ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
Good people. Bad people. Nature's force.
- Thread starter lixluke
- Start date
People are certainly multiple dimensional. A person might be out to help others or hurt others depending on the circumstance. But there are definitely people out there who simply cannot hurt others and often help others when they can. Then there are people do whatever they want without regard to who they hurt ofte abusing others for their own gain. I think the case of this dude was very cut and dry. Which one was the nice person, and which one did she end up going after?
Mayb this answr will be exceptable to you:::
You considered you'r (not very brite) whiny needy clingly despert frind to be "nice" so the "ho" shud have slutted-herself-up on him.!!!
The idea that someone else can't hurt others is factually wrong. Anyone can hurt people. Some people don't do it intentionally, or knowingly, but they certainly can hurt people.
In this case, you completely view yourself as the good guy in the scenario, right? But to an outsider, you aren't. You're a sniveling, rude, judgmental asshole who only was nice to the girl until she told him she didn't want to be with him. Once she told him that, he lost all inhibitions and turned into a crybaby idiot. Even now, you're absolutely certain that just because you were nice to her, she owes you something. You can tell me otherwise all you like, but let's review the facts: you're calling her a slut, talking absolute shit about the guy she ended up with, and have called her a user, abuser, and bad person...all because she turned you down.
So yes, you think she owed you something.
You're wrong.
And you're going to remain a very, very lonely person because of it.
Who are you talking about?
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
yeah ya see here we go again.
your asserting the old adage that a person needs to have a partner (no doubt of the opposite sex) to be happy and not lonely.
i reject your reality and assert my own.
the modern one, where people can be happy and single.
This is what I was referring to when talking about those who simply cannot hurt people. They're incapable of intentionally hurting others because they are too nice. She found that this nice safe individual was boring/unappealing so she took it upon herself to go after the abusers. Can't blame the nice person for considering it pretty fucked up and getting upset about it. Because yes it's fucked up.
Is she not intitled to her opinion on such maters.???
Is it not her rite to choose who she wants to be wit.???
If som "nice" guy who is unexceptable to you sexualy desides that you have to make love to him beause he realy does care for you... you mite begin to see the err of you'r ways...
Yes. That's not even an issue.
Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
Is she not intitled to her opinion on such maters.???
Is it not her rite to choose who she wants to be wit.???
So you'r not up-set at her for rejectin somone who was sesually repulsive to her... so are you up-set wit evoluton or do you blame a "God".!!!
Is she not intitled to her opinion on such maters.???
Is it not her rite to choose who she wants to be wit.???
So you'r not up-set at her for rejectin somone who was sesually repulsive to her... so are you up-set wit evoluton or do you blame a "God".!!!
Everybody has the right to their opinion. It doesn't mean they're going to make the best choice. She has the right to make any choice she wants. It's not relevant because what 'she' considers to be the best choice is not in question here. What is in question is what 'actually' is the best choice. I wouldn't so easily make the nice person wrong for the way he reacted. Even with his reactions, nice people are a way better than assholes.
So if you have the choise of makin love to an azzhole who you are sesually attracted to... or a nice person who you'r sesually repulsed by... which woud you choose.???
WTF? Your question itself is totally loaded. Obviously she considered the nice person repulsive and the assholes attractive. This is the whole idea of what we're discussing. The fact that she considered the assholes attractive and the nice person repulsive.
It's as simple as this:
Nice people are great. They are incapable of intentionally hurting others.
Assholes are the most repuslive thing on the face of the earth.
Yet she considered the assholes more attractive and the nice person to be repulsive.
So as to the topic, it's almost as if nature itself is imposing a force on us to be abusive. Like karma works opposite. When you sow good causes, you get taken advantage of and suffer. Sometimes even to the point of psychosis, self-mutilation, and depression as a result of all the bad things that happen to you. When you sow bad causes, you feel great about your life as a winner because you are rewarded with everything by manipulating and abusing others.
Chronic bullies are usually experts in getting what they want . . . and sometimes they get shot, too. I guess there's no guarantees in any of our behaivor.
