100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Importance | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Nice guys finish last!
Who thinks this is true? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice guys finish last! Who thinks this is true? It is very true. But i can't say why and keep it in the pg rateing. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that most women are attracted to looks followed by a bunch of good lies. Those men who are honest about themselves and have average looks do not have much success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Toodygirl5
on
Tue 03/27/18 08:21 PM
|
|
Nice guys finish last! Who thinks this is true? It is very true. But i can't say why and keep it in the pg rateing. Let upgrade to X rated.  try to explain!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that most women are attracted to looks followed by a bunch of good lies. Those men who are honest about themselves and have average looks do not have much success. Well, some women don't go on looks and arrogance! I have dated. Average looking men. However, they were Romantic and knew how to take a lady out to nice places! I think many women would like that. And pleasant conversation alone with that too! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romance is not a thing of the past and Chivalry is not dead people!! Your thoughts? I think for the most part universal definitions and identifiers that everyone could/will agree to and be able to spot, in regards to chivalry and romance, are "dead," in general, as indicators of romance and chivalry. Or I don't believe people respond to the same universal signals/rituals as they did when they had historic context contributing to meaning and value. I think current rituals/signals of romance/chivalry are more individually defined and are more subjective to the individual relationship. IOW far more reliant on learning to communicate and establish relationship culture rather than being able to rely on socially defined universal standards imposed by community standards. Just different times and different standards regarding things. Like flowers. They're sweet and nice. Or maybe you see them as helping to subsidize Colombia. Or horrible environmentally or socially irresponsible taking up farmland. If someone brings them to you on a first date do you think "wow! He must have a lot of disposable income! Plus he bought red ones, they were arranged a certain way, and a certain number! Now I know his intentions! And he had to go out of his way to find someone that cultivates this plant since most people don't as it's a luxury and hard to find!" Or compare it to the birth of children. Do you think parents look at their little kids the same today as "back then" when on average the last five babies in the community were stillborn, possibly killed the mother, there were no cures for what we see as common maladies, and there may be no doctor or hospital either in existence or for thousands of miles? That stress and fear of knowing how dangerous childbirth was in general? Do you really think you could see your kid the same way? What about "back then" the difference in value between a male and female child? Traditionally understood/perceived/valued "romance" and "chivalry" are dead. There are new brands. Understanding the new brands requires effort and they don't come in easy to communicate universal rituals. Like "opening the door for a lady." If you want romance, you must date a romantic. Personally, I would disagree. IMO if you want romance you have to learn to communicate. That includes paying attention and thinking. People communicate their emotions and feelings. The onus is on you to figure out how they're doing it. Most people focus on trying to make it easy for the other to understand, falling back on what they believe are universal methods of communication. e.g. flowers, poetry, presents, affirmations, tender intimacy like holding hands, kissing, or whatever. But IMO most of that is usually as a response. IMO/IME most of that is BS. There's a kernel of emotional truth wrapped up in a boxing glove of "romance" to make sure the other person gets a message. Exacerbation, hyperbole. The "romance" is figuring out why they feel that way, what triggered them feeling that way, and what triggers their response, leading to their "romantic" gesture/communication. Everyone is romantic in their own way IMO. That's what comes from the push for diversity, multiculturalism, and individualism. Can't rely on universal gestures. You have to look deeper. The universal gestures are just the crutch they're using possibly because you aren't looking deeper. If you want romance, learn to pay attention, not just look for them to fulfill what you think you understand "romance" to be. If all you look for are traditional gestures, that have surface meaning, but have lost the traditional cultural relevance and context, IOW shallow, then ultimately that's the type of relationship and "romance" you will receive. People do what works. If that's what you're responding to, that's what you'll be offered, only without the kernel of emotional