@polishknight

@Durek_The_Bald called nice guys “dangerous” but the alternative is for such men to tolerate abuse for life without any mechanism to escape it

I said "at times". By that I mean, unassertiveness (typical of the "nice guy") is a recipe for quiet, seething resentment building up over time, and then finally exploding into something really bad (family annihilation etc.). Point is, there are evolutionary reasons why women find the Nice Guy persona icky - some of which have to do with personal safety.

The alternative to tolerating abuse isn't being a NiceGuy. It is to be assertive, to have boundaries and communicate them clearly, and to walk away when said boundaries are repeatedly violated. You don't get that by being "nice" though.

the Reddit page "Nice guys" making fun of "nice guys"

One can, of course, choose to take offense at the existence of such spaces. But that's operating from the point of view of how things ought to be. Women ought to not get creeped out at guys being "nice". And we all ought to understand that the NiceGuy is a product of stuff out of his control; what he's been taught etc.

Nothing wrong with "ought to" on a philosophical, ethical level. But on a practical, praxeological level, "ought to" is a terrible way to go about life. Because it blocks a guy from looking at something like r/niceguys , and actually learn something useful from it - something he can take to heart, implement, and get better results from.

Now, I understand that the purpose of WAATGM is to show how women operate, and as such isn't the place for the sort of "radical self-accountability" associated with TRP elsewhere. It's a bit of fun, and it's useful to a certain extent. But also, on some level, it's kinda the opposite of a red pill mindset. So we probably should've had the exchange we had (which I appreciated btw) elsewhere.

But for what it's worth, I always default to "what is" rather than "what ought to be" when it comes to this space (the manosphere). And I put the onus of "dealing with it" on men. Not because that's philosophically sound, but because that's what practically works for men.

It's like with fat chicks online: They might say we "ought to" not be so repulsed at obesity. And sure, there's even a philosophical argument in favor of that. But we are human beings, and that's how we operate - like it or not. So she can either go the route of trying to convince the whole world to go against our nature, or she can suck it up, accept reality, and go see the inside of a gym. Which approach do you think is more likely to give her a positive outcome?