*shrugs*
*shrugs*
Do you consider you'rself a azzhole who gets rewarded wit what you want... or a nice guy who sets in the corner an eats worms.???
Discussions that are directed away from the topic and at those discussing the topic go nowhere. Irrelevant ad hominem is something people around here still haven't learned to stop relying on and holding pertinance to. What I consider myself is not the issue at hand and will never ever have an effect on the validity/invalidity of any of the assertions being made by anybody.
Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
Do you consider you'rself a azzhole who gets rewarded wit what you want... or a nice guy who sets in the corner an eats worms.???
What you call a "nice guy"... other people (includin the girl) see as anythang but nice dew to the way he treeted the girl... an it seems that you want you'r definiton of azzholes an nice guys to apply to other people but not to you'rself... an my queston about whether you consider you'rself a nice guy or a azzhole mite help to clear that up... but i suspect you dont want to answr cause it mite further demonstrate the sillyness of definin a person whos clingly needy an wont-take-no for a answer... as a "nice-guy"... an then you go on to say that the girl made the rong choise which you use as evidence that nice people are sht-on for ther efforts... which you conclude as nature bein fugged-up.!!!
How can "nature" be fugged-up when its workin the only way it can???... nope... i dont thank that its nature whos fugged-up
Do you consider you'rself a azzhole who gets rewarded wit what you want... or a nice guy who sets in the corner an eats worms.???
What you call a "nice guy"... other people (includin the girl) see as anythang but nice dew to the way he treeted the girl... an it seems that you want you'r definiton of azzholes an nice guys to apply to other people but not to you'rself... an my queston about whether you consider you'rself a nice guy or a azzhole mite help to clear that up... but i suspect you dont want to answr cause it mite further demonstrate the sillyness of definin a person whos clingly needy an wont-take-no for a answer... as a "nice-guy"... an then you go on to say that the girl made the rong choise which you use as evidence that nice people are sht-on for ther efforts... which you conclude as nature bein fugged-up.!!!
How can "nature" be fugged-up when its workin the only way it can???... nope... i dont thank that its nature whos fugged-up
I dont want to answer that because ad-hom is nothing more than complete commuication flaw prevelant in culture. I never ever ever ever anywhere on this forum relate issues to any person involved in any discussion. Nor do I entertain ad-hom discussion directed at myself. I will never do it, and I make that completely clear anytime anybody brings it up. It will never change anything being disussed. It will never clear anything up. All it will do, always in every discussion, is derail the matter at hand. Don't claim that the reason I don't want to answer that is because it will have an effect on the definition or anything else. Don't bother pushing it or attempting to find other excuses for my avoidance of disussing ad-hom as I have made it completely clear that there is only one single reason I don't do it. It is not relevant and it derails the topic. So go ahead and make claims about whatever reason you think I refuse to go that route. It's not going to happen.
The nice guy definition has nothing to do with neediness or those types of behaviors. Such behavior does not make somebody nice/not-nice. Yes the situation itself is fucked up, but the point is that it is a universal effect of nature. Those behaviors he exhibited were not because he wasn't nice. It was because he got upset about getting the ass end of the stick. All because he was nice.
The nice guy definition has nothing to do with neediness or those types of behaviors. Such behavior does not make somebody nice/not-nice. Yes the situation itself is fucked up, but the point is that it is a universal effect of nature. Those behaviors he exhibited were not because he wasn't nice. It was because he got upset about getting the ass end of the stick. All because he was nice.
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
well...
what i will suggest is that he chose poorly.
got himself involved with a women who is of lower moral caliber than he is or that had no real interest in him in the first place.
and there lies the lesson.
problem is many do not wish to learn and males get mixed messages from parents peers and x partners and society about never giving up and never taking no for an answer so society creates male stalkers and a very large proportion of women encourage it by the way they live in society.
Whether you define him as "nice" or not is irrelevent... he got the azz-end of the stick cause he was a azzhole.!!!
Its obvous that ad-hominim ant the reason you wont apply you'r argument to you'r own self... cause then you woud have to agree wit my above statment (see statment above)... ie... you'r jus arguein to be rite.!!!