Is this what dating has come down to?

[PoetPhilosopher]

I suppose "good man" might be a phrase similar to that of "good citizen." I think the whole "nice guy"/"good man" trope came about due to society in general focusing a great deal on all the faults of men, as well as a good deal of attention on all of the horrible men out there. When I was a kid, being a male chauvinist was considered a bad thing, so boys were encouraged to be just the opposite.

I've also heard plenty of horror stories about bad men who are violent, abusive, cheating, gaslighting, oppressive, sexual predators/harassers - and it makes me think that there's a whole class of men out there that I know nothing of.

When women talk about men, it's often in monolithic terms, as if they think all men are alike. So, my impression is that when men say they're "nice guys," they're doing so in the context of a constant barrage of stories about all these other men who are simply horrible and despicable. I don't agree with the above meme that says they're just "wolves in sheep's clothing," as that's an oversimplification at best.

Yeah, I should probably explain what I meant. That post you quoted which I posted, may have misunderstood something being said by @Epic Beard Man - but I still find it useful, and here is why...

There are a lot of 'bad boy' men that are sweet. And if they're cute and sweet on the inside, a woman may be prone to feel she has a chance of taming him.

However, a lot of people I've met who refer to themselves as 'nice men', are kind of putting a chip on their shoulder and asking a woman to knock it off. They consider themselves dominant men who are entitled to a woman, and there may be an increased likelihood they'll be extremely rough and mean to their partner.

There are men who are truly nice. But the truly nice ones us women like, are the ones who let the women define whether they are a nice guy.

 

[Revoltingest]

I've heard before that some judges will get a little irritated if you sue for petty amounts over petty things - like you are wasting their valuable time and experience just for a few bucks. But I haven't looked up cases on the matter.

It depends upon the judge. I've known some who are offended
by frivolous suits, & disobeying court orders. I've also seen
them tolerate & even encourage such waste.
Judges are all individuals, & there is diversity of motive & thought.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

It depends upon the judge. I've known some who are offended
by frivolous suits, & disobeying court orders. I've also seen
them tolerate & even encourage such waste.
Judges are all individuals, & there is diversity of motive & thought.

True. Though if it's under $50-$100, I think I'll let the offense slide rather than a 50 percent or so chance of being lectured by a judge. But that's just me.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Also, suing women for small amounts may seem like a big justice for the man, but it can go wrong too. Sue the wrong woman, she'll get a good lawyer to advise her the steps to take, she'll sue for frivolous lawsuit, and if the judge isn't the type to believe that a woman should be responsible for every action she makes, and he has sympathy on her... could owe a few thousand dollars even if you drop the case against her. I think.

 

[idea]

Actually, single moms are winning. The reason? The high possibility of sex, the desperation of men seeking sex, and a plethora of men who only want sex. Some men think "single mom? No baby daddy in the picture? Free sex. Some women are unfortunately lonely. Thus repeating the cycle of no good men because we know the outcome when some men have ulterior motives.

In my opinion everyone needs to learn how to master*ate so they can choose a partner with a clear mind.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

In my opinion everyone needs to learn how to master*ate so they can choose a partner with a clear mind.

Except that you usually don't want a partner after you're done doing that. Lol.

 

[idea]

Except that you usually don't want a partner after you're done doing that. Lol.

We are social creatures, we all seek company. The greatest form of love is not lust. I really do think it would be good to get rid of any stigmas surrounding master*ation. It would decrease rape / child molestation / unhealthy relationships, it would help so much if everyone just took care of their own needs and had a clear mind.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

So, am I wrong?

On so many levels

 

[Shakeel]

Then you tell me how it is. Note that this relates to a certain question that came up earlier.

 

[Stevicus]

Yeah, I should probably explain what I meant. That post you quoted which I posted, may have misunderstood something being said by @Epic Beard Man - but I still find it useful, and here is why...

There are a lot of 'bad boy' men that are sweet. And if they're cute and sweet on the inside, a woman may be prone to feel she has a chance of taming him.

