Why is it, NICE guys are often seen negatively but NICE women are seen as positive?

I posted a reply to this earlier and deleted it - just because.

Above, someone asked how many women participated in a survey that was used as an example for an argument. It made me look at the difference between male and female numbers who participated in this thread. Not surprisingly, most are male.

Also, (sarcastic tone) nice to know that so many of you continue to separate male and female when it comes to sex. Just stop doing that, please. If you are going to refer to a human being as a slut, then do so *without* qualifying the person's sex.

I've noticed that some people who are doing this and similar (it is more than one, and I'm not picking out any certain person) happen to be followers of Abrahamic religions that use the Ten Commandments. Other than telling men not to covet their neighbors' wives, the only other mention of sex is a commandment stating human beings are to not commit adultery. There is no mention of male or female. If God doesn't separate male from female in this manner, then why do some people do this?

It's no one's business who has sex with whom. If anything, it's men who brag about this stuff and not women. Even God pointed out that specifically men shouldn't covet other mens' wives. Just about everything in the Bible about sex is directed toward men, but in society, men degrade women and women only (heterosexually - I'm not touching non-CIS issues). Well, except for at least one guy in this thread, and kudos to you for that. Thank you for being one of the very few who can see reality for what it is.

The OP itself really highlights the victimized nice guy's mind-set (kudos to the person who caught onto this and posted the comic). You assume that a "nice girl" is a really pretty young lady. Typically, really attractive ladies date really attractive men. I'm curious if the term "nice guy" is a euphemism for "homely", and "nice girl" is a euphemism for "girl I'd like to *uck but can't."

Reality is that there are plenty of boys who pretend to be nice and end up doing terrible things to women, which is what my initial post was about. I gave two personal experiences I've had as examples along with experiences that friends of mine have had, such as a man stalking one friend and then breaking into her house. He beat her with a tire iron and repeatedly raped her. She almost died. Another friend had a guy be really nice to her and then bashed her face and head into a windshield when she turned him down for a date. Twice, I've had guys pretend to be gay only to later say that I "turned" them. Don't laugh. It's not funny at all. One guy did this for months, and that kind of stuff really messes with a person's head. It's a terrible thing to do to a person. It just shows the lengths that a person will go to use another human being just to (hopefully) satisfy personal needs. Although it should be a sign of how that guy degraded himself, other guys think it's hilarious and accept it as something that is okay to do to a female, but woe be it for the girl who degrades herself. Let the shaming begin.

It's not that nice guys are seen in a negative light. It's that all guys have that negative potential, and it should not solely be the woman's responsibility to keep this male behavior from happening when in reality, males need to be responsible for their actions. Men need to stop encouraging this stuff and egging each other on in the locker room or school hallways or in the work place, etc. This should not be tolerated anywhere. One way to stop this is to stop the stereotypes and realize that men should take on equal responsibility and be blamed just as much as women. Another way is to stop using gender specific slurs and "slut" shaming for women - this goes for both men and women. Either stop doing those things altogether or do them equally for both sexes.

Oddly, a lot of women do question the motive of a nice guy (many guys) as a means of self defense/ preservation, but in doing so, they are questioned for it - sometimes by the same guys who would blame the women if they were to get raped...

In one of the earlier posts of this thread, someone brought up gold diggers, and I discussed them in my deleted post as well. At least legally, if it can be proven that a person has used/conned/scammed another person out of money, then that person can be sued and/or criminally charged. I have little respect for any human being who is intentional harmful to any other human being, but to see how things are never going to change in regards to sex and stereotypes leaves me feeling like women continue to be property - an asset - something to be used. To me, this thread is only indicative of the reason behind it, and the same goes for some of the comments. I know that rebuttals will fly at me, but I have no intention of debating this. To me, there is nothing to debate. I know that my "feminist", aka speaking out against reality, pov is prime fodder. I shouldn't post it if I'm not going to argue it, but some of these comments are so sexist that I just wanted to add my opinion. Attack it all you wish to, but counters to it mean very little to me. I only expect it, just the same as a lot of women do indeed question the motives of many (not all) nice guys. It's just reality and expected.

Being nice is not a turn off. Being a push over is a turn off, at least for most women. Traditionally, men are supposed to be providers and protectors. You can't be either of those things if you're a pansy. Likewise, if women deviate too much from their traditional gender roles, they tend to look less attractive to most men as well.

Also, the term "nice guy" doesn't really hold a good connotation anymore, so that doesn't help.

“I'm not even really sure if saints exists. I think all human beings have a little darkness within them.”

I’m more pointing out that you seem 100% focused on things being the man’s fault, but don’t consider the woman’s contribution to the issue in question; and that resembles a lot of certain types of men that my experience has shown me, where they’re usually the men considered players and the like, as they attack the men who have a reputation of being nice or good, as in church members; and, as another poster pointed out, charming men perhaps equating to nice men, where I’m talking about good men and those men always carrying the burden of women leaving them out for waiting for the shoe to drop that would exposed them as having faults to judge and become topics of conversations.

“The second one, actually. If a so-called or self-proclaimed nice guy is upset because a woman chooses another man over him (and then perceives him as a asshole or a bad guy or has ill feelings, even though he doesn't really know him), that's an insecurity. Said guy isn't actually nice. A man who is a truly nice or a good guy isn't going to feel a way toward another man because of all of that.”