truth it's wrapped in, it will simply become a gesture to push a response button. Nice guys finish last! Who thinks this is true? I kinda do. But to me it's kinda like saying "those who open the door for others go through last." It doesn't mean much, especially since it's not a race and really there are plenty of women. Billions of them. All over the place. In my head I think of a formula 1 race in Italy. The nice guy obeys the speed limit, lets all the other cars pass, and takes in the sights on a Sunday drive. Maybe stops for gelato. I'd rather hear his stories about what he saw and did than the guy going 200 mph to hurry up to the finish line and get the trophy. That's just me. But I'm kinda slow. Let upgrade to X rated. try to explain! To the nice guy, the lady comes first? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sort of agree with above....it's just that the bar has been trounced so low that "manners" are mistaken for true chivalry, at least in the Olde World sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that most women are attracted to looks followed by a bunch of good lies. Those men who are honest about themselves and have average looks do not have much success. A statement more often made, always by men who are disillusioned because they themselves haven't got what it takes to get good dates and attract quality women. They don't take responsibility for their own 'failings' then blame it on women. You cannot expect women to be attracted to you when you simply aren't attractive. And I am not talking about looks. Maybe look around when you're out and about, there's plenty of average looking men with a good looking, attractive woman by their side. And to be honest, most people are average looking, and yet they do find partners & relationships. It's only a mere handful of mankind that can be considered 'good-looking'. Funny enough I've noticed more than once that on average there's more good-looking women than men. And not talking about make-up, just their features. I have no idea why that is. But in any case, don't project your own bitterness at not being able to be attractive onto women. Do the work, take responsibility, develop love of self and self-esteem. Then you are attractive. It's like everyone says: it's about how someone carries themselves more than looks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
SparklingCrystal 💖💎
on
Wed 03/28/18 04:06 AM
|
|
sort of agree with above....it's just that the bar has been trounced so low that "manners" are mistaken for true chivalry, at least in the Olde World sense. "True chivalry" comes from knights. It's the knight code. You didn't have knights in the US so in that sense one could argue you never had true chivalry in the USA to begin with, haha. But anywho... I was reading a bit about chivalry, interesting subject, and I don't believe it is dead at all. According to an article, this is what chivalry is about: So what is chivalry today? It’s really nothing but a way to show your lady in little ways that you respect her and love her. Knowing what chivalry is isn’t just about opening doors and pulling back seats only though. Really now, if you’re out on a date by a lonely beach or at a park, you obviously can’t pull back imaginary chairs or open doors out of thin air. But you can still do other things that show you care. And that’s what chivalry is all about. NOw this same dude had another article on his experiencing when being chivalrous, ranting that it was so difficult. Some women like it, others are too effing feminist to want it, and he seemed PO and confused about what to do and how to know what to do. That made me think. I don't understand why it is so difficult and confusing. Doesn't it all start with knowing who YOU are as a man? If it's in your own nature to be chivalrous, hold a door open for a woman on dates, then do that! Be yourself. And she gets all irate because she assumes you just want to look at her ***, then maybe she's not the right woman for you to date. If you're not all that thoughtful when it comes to little things that show you care and the woman you're seeing gets upset about that, then she isn't the right one for you. Quite easy? It's can be a great and easy gauge to see if you're a match. Be yourself, and sure you do your best to make a good impression, we all do, women alike, but then still do it in a way that is 'you'. Isn't that the beaut of this era, that you now have the option and freedom to choose if you're going to be chivalrous and decide how you can be that? Sure it can be nice and easy to have a set system that dictated what roses meant, and a ring, and a kiss, and XYZ. But isn't it far nicer to have the freedom to fill in how you want it and how you want to express yourself? It's freedom, people. And yes, that is hard for most to handle, lol, as we haven't had that freedom for centuries on end. But truly it's liberation, not a bar that's trounced very low, and it can be liberating. And in that sense, who cares about labeling things 'chivalrous'? Just be you. Be warm, loving and caring, both to yourself and to the one you date. And if you cannot muster that, you have some work cut out for you... As for 'old' dynamics: (Almost every) woman still wants to feel like a woman when around a man, and loves a man to be a man. And when with an empowered woman, she will show her gratitude and appreciation for you being that empowered man. . . . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romance is not a thing of the past and Chivalry is not dead people!! Your thoughts? Especially if you agree.  Not dead or a thing from the past. Just answering the question. Not writing a book. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Beachfarmer
