Dedicated to exposing all the women who complain about wanting a "good man", to show women's poor dating behavior and unreasonable standards while offering little to no value themselves.
Created by kevin32
Visit the WAATGM forum to view and post content.
We're just a bunch of clueless NiceGuys™ with kindness coins that don't seem to work in women's holes so that the sex we're "entitled to" falls out. Because apparently we weren't demonstrating good relationship material through the attention, respect and stability that women demand. We were only "pretending" to be nice just to get laid.
In response to r/niceguys, this tribe is dedicated to exposing all the women who complain about wanting a "good man" after dating jerks and riding the cock carousel in the prime of their youth, and think they're deserving of commitment and financial stability when all they have left to offer is their depreciating looks, narcissistic mentality, used-up vaginas, and another man's kids.
Women in their 20s have numerous opportunities to date the decent men they claim to want, but many reject or friendzone these men for jerks and promiscuity. She takes advantage of a good dude's kindness for attention and favors, then accuses him of being a bad person who thinks he's entitled to sex.
But when she's in her 30s with depreciating looks, jerks who won't commit, the likelihood of being a single mom, and the social pressure from her married friends, she asks "Where have all the good men gone?"[1][2] Funny how back when she was chasing the bad boys "Being nice is the bare minimum", but now that she's past her prime and needs a bailout, she wants a man with nice guy traits.
Furthermore, dating jerks and riding the carousel before settling down with a good man is planned by many women, and encouraged by feminists. They then come to the dating market with unreasonable standards while offering little to no value themselves. Such women are totally unaware that the mature, stable men they now need are the same decent men they rejected, except these men remember the rejection and are responding in kind to avoid unstable, unappreciative women who view them more as ATMs than romantic partners.
The reason women end up here is because their behavior is not exposed as the lucid, self-destructive, feminist ideology that it is. And we're here to help Good Men guard their commitment and resources by exposing women who would make poor life partners and mothers of their children. Providing observations and opinions on the posts here allows us to better understand women's psyche and later depressive/miserable state when they are not held to a moral standard required for healthy, functioning relationships.
Rules of conduct:
-
1. No shaming men for any reason.
- 2. No white-knighting or NAWALT. This is not a debate tribe.
Recommended reading:
-
Dating profiles showing women's Dual-Mating strategy and unreasonable standards
-
OkCupid study shows women reject 80% of men based on looks alone
-
Milo - The Sexodus: The Men Giving Up On Women And Checking Out Of Society
-
Women Want to Know Why Men Don't Want to Marry Anymore...Allow Me
-
WAATGM mod explains why promiscuous women can't get good men to commit.
-
Okay, I get it. You're sick of hearing men complain about girls only dating assholes.
-
Dear Girls Who Are (Finally) Ready To Date Nice Guys: We Don’t Want You Anymore
-
Dear Single Moms: I wasn't your type then, why am I all of a sudden your type now?
-
The Truth About Single Moms Who Bring Young Children To The Dating Market
-
Carol asks WAATGM for the harsh truth after riding the carousel
- Complete list of resources here.
Content Archive:
Related forums:
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3y ago
Maybe Icarus should stop flying so close to the sun then, huh?
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3y ago
For men, "cute" would mean a girl whose perhaps not stunning beautiful but has something going for her and she's also feminine/submissive. In the modern era, when women may say a man's "cute", maybe they mean he's not a gigachad but otherwise hot?
If he had "genuine" interest and he wasn't hot, she probably would have felt comfortable beta-testing him to make him wait but probably worried he would move onto someone else.
hornetsfalcons12 Sr. Hamster Analyst 3y ago
“Cute” is probably the lower half of the top 20%. Since those are the only men that those women want to bang. Probably a “sex positive” 5 hoping that an 8-9 man will stick around for her magical poonyaya.
mattyanon TRP Endorsed 3y ago
No......
It means he's really hot, but she wants to downplay it.
If she said this about gigachad, noone would have any sympathy. By downplaying how hot he is, she garners sympathy.
whytehorse2021 Jr. Hamster Analyst 3y ago
Weird. My wife didn't have that problem dating a nice, cute guy(me).
hornetsfalcons12 Sr. Hamster Analyst 3y ago
Anyone wanna bet that she met this dude somewhere that wasn’t a free dating app, bar or club? It’s like you’re shocked that when you give a man easy access to sex, with no social consequence for using you for sex, that he will use you for sex.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3y ago
I'm going to quibble with this wording (not your fault) that is often used that men "use" women for sex. Women regard being "used" for sex because they commoditize it hence it's either something they regard as a chore, or they "lose" by giving it away for free such as to Chads. I'm not a Chad, but I feel a need to defend them in that they do nothing wrong: If women throw themselves at them giving them "easy" sex, and the women enjoy this sex, have the women really been "used" by the men as implied by that wording?
In a manner of speaking, "yes" in the sense of "alpha widows" and body count social shaming but this is due, again, to the women commoditizing sex and the notion of it being 'easy" to access is about charging beta bucks for it. The "social consequence" is that high end beta bucks won't want to pay top dollar for alpha widows.