However, a lot of people I've met who refer to themselves as 'nice men', are kind of putting a chip on their shoulder and asking a woman to knock it off. They consider themselves dominant men who are entitled to a woman, and there may be an increased likelihood they'll be extremely rough and mean to their partner.

There are men who are truly nice. But the truly nice ones us women like, are the ones who let the women define whether they are a nice guy.

Well, I guess there are different degrees of "bad boy." Some might be a bit roguish or playfully mischievous, but not necessarily hardened criminals. I guess the classic trope might be the standard "jock vs. nerd" dichotomy, where the jocks get all the girls, while the hapless nerds are left out in the cold. I've also heard of serial killers getting marriage proposals from women. That's pretty strange, I think.

I don't think the opposite of the "bad boy" is the "nice guy." The "nice guy," at least as I understand it when it's used in this context, really means a "bad boy" who is pretending to be nice - and oftentimes doing a transparently rotten job of it.

On the other hand, the true opposite, the "good boy," is the one who is an upstanding citizen, a Dudley Do-Right type who pays his taxes, obeys the law, likes animals, is polite to neighbors and store clerks, and does the Sunday crossword puzzle in pen. Of course, they're going to be "nice" by default. Quite friendly and affable, but many women might find such men to be too boring or stodgy.

 

[oldbadger]

I'll admit he was stupid. For one he made the stupid suggestion of watching Guardians of the Galaxy which is a 3-hour movie. Second, he decided to go to a small claims court for $17.31 cents. I don't blame him for getting upset after she ghosted him, but it is kind of petty to do the most for $17.31 and even counted it out in front of her.

Yep........ He'll be single for a while.... like decades.
I'll bet that he didn't ask her if she would like to see that film... just went ahead and purchased those tickets.
It was all about him, the 'centre of the universe'.

 

[oldbadger]

I agree he was a jerk, although in fairness, she was also bloody rude for texting with her friend and walking out on a date.

Did he tell her to leave the cinema to finish that text?
Yes.......... that deserves a walkout.

Of course, the guy was over the top for trying to sue her in court. I'm sure Judge Wapner would have thrown it out.

I don't know how US small claims courts work, but if they are expenses free then she should have defended the case and told the judge that Brandon expected slave-like devotion to feed his self-complexes ..... for $17. !!

Imagine that........ My name is oldbadger a gorgeous but slightly older and more mature date. If you should be so lucky as to gain my interest I will buy you a drink and a show but for that I would require your undivided attention for the entire evening. You would be required to turn any mobiles off for the entire duration of the boredom which I intend to flood down upon you. Now queue up you plebian retail girls!

 

[Stevicus]

Did he tell her to leave the cinema to finish that text?
Yes.......... that deserves a walkout.

I'm just saying that she was rude first. At least based on the narrative as it was presented, it appeared she obviously wasn't interested in the guy at all, but rather than be honest and upfront about it, she chose to do some passive-aggressive texting just to get his goat. He understandably got perturbed by it and asked her to step out for a few moments while she was texting.

I don't know how US small claims courts work, but if they are expenses free then she should have defended the case and told the judge that Brandon expected slave-like devotion to feed his self-complexes ..... for $17. !!

It's possible that this may not have even happened. What are the chances that these two cooked this whole thing up to get on TV?

Imagine that........ My name is oldbadger a gorgeous but slightly older and more mature date. If you should be so lucky as to gain my interest I will buy you a drink and a show but for that I would require your undivided attention for the entire evening. You would be required to turn any mobiles off for the entire duration of the boredom which I intend to flood down upon you. Now queue up you plebian retail girls!

My view is that no woman is required to go out with any guy, and vice versa. It's all optional. Some couples hit it off right away, they eventually get married, have babies, and live happily ever after. I've known quite a few who fall into that category. Then there are others, where you hear about stories like this.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I don't know how US small claims courts work, but if they are expenses free then she should have defended the case and told the judge that Brandon expected slave-like devotion to feed his self-complexes ..... for $17. !!

Don't take this as the gospel, but I'm under the impression small claims would cost him a couple hundred or so, but that he could sue for the court costs on top.

However, thinking it over, since she didn't hand him court costs.... maybe this thing is made up or something? I just don't know.