Skip to main content

A Facebook debate regarding the "nice guy"

So, I saw a Facebook post today which aired a video clip of a guy reading a poem he had written about always being cast as the "nice guy" or in the "friend-zone" among the women he had been interested in either romantically or sexually. The guy said that if a man (a "nice guy" apparently) purchased a woman a gift in hopes that she would sleep with him in return, she didn't owe him anything. While I agree a woman never owes a guy sex, this video sparked a more elaborate debate on the whole "nice guy" concept and who exactly would be at fault if such a guy gets taken advantage of in any way. Here's what I had to say on the matter:

"The only thing women owe 'nice guys' is honesty. If he shows romantic interest in her or perhaps buys her something to indicate this, it's on her to be upfront with him and say, 'This was really sweet, but just so you know, I only see you as a friend.' 

If she says this and he continues to do such things, it's all on him when he gets turned down and hurt. However, if she isn't upfront and honest with him about matters, perhaps flirts with the guy and insinuates the romantic interest may be mutual, then in the end, she'll be giving the appearance that she's taking advantage of him on multiple fronts and when he finally confronts her on matters and asks how she feels about him, it likely won't end in a pretty manner.

When it comes to a 'nice guy' providing a woman with gifts in exchange for sex, a woman never owes a guy this, and I wouldn't refer to the before-mentioned guy as a 'nice guy,' considering the main objective of said gift was to get laid. I'd probably refer to him as a pseudo nice guy or something of the like. For a genuine nice guy, seeing the woman's joy and smile would be reward enough."
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more