Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys are All Dented Cans: Entitlement

I went back to the beginning recently, and read about the misogynist, the coward, the racist, and the guy who won't take "No" for an answer.

And I found it striking. Partially because a few things have happened:

1. I stopped going to church.
2. I'm not sure I want to date Christian guys anymore.
3. I encountered more than one man who is a husband, father and believer in Jesus Christ, and also spouts Red Pill Reddit language and rhetoric.

This last one, if I'm honest, leaves me feeling heartbroken and confused--I feel betrayed, somehow.

And that sort of leads me to today's topic, entitlement.

"Entitlement" feels like a hot button word that gets thrown around a lot, particularly in articles about Millenials and the job market. But what does "entitlement" mean in the context that I am writing about?

I turned to Google to find out what exactly people feel entitled to. The results were predictable and a bit dull--the short version is that people feel entitled to government benefits, such as:

Entitlement to medicare
Entitlement to social security
Entitlement to paternity leave
Entitlement to bank holidays

And the puzzling:

Entitlement to kill a mockingbird

My two favorite things to be entitled to:

Entitlement to wear kilt
Entitlement to tea breaks

Photo by George Redgrave

Sam Heughan in "Outlander" on Starz

Yes. One thousand and one times yes.

[Why has no one made a calendar of attractive, possibly shirtless men in kilts drinking tea? I would buy the hell out of that calendar.]

So here's my unofficial definition of entitlement:

Entitlement is an unwritten, unquestioned and often unconscious law held to be inviolable and true, so that when the law is broken, the entitled person is justifiably angry, hurt, and vengeance-seeking.

[And its converse: Entitlement is an unwritten, unquestioned and often unconscious law held to be inviolable and true, so that when the law is upheld or enforced, the "victim" of the entitled person cannot justifiably be angry, hurt, or vengeance-seeking.]

I feel like entitlement, taking the posture and role of the victim, and not taking "No" for an answer are all tangled up together.

You learn the unspoken rules of a relationship, sometimes when it is in the process of ending, often after it has already ended. In one of my relationships, the unspoken rule was: You are not allowed to leave.

Entitlement is the unspoken law that leads to violence.

You see, I don't think anger, or the pain at the heart of anger, causes violence. There's another step there, another component--

The man doesn't kick the dog because the boss yelled at him. The man kicks the dog because he believes he has the right.

Let me give a simple, everyday example:

The law: A woman must always graciously and without rancor accept a compliment from a man. [Especially if he is a stranger]

It's funny, really. It's violence wrapped up in "You're beautiful." And what's even funnier is that the violation of this law is already presumed, the compliment followed immediately with, "I can give you a compliment" or "That's a compliment you know," before the woman even has time to react--the hatred trailing so closely on the heels of love.

And it's not just strangers.

I've thought a lot about the disparate rage that men have directed at me--from the first emotionally abusive relationship I had in my early 20s, to more recent experiences. I think about a story that a friend once told me.

He was a friend of the family. And he had a crush on her, despite an age difference of some 20 years (she was in college, he was in his 40s or 50s). He was giving her a ride, but she had brought a friend along--probably for safety.

And for whatever reason, he was angry with her. Angry because she brought a friend. Angry because this wasn't going according to plan. Angry because she didn't reciprocate his feelings. Angry.

And he threw acorns at her.

In the scene I imagine, there is nothing playful about it. He is looking down, not making eye contact. Scuffing his shoes against the dirt. Casually picking up an acorn. Half-heartedly throwing it. The petulant anger of a 10 year-old in the body of a middle-aged man.

There's another guy that I know. And he's one of the good ones. But I was recently struck anew by the memory of something he once said about my writing. I was struck by how passive-aggressive it was, this single comment. Rage, buried deep.

I laughed it off, initially. "He's just intimidated," I thought.

It's always just some guy. Throwing acorns.

I have no desire to date an acorn-thrower. But if even the good guys are like that--I don't know. It breaks something open inside of me.

I wonder if entitlement is at the heart of misogyny--these unspoken laws:

"You don't respect me": You must respect me
"You don't give a s*** about my intentions": You must give me the benefit of the doubt at all times, and forever.

It's not anger. Because anger doesn't cause abuse. It's not pain. Because there are many, many men (and women) who experience intense, searing, heart-rending pain and yet fail to abuse anyone.

It's not that they rage--it's that they feel justified in their cruelty.

I'm trying to avoid dating abusive guys.

Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys are All Dented Cans - The Myth of Persistence

Photo by quinn.anya

So I've started doing this thing where I'm completely honest with men. Why?

Well, for one, it amuses me and my dark sense of humor. I get to say fun things like:

"I'm not interested in pursuing anything romantic with you."
"Hitting on one person on the fb status of another person is kind of a douche move."
"You fondled my earring at a BBQ and it made feel uncomfortable and disrespected."
"When you grabbed me from behind around my ribs directly under my breasts [yeah, that happened], I felt unsafe and violated."

Yep. That's right. Just waiting for the marriage proposals to roll on in.

For another, I'm done protecting a man's feelings at the expense of my own personal safety.

