I had a thought. Haven't thought it through completely but this seemed like a good place to hear some thoughts.
The term "nice guy" I just realized may inadvertently have a subtext (overt or latent) of entitlement.
In short, [I'm Nice] so [I Deserve] [A Particular Outcome].
The somewhat flippant reply might be, "There are lots of decent people who don't get treated as they deserve." But I don't know, maybe there's a legitimate "nice guy" argument to be made?
I had a thought. Haven't thought it through completely but this seemed like a good place to hear some thoughts.
The term "nice guy" I just realized may inadvertently have a subtext (overt or latent) of entitlement.
In short, [I'm Nice] so [I Deserve] [A Particular Outcome].
The somewhat flippant reply might be, "There are lots of decent people who don't get treated as they deserve." But I don't know, maybe there's a legitimate "nice guy" argument to be made?
I think that this could be argued, but looking at the motives could shine a more noble light on it. It starts, in my opinion, within a few moments of realizing that the relationship is long term, and will need work to maintain. The guy wants her to be happy, so it seems obvious that the way to accomplish this is by doing things to make her life easier. Cooking, washing the dishes,etc. He's picturing a life of harmony, and may even resent it if she doesn't simply swoon.
The problem comes from ignoring the laws of attraction. The woman wants to feel like she has to put some work in it, but in the sense that her sexual attractiveness sways an otherwise disinterested man. And to some, it helps if others see this dynamic in play and think that she is the lucky one.
Notice the bolded "I" and the "X" can be anything, eg. substitute with "special", "rich", "handsome", etc. etc.
Entitlement seems to go a bit hand in hand with people who are narcisstic - which revolves around the all-encompassing me, myself, and I.
I actually thought that "nice guy" was a bit of a misnomer, as I see it more as a "wimpy" guy - meaning someone who is "weak and ineffectual".
Usually, weak/ineffectual people don't necessarily see themselves as being 'entitled' (someone feeling higher than others with a right to demand something from them), but they feel they are not allowed to ask for what they want (someone feeling lower than others with no right to demand something from them). That is the opposite of entitled.
I actually thought that "nice guy" was a bit of a misnomer, as I see it more as a "wimpy" guy - meaning someone who is "weak and ineffectual".
Usually, weak/ineffectual people don't necessarily see themselves as being 'entitled' (someone feeling higher than others with a right to demand something from them), but they feel they are not allowed to ask for what they want (someone feeling lower than others with no right to demand something from them). That is the opposite of entitled.
Don't know - maybe it's all just semantics.
I think a Nice guy might be weak, but largely in the Machiavellian sense. Weak as in that he doesn't see that his wife will lose respect for him if he doesn't take a deliberate approach to keeping the passion in the marriage.
I had a close friend who was normally very tough, but thought that keeping his wife happy involved being pleasant, and treating her like a Queen by doing everything for her. He thought that these acts of service would be directly proportional to her desire for him. Once married, he no longer pursued her, but instead considered it an expectation that she would desire him. She lost respect and they ultimately divorced. Through the course of it, he just couldn't understand when his friends tried to tell him that he needs to make her feel lucky to have him, and the acts of service should only be a matter of his inner character.
"Nice guy" - defers or suppresses his own desires in favor of someone elses. Martyr.
"Nice guy" - puts responsibility and control of his own happiness and fulfillment in the hands of another. A child.
"Nice guy" - believes, and takes at face value the negative chastisments he is bombarded with that his basic and elemental expressions of masculinity are outdated, unwarranted, destructive, comical, and something to be ashamed of.
But what is instead truth?
Any engagement between two or more forces will be a contest of elemental power and control. Whether in war, sports, basic physics, or sexual relationships.
When one is at a disadvantage in power and control, what is left but cunning and diversion and deception?
So we see, if a man is taught or shamed to believe his masculine talents and tendancies are "off the table", then what is left for him to work with?
We then have the "Nice guy" archetype, attempting to use roundabout and backhanded tactics to achieve what he desires in a sexual relatoinship.
Appeasement (whatever makes you happy dear), bribery (housework for sex), trickery (I'm not a pig like those other men), deception (I never masturbate no not me), dishonesty (no honey I never look at other women never even notice them).
So it is, women collectively may say they want this nice guy with their words, but the woman individually, her behaviors show she is as much attracted sexually to strength, honesty, power, dominance, as women were thousands and thousands of years ago.
So the good man has a choice, believe political correct words that he hears and reads in media, to become a "nice guy", and exchange his power and strength and honesty (and control), for deferment and appeasement, and most likely end up mired in resentment when this "deal" doesn't work out.
Or he can choose to trust what he experiences in actions and behaviors, that his masculinity was never outdated in the past, that his masculinity is very much in demand today, and his masculinity very much in need to build a bright future tomorrow!
And no matter how effective this attitude is in his career and social situations, no more is this true than in sexual relationships especially.
I still think many women would want a guy to be "nice", but not be a "nice" guy (someone who is weak, doesn't stand up for himself), if that makes sense.
In otherwords, I think most women (likely both sexes) would find someone who is generally pleasant, good-natured, and kind (the definition of 'nice') to be appealing as long as that someone is also rounded out with other qualities of character, especially in a long-term relationship like a marriage. The sexual tug and pull between a husband and wife should be there, but you also have to be able to get along on a day-to-day basis outside of that.