on
Wed 03/28/18 05:39 AM
|
|
sort of agree with above....it's just that the bar has been trounced so low that "manners" are mistaken for true chivalry, at least in the Olde World sense. "True chivalry" comes from knights. It's the knight code. You didn't have knights in the US so in that sense one could argue you never had true chivalry in the USA to begin with, haha. Haha, Crystal. (By that rationale) Manned flight came from Kitty Hawk, NC USA. So in that sense one could argue you never had airplanes in Europe to begin with. Not many wear capes anymore (to place over a puddle) like Sir Walter Raleigh, but Chivalry at least used to be a well traveled concept. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that most women are attracted to looks followed by a bunch of good lies. Those men who are honest about themselves and have average looks do not have much success. A statement more often made, always by men who are disillusioned because they themselves haven't got what it takes to get good dates and attract quality women. They don't take responsibility for their own 'failings' then blame it on women. You cannot expect women to be attracted to you when you simply aren't attractive. And I am not talking about looks. Maybe look around when you're out and about, there's plenty of average looking men with a good looking, attractive woman by their side. And to be honest, most people are average looking, and yet they do find partners & relationships. It's only a mere handful of mankind that can be considered 'good-looking'. Funny enough I've noticed more than once that on average there's more good-looking women than men. And not talking about make-up, just their features. I have no idea why that is. But in any case, don't project your own bitterness at not being able to be attractive onto women. Do the work, take responsibility, develop love of self and self-esteem. Then you are attractive. It's like everyone says: it's about how someone carries themselves more than looks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If this was the case, then please explain why men significantly outnumber women on dating sites and at public social outings? Are there that many men you consider incompetent in the dating world?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sort of agree with above....it's just that the bar has been trounced so low that "manners" are mistaken for true chivalry, at least in the Olde World sense. "True chivalry" comes from knights. It's the knight code. You didn't have knights in the US so in that sense one could argue you never had true chivalry in the USA to begin with, haha. Haha, Crystal. (By that rationale) Manned flight came from Kitty Hawk, NC USA. So in that sense one could argue you never had airplanes in Europe to begin with. Not many wear capes anymore (to place over a puddle) like Sir Walter Raleigh, but Chivalry at least used to be a well traveled concept. Oowww... that is by far the weakest argument you've ever come up with, Beach, haha. I mean, Knight never actually were to be seen and found in the USA, airplanes are over here. You could of course argue that your chivalry stems from good ole English roots, but then you do have to admit that you have European/English roots, which often tends to be a bit of a sore spot for Americans, lol. Not you, I know. I also know you do your best to uphold the Knight Code and chivalry, roaming the beaches wearing your cape and speedos and cowboy boots, looking all sexy and adorable  Kudos for that! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that most women are attracted to looks followed by a bunch of good lies. Those men who are honest about themselves and have average looks do not have much success. Where’s my violin. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sort of agree with above....it's just that the bar has been trounced so low that "manners" are mistaken for true chivalry, at least in the Olde World sense. Yes, I’d go with your bar comment. I’ve always believed I’m a good communicator but my ex had a strange way of striking up a conversation. She always used to begin with ‘are you actually listening to me’ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romance is not a thing of the past and Chivalry is not dead people!! Your thoughts? I think for the most part universal definitions and identifiers that everyone could/will agree to and be able to spot, in regards to chivalry and romance, are "dead," in general, as indicators of romance and chivalry. Or I don't believe people respond to the same universal