Many men may not mind if a woman gives men "easy access to sex" provided she's responsible about it and doesn't commoditize it. Heck, this is the perfect girlfriend really: She's sexually available and doesn't require you to pay for the sex. The truly "independent" woman. The problem is that most women aren't really independent.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3y ago
Exactly.
Boar_excrement Jr. Hamster Analyst 3y ago
Whatsa matter, sweatie, don't like the 'let just be friends' rejection? Oh, you gave him sex and he won't commit? Well dearie, men do not owe you commitment. Just like you don't owe sex to the men who bought you dinner on multiple expensive dates.
How is that equality thing working out for you laydeez, now?
Lone_Ranger Live by the pork sword, die by the pork sword 3y ago
read closely...."that a nice cute guy would be genuinely interested IN WHO I AM."
Read that and weep for all of womankind. They think we ought to be interested in who they are. Not what they do, not what they say, not how they behave, not for the value that they bring to the table....they want us to be interested in them for WHO THEY ARE.
Problematic_Browser Sr. Hamster Analyst 3y ago
If both parties are consenting, nobody got "used".
I'm tired of this bullshit language women use to absolve themselves of responsibility.
No bitch, you eagerly opened your legs for Chad and you're mad that you aren't getting his commitment in return.
To turn a phase the feminists love: you aren't owed commitment.
hornetsfalcons12 Sr. Hamster Analyst 3y ago
Hey, those men should feel special, it’s only the 14th different cock that’s been inside of her this calendar year! She doesn’t give it to just anyone. You realize how many men she’s turned down for being 5’9” or for driving a Toyota Corolla or for only having a 2 bedroom house?
houseoftolstoy Unchivalrous Christian 3y ago
I get what you are saying, though from her perspective, she got nothing that she wanted out of the "relationship," which is why she feels used. But no matter how she feels about it, it is her fault, as she was willing to sleep with this guy before there was any actual commitment secured. She fails to understand that her approach to relationships is doomed to failure when she has been far too willing to sleep with a man early on. One of the consequences women of not practicing restraint with sex is that it can lead them to lose any grasp on how to make a relationship work without leading with sex. A "relationship" only built on sex is never going to have a secure foundation.
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3y ago
Men are not vending machines that you insert sex tokens into until a relationship falls out.
Pic889 3y ago
Came for this, wasn't disappoint. Personally, I like better the variant of "Men are not vending machines that you insert sex tokens into until commitment falls out." because it ties nicely with "nobody owes you commitment ".
houseoftolstoy Unchivalrous Christian 3y ago
If she was "feeling used," it means that she was used. A woman who has the actual standards of not sleeping with a guy early on cannot be used by men only looking for quick sex. Many women try to play the "I am not a slut" game by paying lip service to the idea that they are looking for something long term. But someone with long term thinking should not be jumping into bed with a guy they barely know.
If the guy says he will break things off if a woman does not sleep with him early on, then problem solved! Men who actually want something long term are not going to put this sort of ultimatum in the first place. And if he suspects that the woman is indeed a slut, that sort of man would not even invest any time in the first place.
For women like this, there is very little they can do to reverse this issue. I suspect that such women have no idea how sustain a relationship without leading with sex, and it really shows when they end up with these results. Do they even have any clue how to find a man who wants something more long term(That is, if such a man would even want them?)? Probably not. Especially if they are merely going for men they find physically attractive without even looking at other traits in the men.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3y ago
I was always open to long-term, but would drop a woman who didn't put out within 3 dates. It wasn't an ultimatum, in that I didn't tell her. To paraphrase Cheap Trick, I wanted her to want me.
I wasn't willing to wait when I realized that they had all had sex before, and the more they wanted a guy, the less they'd try to make him wait.
I might have been willing to wait with a virgin, but I never did find one of those.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3y ago
The fundamental problem is that in so-called "traditional dating", women insist upon men proving their worth to her while she offers nothing in return except for sex (either long or short term.) One of the funniest examples of this thinking was when entitlement queens quipped "I don't bring anything to the table because I am a table" essentially declaring themselves to be furniture.
Because women use transactional sex to demand men submit to them during the courtship process, it makes the men less attractive to her hence if he doesn't demand sex, she'll lose respect for him hence "The Friendzone." Ironically, so-called "traditional dating" requires men to demand women have sex with him for the relationship to have long term potential (in most cases). This means that single women are going to have high body counts unless they marry the first guy who went on a few dates with them. Consider...
That's why there are so many "single moms" out there who married guys who didn't work out for them. Under modern courtship, she had to demand he prove himself to her, he had to demand she put out, she got knocked up, and a few years later she's a single mother. Many may not be all that bad but who wants the liability?
The only way to break this cycle is for women to stop attention ho'ing and demanding men pay for courtship, but that ain't happening.
[deleted] 3y ago
[--removed--]