Nice guys v Jerks

Any book on dating would be incomplete without addressing the perennial nice guys versus jerks debate that rages on and on, and seemingly without end. The myth goes that nice guys finish last, and women always go for the jerks. yet this is a myth that largely goes unexamined. Elaborate and probably inaccurate ideas about why this would be true are often put forth, and frequently dressed up in the guise of being scientific, and still no one really examines this premise, and it's very real lack of agreement with reality.

It is important to realise that in our experience it is frequently the nice guy that finishes first. However it is also important to realise that just because someone is 'nice' in no way guarantees their success, since being nice is not the major criterion which is used to judge someone's suitability for dating--not that alone. Many times it is the more aggressive suitors that win out whether they are nice or not, because they get there first. However it is suspicious on the part of a woman who claims there are no nice guys, or wonders how to meet a nice guy, since they are in reality in abundance. Many men who claim to be nice guys however are not in fact nice guys at all, and the real reason they are not winning at the dating game has little to do with whether they act nice, since many have behaviours that drive women away, and many also have a bad attitude towards women to begin with. A common statement of so called nice guys is something like:

"How come all the really hot chicks always go for the jerks?"

This characterises many women as being unattractive, because they don't look like they came off the cover of Vogue, and is not an attitude held by men who like women. So it also means that they actively overlook women who would be perfectly happy to date them. Part of this results from wanting social validation, and treats a woman's appearance as an accessory. Not a nice guy really. Some people come up with the explanation that women only care about looks, money or fame, and if you haven't got that--then you're out of luck. For some women maybe that is all they care about, but they are probably in the minority. Hopefully you will discover not every woman is going to like every man, no matter what. What we hope you will discover is the single most important thing is how you make a woman feel. Blaming an unfair world on a lack of money, looks or prestige and sulking does not make someone a nice guy.

Some even claim the size of a man's appendage is foremost in a woman's mind, despite the fact no research has ever supported that idea. The point is many of these nice guys blame their luck on some outside agency or being born under a cursed star, and would rather cling to an unhelpful bad self-image, than actually change their attitude to something that would be more likely to attract women. These are not nice guys. Some of these same men often refer to women as bimbos, sluts and bitches. Maybe these guys on top of not really being very nice characterise women in a way that makes it obvious they do not really like women, and their attitude of resentment and needyness is repellent.

Many books and web sites have advanced the theory that women go for jerks because they are 'alpha males' or exhibit signs of dominance. This is drawn from the studies done on primates, however thses ideas tend to ignore the idea that humans have a considerably more elaborate social behaviour than our primate cousins. The claim is made that women are genetically programmed to be attracted to certain traits to have the best chances of passing on her genes. But some caution should be exercised in making such statements. As pointed out earlier, human social behaviour, (something which could just as easily be genetically hard wired to some extent), differs considerably from other primates. To say that people have a sexual drive simply because they must procreate is like saying we go to an italian restaurant driven by our biological need to eat--when in fact sharing mealtime with friends has far greater social significance than the mere biological facts.

By analogy then, attraction may have more subtle and complicated dynamics than passing along genes. The alpha male concept in primates also assumes sexual partners are a limited resource, when in fact the same is not true of humans. We think in fact part of the problem with the 'nice guy' is imagining women are a limited commodity that they must compete for. So if the alpha male concept has been hyped up, then there really is no advantage or disadvantage to being a jerk. Meanwhile the nice guy continues to assign his lack of luck to some exterior agency, and remains passive. In reality he is not getting shot down all the time, but only imagines he will, generalising a few occasions to all occasions, often harbouring hostility towards attractive women asking questions like "why do women dress so seductively if they don't want to meet me?" This will be answered later. This again cannot be described as nice.

Some women need drama, some crave excitement. Whether a man treats her well or not is not the point. They will hang around as long as they can, if these things are sprinkled into a relationship--if they fear not being in a relationship. But suppose it really is true. Maybe a particular woman really does only hook up with the wrong type of person. Perhaps she does overlook many much better prospects. What's the prescription here? This usually falls into one of four categories:

1) The woman is a jerk herself.
This is the most common. People tend to be attracted to people they have something in common with. It is impossible to know the exact nature of a relationship unless you are there. After all, why is she complaining about a relationship to a third person sometimes in intimate terms. Why would a woman put up with foul behaviour unless she dishes it out herself? It cannot be true that a woman that says all men are jerks, cheaters or dogs actually likes men--and is likely to attract men who do not really like women, basing their relationship on mutual ignorance. Women with low regard for men who make statements like "men are a different species" are undatable.

2) The helper.
These are women who over look anti-social traits with the belief they can improve or change these traits at a different time. they also want to mother and "take care" of frequently dysfunctional men, who for the most part have unmanagable lives. This is their full time job, and will often become angry or insecure unless a man becomes highly dependent.

3) Low self-esteem.
The woman takes whatever relationship she can get and holds onto it regardless of how she is treated fearful if she lets this relationship go, she will not find any other. This is a condition she brings on herself, and will often become bored with relationships that do not contain a sufficient amount of gut wrenching drama. These are game players, and often liars. They actually seek out men who treat them badly, because they believe it is their role in a relationship to be treated that way.

4) Hopelessly superficial.
These are the women who really only care about looks, money or status, and end up with what they asked for, and nothing else. To them it doesn't matter whether a man is a jerk or not. They want one superficial trait, and ignore any other quality of a man, their real goal being to impress their peer group with what a good catch they can snag. To them their relationships are replacable, and think no more deeply about who their mate is then on finding a tennis partner, so they often end up in abusive relationships simply because they never consider that as important until after they have formed a relationship.

In the cases of both men and women, the "nice guy" who finishes last is not really a nice guy and has real reasons why he does not succeed. In the case of women who somehow seem to "always end up with jerks", she is far from innocent in her role in that drama, and is not the "nice" girl that just can't find the right guy. Both are expressions of the same flawed characteristics of fixing permanent labels to mutable qualities, and both are passive aggressive, blaming their bad luck on fate and not taking responsibility for their own lives.

I hope that puts a new light on this cultural myth, and puts it to rest.