The word "dominating" is used a lot. But many people may find that word unappealing. It could be semantics again - dominating can mean to have great strength of character or a commanding influence (positive attraction quality), but it also has a meaning of being the most important or conspicuous person or thing (negative attraction quality).
Most people would admire someone that has a dominating presence, but would not admire someone that wants to dominate everyone. I think that is especially true in a sexual relationship of a marriage - I know I definitely want my husband to have that dominating presence as that is attractive and is part of his sexual pull for me, but I most definitely do not want to be dominated and lorded over and be "under his thumb" all the time as that would diminish his attraction in a big way.
Instead of using the word 'nice' to describe men who put up with women s*it, use the word that aptly describe them weak. Otherwise you might as well use the word a*sh*le instead of alpha to describe an emotionally strong man.
"Nice guy" - defers or suppresses his own desires in favor of someone elses. Martyr.
"Nice guy" - puts responsibility and control of his own happiness and fulfillment in the hands of another. A child.
"Nice guy" - believes, and takes at face value the negative chastisments he is bombarded with that his basic and elemental expressions of masculinity are outdated, unwarranted, destructive, comical, and something to be ashamed of.
But what is instead truth?
Any engagement between two or more forces will be a contest of elemental power and control. Whether in war, sports, basic physics, or sexual relationships.
When one is at a disadvantage in power and control, what is left but cunning and diversion and deception?
So we see, if a man is taught or shamed to believe his masculine talents and tendancies are "off the table", then what is left for him to work with?
We then have the "Nice guy" archetype, attempting to use roundabout and backhanded tactics to achieve what he desires in a sexual relatoinship.
Appeasement (whatever makes you happy dear), bribery (housework for sex), trickery (I'm not a pig like those other men), deception (I never masturbate no not me), dishonesty (no honey I never look at other women never even notice them).
So it is, women collectively may say they want this nice guy with their words, but the woman individually, her behaviors show she is as much attracted sexually to strength, honesty, power, dominance, as women were thousands and thousands of years ago.
So the good man has a choice, believe political correct words that he hears and reads in media, to become a "nice guy", and exchange his power and strength and honesty (and control), for deferment and appeasement, and most likely end up mired in resentment when this "deal" doesn't work out.
Or he can choose to trust what he experiences in actions and behaviors, that his masculinity was never outdated in the past, that his masculinity is very much in demand today, and his masculinity very much in need to build a bright future tomorrow!
And no matter how effective this attitude is in his career and social situations, no more is this true than in sexual relationships especially.
The whole freakin' thing confuses the hell out of me. I am sure most of you would probably consider me a "nice guy" if you knew me but I don't fit neatly into any of these categories.
I am conflict avoidant for the most part. That one fits me. Though I am less so with my spouse than in work/social settings. I don't feel entitled to anything other than mutual respect as a human being.
I suppose you could say I am a martyr at times but that is some of the deal that comes with getting married and having children. Would I like to be out buying motorcycles and guns and going gambling or on ski trips. Sure. But I have mouths to feed and clothe and educate, etc. It is a life I chose and I love my wife and kids so I make sacrifices.
I don't consider myself a doormat but I am a pleaser. Yes, sometimes too much so. My wife knows I masterbate, knows I occasionaly admire an attractive woman. Do I do housework? Yes. Do I expect sex from it? No. Again, it's part of the deal.
Do I have a strong presence, dominant personality, assertiveness? No. But I do have strength of character and integrity.
I do have low self-esteem that can tend to play into my "nice guy" tendencies but I see that as a whole different animal. Maybe I am wrong..
Sorry for interjecting/rambling but sometimes I just don't get all of this...
The whole freakin' thing confuses the hell out of me. I am sure most of you would probably consider me a "nice guy" if you knew me but I don't fit neatly into any of these categories.
As I've written before, relationships are way more complicated than I ever thought they were or need to be. Topics like this are interesting, and I know I have started them that are it's equal and probably will again, but isn't it amazing that this much discussion can go into a "nice guy" as it pertains to relationships?
Applying something like this to real life is enough to drive an introverted, logical, B-type guy like me insane!! I feel like I need a manual to make a relationship work, but it would be so thick I couldn't carry it around!
The whole freakin' thing confuses the hell out of me. I am sure most of you would probably consider me a "nice guy" if you knew me but I don't fit neatly into any of these categories.
If you're so "nice", be nice to your wife and give her what she wants: a man. Go out and get a motorcycle. You don't have to go with every impulse, but some is not bad.
As I've written before, relationships are way more complicated than I ever thought they were or need to be. Topics like this are interesting, and I know I have started them that are it's equal and probably will again, but isn't it amazing that this much discussion can go into a "nice guy" as it pertains to relationships?
Applying something like this to real life is enough to drive an introverted, logical, B-type guy like me insane!! I feel like I need a manual to make a relationship work, but it would be so thick I couldn't carry it around!
There's nothing wrong with being a geek. But be the alpha geek.
Term "Nice Guy" is code for "entitled"? 
As I've written before, relationships are way more complicated than I ever thought they were or need to be. Topics like this are interesting, and I know I have started them that are it's equal and probably will again, but isn't it amazing that this much discussion can go into a "nice guy" as it pertains to relationships? 