Yes, as someone helped us out with, a charming guy, in other words. Nice guys or good guys being called nice guys usually carry that reputation about them due to rumors banding about concerning their usual day to day behavior; so, it’s not self proclaimed. And here is an example of your finding only fault in men for an obvious natural human response for someone who had genuine feelings about someone else; it wasn’t fake or a pretense, but real feelings. As the woman said in the video, women have these feelings and reactions too, but women and men may react differently as different genders; the concern should actually be for a man who didn’t act in such a way; that’s where you mostly likely had a charmer or player on your hand who found you (as in her) as not really a big deal or that important to them; if I express feelings, as a genuine good guy, as being concerned with both what I could have done for her and her getting hurt, than, naturally, I’m going to initially respond negatively to her rejection, which is contingent on both her rejection and subsequent response and behavior which would follow; again, it’s the degree of his negative reaction.

And, honestly, why do players always use this word “insecure”? Insure about what? What is insecure supposed to mean? I just notice that it’s used by these charmers and players against good guys who have a natural human response to have their advances being rejected. The guy can most certainly still be a nice guy, he just had a natural human response to being rejected as someone who actually had genuine feelings about someone. A nice or good guy most certainly would be concerned about the person who she rejected him for; likely a charmer or player wouldn’t, as it’s an indication that his feelings for her weren’t nearly as strong as her feelings for him, as he has a bunch of women waiting in line.

“If he knows about him and he is a shitty dude, even still, there shouldn't be any ill feelings toward another man over whom she chooses if he's truly a good guy. If he cares about her, he would respect her choice. At the very least, her taste in men could be questioned. But, that's it. Well, this is where I'm different. I'm honestly not interested in learning about the guys that a woman I may be interested in, is interested in. I couldn't care less, because those dudes don't have anything to do with me.”

I disagree, as this just contradicts a natural human response, along with someone who I can see as being honest with themselves, at least, for us men who aren’t players but just striving to be good guys according to God; initially, in the immediate aftermath, depending on how she treated me, after rejecting me, I would have hostile feelings towards a guy who I know is not a good guy, as I now have some reason to even consider his existence, as the connection is someone who I once cared deeply for; however, in a normal, healthy person, this will gradually and quickly fade, the further time passes by, where she hasn’t treated me differently or even just removed me from any involvement in her life (e.g. and, than, later on, in being honest with myself, this does start to give me pause to wonder, but from more of a third party perspective instead of a participant; I know, because this is actually my life experience involving only about a hand full of women and only involved 2 actual romantic encounters now more than 20 years ago; from this third party perspective, I do consider why she seemed to have a preference for a guy that women usually complain about over me; it’s either all men fit this category or there has to be something out of place with a guy striving to be good, and her requiring the shoe to drop rather it does or not). This can still be true while the woman is entitled to choose a guy who she wants to choose; but, I’m still entitled to judge the situation and her, as it is warranted, given the situation.

“That's a natural response for the simple fact that people think that they are owed something once they show interest in another person. They have expectations. They want something, when they shouldn't want or expect anything from anyone, even if they are attracted to them. If more people approach with this mindset, there wouldn't be any disappointment.”

No, it’s not an either or proposition; sometimes it could overlap with genuine feelings that had developed over time for this person; because no one is perfect and this is that person’s issue of imperfection, a fraction of the cases might view it as their being owed something; but there are a host of other reasons and motives, as well, where one major reason was a genuine feeling of love for this person developing overtime and now being faced with the abrupt prospect of disappointment and that it’s not reciprocated; this is where you can now judge the woman’s character and how she reacts, after rejecting someone; simply because her display gave me a clear indication that she has a very bad character wouldn’t have to make me into the man that you’re presenting as a one size fits all (men). Other people might than understand that I had every right to feel as I did about her, in having seen the situation and than judged her character. The woman could react as indifferent, joking, or surprised; the first two looks like problems while the third might be a 50/50 between a bad character and good character (e.g. although a small prospect, she might both have a good character but also think she’s too good for me; e.g. and see how the Bible handles issues involving Leah and Rachel, even though it’s mostly from Jacob’s take; Rachel was the one who thought that she was too good for him, or, another, closer one David and Michal; or, a slight variation, Sarah and Hagar and notice these women’s ultimate fates; legend has it that Sarah died alone and heartbroken, after laughing at a fellow who was actually God in the image of a person).

“If I tell a woman that I'm attracted to her, it's to let her know. If I'm interested, I'm going to show interest in her. But, at the same time, I'm not expecting too much or making any assumptions about how she feels about me. It isn't until she lets me know that she's interested that I will pursue. If she's not interested, I'm not going to feel a way or get upset.”

Well, it depends, as you could be unfairly comparing apples to oranges; you might be someone who virtually just met this woman while the good guy might have known her for awhile in order to have developed a genuine feeling of love for the woman; sure, now, there’s other cases where it starts with a strong attraction for a very beautiful woman; if you just walk up to this very beautiful woman and get rejected, that’s not a very fair comparison to a good man who developed a feeling of genuine love for a beautiful woman over time; so, if this woman rejects your advances, than, sure, no problem, since you just saw her a few moments ago; but, rejection is a powerful emotion and will sting even if it’s a woman who you just saw a few moments ago; and it matters how she behaves after rejecting you.

“You mean through the text messages she lets me read? The disrespectful things that they say to her because she doesn't want them in those texts? I'm aware of both sides, trust me. There are no skewed images here.

By "dealing," I mean that she was, at one point, interested in these guys, until they flipped the script or showed true colors to her. Her behavior toward these men was consistent, until they flipped on her. So-called "nice guys" that can't handle rejection.”

Again, the more fair issue to look at is in the immediate aftermath and her behavior; at the stage you’re showing, we still need to know her contribution; how did she respond to the text messages and why is she feeling comfortable sharing them with you, for a guy she supposedly once considered her (best) friend? We still need to know her character traits, as well; it can’t just be a lens 100% focused on this nice guy, or, was he just a charmer? In other words, at this stage, it's just become a tit or tat thing, where we're only getting one side of it.