signals/rituals as they did when they had historic context contributing to meaning and value. I think current rituals/signals of romance/chivalry are more individually defined and are more subjective to the individual relationship. IOW far more reliant on learning to communicate and establish relationship culture rather than being able to rely on socially defined universal standards imposed by community standards. Just different times and different standards regarding things. Like flowers. They're sweet and nice. Or maybe you see them as helping to subsidize Colombia. Or horrible environmentally or socially irresponsible taking up farmland. If someone brings them to you on a first date do you think "wow! He must have a lot of disposable income! Plus he bought red ones, they were arranged a certain way, and a certain number! Now I know his intentions! And he had to go out of his way to find someone that cultivates this plant since most people don't as it's a luxury and hard to find!" Or compare it to the birth of children. Do you think parents look at their little kids the same today as "back then" when on average the last five babies in the community were stillborn, possibly killed the mother, there were no cures for what we see as common maladies, and there may be no doctor or hospital either in existence or for thousands of miles? That stress and fear of knowing how dangerous childbirth was in general? Do you really think you could see your kid the same way? What about "back then" the difference in value between a male and female child? Traditionally understood/perceived/valued "romance" and "chivalry" are dead. There are new brands. Understanding the new brands requires effort and they don't come in easy to communicate universal rituals. Like "opening the door for a lady." If you want romance, you must date a romantic. Personally, I would disagree. IMO if you want romance you have to learn to communicate. That includes paying attention and thinking. People communicate their emotions and feelings. The onus is on you to figure out how they're doing it. Most people focus on trying to make it easy for the other to understand, falling back on what they believe are universal methods of communication. e.g. flowers, poetry, presents, affirmations, tender intimacy like holding hands, kissing, or whatever. But IMO most of that is usually as a response. IMO/IME most of that is BS. There's a kernel of emotional truth wrapped up in a boxing glove of "romance" to make sure the other person gets a message. Exacerbation, hyperbole. The "romance" is figuring out why they feel that way, what triggered them feeling that way, and what triggers their response, leading to their "romantic" gesture/communication. Everyone is romantic in their own way IMO. That's what comes from the push for diversity, multiculturalism, and individualism. Can't rely on universal gestures. You have to look deeper. The universal gestures are just the crutch they're using possibly because you aren't looking deeper. If you want romance, learn to pay attention, not just look for them to fulfill what you think you understand "romance" to be. If all you look for are traditional gestures, that have surface meaning, but have lost the traditional cultural relevance and context, IOW shallow, then ultimately that's the type of relationship and "romance" you will receive. People do what works. If that's what you're responding to, that's what you'll be offered, only without the kernel of emotional truth it's wrapped in, it will simply become a gesture to push a response button. Nice guys finish last! Who thinks this is true? I kinda do. But to me it's kinda like saying "those who open the door for others go through last." It doesn't mean much, especially since it's not a race and really there are plenty of women. Billions of them. All over the place. In my head I think of a formula 1 race in Italy. The nice guy obeys the speed limit, lets all the other cars pass, and takes in the sights on a Sunday drive. Maybe stops for gelato. I'd rather hear his stories about what he saw and did than the guy going 200 mph to hurry up to the finish line and get the trophy. That's just me. But I'm kinda slow. Let upgrade to X rated. try to explain! To the nice guy, the lady comes first? Hello Ciretom!  I also think romance is varied to each individual and couple. In my experience, romance is a growing and changing energy unique to each couple. It’s something created together more than by rote gestures. As for red roses, they are most fragrant and beautiful to receive, no doubt. IMO, the spontaneity of a daisy plucked from the yard trumps a phone call to a florist any day. To your take on dating a romantic if you like romance, I agree that communication is a large factor. Even with great communication, there are some people who simply don’t care for the fluff of the romantic. If romance is something you enjoy greatly, but your partner views as stuff and nonsense, I would suggest your personalities may not be best suited. Not to say a whimsical person matched with a no-nonsense type can’t make a go of it. Though I don’t believe it usually works that well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Beachfarmer
