imperfections. The difference is jerks send you to forums like these to recover while overly nice guys are just an annoying first date. Pretty easy to get over.

[tiredofvampires]

Given the choice between those two, I'd choose "C": Neither. And I mean -- neither, under any circumstances.

 

How can a jerky butt-hole protect me? All he can do is hurt me while confusing me with the mixed message that he cares about me when really, he's just flexing his jerky muscles.

 

I do believe that you should protect the people you care about and love. But that's not a masculine job, specifically.

 

I'm talking about standing by someone in support when they need it, and that's something jerks aren't really capable of doing in any sort of meaningful way.

 

With my partners, I've alternated this role, and I consider myself pretty feminine. Or, I have a strong feminine side and I feel this to be part and parcel of it.

 

I have to agree with others that your definitions of femininity are pretty disempowering and unattractive. If I saw femininity through your lenses, I'd disrespect me, too.

[frree]

That's because feminine traits are a weakness in men. Men who are very feminine will more then likely have lower testosterone, and the more testosterone you have the less you cry. That's been proven in scientific studies. It doesn't matter we're no longer in the caveman days, our genetic make up still doesn't change in what we find attractive. For instance, in face studies it's be shown that men with high testosterone prefer women with very feminine faces.

 

Also, it goes both ways. I'm pretty sure if you told most females "they walk like a man" or "you've got a jaw like a man" they'd be upset. Would you date a woman that's got bigger biceps then yourself? I sure as hell wouldn't. And I wouldn't associate myself with a bossy woman either. You 're stuck in middle ground with those type of women. On the one hand they drive you nuts, but you can't do anything about it. You can't hit them because they're still a woman. At least if a man's pissing you off you whack him one, and if you come on the wrong side of it so be it.

[LP90]

This is a very interesting topic. I just went through a terrible breakup where i was strung along for months, lied to and cheated on after 2 years of what seemed to be going great. Im 3 weeks into the breakup, full NC and moving on. Point is, only now i see just how much me acting feminine negatively affected her deciscion to remain with me. I cried, begged, forgave her for her BS mistakes and excuses, was a pushover, etc. I probably came off as just another girl friend than a man who could control myself and my emotions and take care of her. I always thought that while i was with her i should be more feminine and share all my feelings, emotions, etc. Treated her "too nice" no doubt about it. A lot of the time, or rather most of the time, I thought i was doing the right thing by always taking her to dinners, trips, doing whatever SHE wanted. Now i can see that was the mistake all along. I shouldve been the proactive one and stand up for what i believed. Without a doubt, there is a thing as too nice. A guy has to be able to stand up for himself and do what he feels, not just because he wants to come off as nice and make a woman happy. Its very important to be nonchalent and avoid being a people pleaser.

 

My question is though, at what point is it ok to be feminine or show femininty? What i mean by that is, are guys supposed to act "manly" from the very beginning and never open up or is it ok to show some feelings and emotions when you are in a deep relationship, because at that point your GF knows who you are anyway. Just how much feelings and emotions is it ok to show while still remaining manly?

[FathomFear]

That's because feminine traits are a weakness in men.

 

My point is that is how they are viewed. I'd disagree that such a view is truthful though. There's nothing weak or inferior with classicly "feminine" traits.

 

Men who are very feminine will more then likely have lower testosterone, and the more testosterone you have the less you cry. That's been proven in scientific studies. It doesn't matter we're no longer in the caveman days, our genetic make up still doesn't change in what we find attractive. For instance, in face studies it's be shown that men with high testosterone prefer women with very feminine faces.

 

Also, it goes both ways. I'm pretty sure if you told most females "they walk like a man" or "you've got a jaw like a man" they'd be upset.

 

You're mixing physical and mental characteristics though. I have no doubt that a male who looks like a stereotypical woman or a female who looks like a stereotypical male will be deemed unattractive to most people. The issue is the viewing of the characteristics as weak/inferior. Guys, for example, are made to feel shame if they have "feelings", if they're caring, etc. This is "weakness". But if a woman is decisive/confident this is not seen as "weakness". The problem is that qualities classically associated with women are viewed as inherently weak/inferior.

 

Would you date a woman that's got bigger biceps then yourself? I sure as hell wouldn't. And I wouldn't associate myself with a bossy woman either. You 're stuck in middle ground with those type of women. On the one hand they drive you nuts, but you can't do anything about it. You can't hit them because they're still a woman. At least if a man's pissing you off you whack him one, and if you come on the wrong side of it so be it.

 

I'm not exactly sure where you live or what culture you're from, but I regard aggressive/bossy behavior the same regardless of the gender of the person it comes from. Additionally, I don't resort to violence either. If some guy sucker punched me because he didn't like something I said, he's going to get a visit from the police. Such behavior is simply immature and not something that's acceptable in this day and age.

[Batya33]

I find it weak when a person reacts to being angry by resorting to physical violence.

[frree]

My point is that is how they are viewed. I'd disagree that such a view is truthful though. There's nothing weak or inferior with classicly "feminine" traits.

In a man, being very feminine is weak because you're likely to be stepped on by other men. You won't be able to stand up to other men if you're acting like a wimp, and won't be able to support a family properly either.

 

 

 

You're mixing physical and mental characteristics though. I have no doubt that a male who looks like a stereotypical woman or a female who looks like a stereotypical male will be deemed unattractive to most people. The issue is the viewing of the characteristics as weak/inferior. Guys, for example, are made to feel shame if they have "feelings", if they're caring, etc. This is "weakness". But if a woman is decisive/confident this is not seen as "weakness". The problem is that qualities classically associated with women are viewed as inherently weak/inferior.

 

I don't just mean physical characteristics though. He can look like Andre the Giant, but if he acts like girl that will be seen as unattractive. Same goes with feminine looking women who act too manly. Also, it's not true that guys are made to feel shame for having feelings. Most women want a guy who can be a little sensitive. But they want a man who look after them and step up. Somebody who acts like a whiny emo crying every 5 minutes isn't going to be able to cut it.

[frree]

I find it weak when a person reacts to being angry by resorting to physical violence.

 

That depends on the circumstances. If somebody had their kids get hurt by someone, I can understand there being retaliation.

[timlondon]

That depends on the circumstances. If somebody had their kids get hurt by someone, I can understand there being retaliation.

 

Nope, if you react to anger like that you've lost control, and that ain't cool. Likewise if you lose your temper in an argument and start shouting - loss of control, and lost argument as far as I'm concerned.

 

Not that physical violence isn't the right thing to do sometimes - i.e. for defending yourself - but as a response to anger it's weak.

[frree]

double post