on
Wed 03/28/18 09:17 AM
|
|
sort of agree with above....it's just that the bar has been trounced so low that "manners" are mistaken for true chivalry, at least in the Olde World sense. "True chivalry" comes from knights. It's the knight code. You didn't have knights in the US so in that sense one could argue you never had true chivalry in the USA to begin with, haha. Haha, Crystal. (By that rationale) Manned flight came from Kitty Hawk, NC USA. So in that sense one could argue you never had airplanes in Europe to begin with. Not many wear capes anymore (to place over a puddle) like Sir Walter Raleigh, but Chivalry at least used to be a well traveled concept. Oowww... that is by far the weakest argument you've ever come up with, Beach, haha. I mean, Knight never actually were to be seen and found in the USA, airplanes are over here. You could of course argue that your chivalry stems from good ole English roots, but then you do have to admit that you have European/English roots, which often tends to be a bit of a sore spot for Americans, lol. Not you, I know. I also know you do your best to uphold the Knight Code and chivalry, roaming the beaches wearing your cape and speedos and cowboy boots, looking all sexy and adorable Kudos for that!   Well "Touche'" (as they say). I guess it was the Vikings that first in their true form touched The Americas. So we have the raping and pileaging down. I was just commenting on the line of logic that ideas die at the point of origin. Somehow Chivalry ended after the Medieval Knightly system with it's religious, moral and social code. Do knights, nobleman, and horseman (of European decent whom I admire,honor, and am proud to be descended from) collectively corner the market on chivalry? When armour changed from steal to kevlar did it die? Am I not (though stripped down to my speedo, cape, and boots) "Chivalrous" if I display courage, honor, courtesy, and readiness to help the weak? To be "absolutely" honest, I'm not feeling so knightly. This speedo is COMPLETELY inadequate for sheathing my sword.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sort of agree with above....it's just that the bar has been trounced so low that "manners" are mistaken for true chivalry, at least in the Olde World sense. "True chivalry" comes from knights. It's the knight code. You didn't have knights in the US so in that sense one could argue you never had true chivalry in the USA to begin with, haha. Haha, Crystal. (By that rationale) Manned flight came from Kitty Hawk, NC USA. So in that sense one could argue you never had airplanes in Europe to begin with. Not many wear capes anymore (to place over a puddle) like Sir Walter Raleigh, but Chivalry at least used to be a well traveled concept. Oowww... that is by far the weakest argument you've ever come up with, Beach, haha. I mean, Knight never actually were to be seen and found in the USA, airplanes are over here. You could of course argue that your chivalry stems from good ole English roots, but then you do have to admit that you have European/English roots, which often tends to be a bit of a sore spot for Americans, lol. Not you, I know. I also know you do your best to uphold the Knight Code and chivalry, roaming the beaches wearing your cape and speedos and cowboy boots, looking all sexy and adorable Kudos for that! Well "Touche'" (as they say). I guess it was the Vikings that first in their true form touched The Americas. So we have the raping and pileaging down. I was just commenting on the line of logic that ideas die at the point of origin. Somehow Chivalry ended after the Medieval Knightly system with it's religious, moral and social code. Do knights, nobleman, and horseman (of European decent whom I admire,honor, and am proud to be descended from) collectively corner the market on chivalry? When armour changed from steal to kevlar did it die? Am I not (though stripped down to my speedo, cape, and boots) "Chivalrous" if I display courage, honor, courtesy, and readiness to help the weak? To be "absolutely" honest, I'm not feeling so knightly. This speedo is COMPLETELY inadequate for sheathing my sword. Hahaha, I am almost falling out of my chair with laughter, haha. I don't think chivalry died at all, but maybe I'm just too romantic and dreamy? I remember that as a very young girl I was totally smitten with Ivanhoe Vikings... they stir up completely different feelings and I should be ashamed of that as it must have been hell when they landed on your shores, especially if you were a woman... What can I say? Sexual surrender is also part of the Fight or Flight thing, although most people don't know that. Which leaves us with the speedo and your sword... Would you say you are more of a Knight or Viking? I'm okay with either, just need to know whether to put on my Southern Belle outfit or the pagan shift that tears so easily. PS GREAT comeback! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well how do you think Sir Lancelot got his name?
Not all knightly intentions are "completely" honorable. I'd say the easy tear garment will do. 
|
|
|
|
|