And that brings me to the topic for today in dented cans: THE MYTH OF PERSISTENCE. And yes, it definitely deserves to be in all caps.

There's this weirdly longstanding myth out there that women want men who will continue to pursue them even in the face of blatant rejection (see also, "The Notebook").

You say, "I just want to be friends."
He hears, "I just want to be friends until I change my mind and decide we should definitely get married and have five kids."

You say, "I'm not interested in you in that way."
He hears, "I'm not interested in you in that way, but you should definitely grab me and try to kiss me."

You say, "I like someone else."
He hears, "He's probably a douche-bag--so you still have a shot!"

To the men that believe this myth, "No, I'm not interested" means "Try harder. You're not trying hard enough. Persist long enough and I will say 'Yes.'"

Except it doesn't mean that.

No--when you persist in pursuing me after I have made my feelings clear, I can only assume that there is something wrong with you either emotionally or mentally. And the last thing in the world that I desire is to have an emotionally or mentally unstable man pursuing me, or worse, believing that I owe him something--a date, friendship, my time, a second chance.

In short, when a man will not take "No" for an answer, all my self-preservation instincts kick in, and all I want is for him to stay the **** away from me.

I feel fear and anger.

Fear--because if this man apparently can't understand or chooses not to understand the words that I use to communicate (perhaps if I did an interpretive dance?), who's to say what other boundaries of mine he won't violate due to this "misunderstanding"? If he has already violated my verbal boundaries and made me feel unsafe, there are still other boundaries he has yet to cross: emotional, spiritual, mental, physical.

But truthfully, I have trouble understanding the level of pure terror I feel when a man refuses to take "No" for an answer.

My best guess is that this is a dehumanizing experience--I am not a person to these men. I am the projection of all of their baggage about women. I "owe" him something--my body, my "Yes," a chance for him to prove that he is the man of my dreams and we are meant to be together-- In short, I cannot give consent because I am not fully human. His pursuit has very little do with me, and so much to do with the fantasy world he has created in his mind: A world in which I should say, "Yes."

At a certain point this fantasy becomes far more important than my humanity. And that is terrifying (cue visions of being chained up in a dungeon somewhere by a man who "just wants to love me," and is willing to wait as long as it takes for me to realize that).

My guess is that many men fail to understand this as well--they have never experienced fear for their personal safety in the context of romantic relationships, partially because women are not encouraged to pursue in the face of rejection, in fact, quite the opposite. Any romantic rejection is humiliating and shameful.

And what about "Not Leading Him On," that crime that women seem to be accused of at a substantially higher rate than men? Why do women so often take the path of least resistance, trying to "let him down easy." It goes back to fear, again. Women have been taught that saying "No" is not only rude, but also dangerous.

A stranger came up to me in the 99 cent store and told me that I was "beautiful." He followed this up immediately with, "That's a compliment you know."

Of course, I enjoy compliments most when they are followed by vaguely hostile or threatening statements. I also enjoy being put in a situation in a public space where I am expected to thank a stranger for harassing me or be subjected to the accusation of "ungrateful b___ who can't take a compliment."

Unfortunately for me, as a woman, I fear for my physical safety. Therefore, I try not to engage with men in an aggressive or potentially escalating manner.

The same goes for turning down men who are romantically interested in me--but as it turns out, it matters very little what I say:

I've had different Christian guys: Corner me in a car and demand repeatedly that I go out on a date with him, then text me to apologize and tell me that he really "respects" me; Tell me my job is on the line unless I let him back into my life (as a friend, of course); Ignore my request to be "just friends" by grabbing me and dipping me for a kiss, all while citing the scene in "Hitch" when Will Smith and Kevin James accidentally make out ("You lean in half way, then wait for her to go the other half").

Then there's the anger--yeah, being seen as not quite human kind of pisses me off. And there's the icky, would rather not think about it, idea that my biracial, "exotic" looks only contribute to the extent to which men are able to project their own fantasies onto my very real, non-white (but still human!) body.

The intersection between race and perceived sexual availability is a fraught one at best--but whether it applies here or not, let me just say:

I don't want to be touched, grabbed, or groped in public by men I don't know.
If I say I don't want to date you, I mean exactly that, and I don't care to repeat myself.
I am in no way obligated to explain to you why I am not interested. I owe you no justification whatsoever.
If you won't take "No" for answer, consider yourself banned from my life.

So why is it that Christian men are so horrible at grasping the concept of women as fully human?

The word "consent" is quite the buzzword these days, but I believe there are many Christian men who do not grasp the concept:

Consent (or if you prefer, "Respect") isn't just about sex. It's about respecting the boundaries of another human being--seeing them as fully human--in every single interaction, romantic or not.

There are certain things that "Nice" Christian guys tend to believe or say that are inconsistent with consent:

One, believing that if you go to the trouble of asking a girl out, she should say, "Yes," just because you took a risk and put yourself out there.

Two, if you ask a girl out and she says, "Yes" even though she is not ultimately interested, then she is leading you on.

Three, you are a "Good Christian Man" but every girl you ask out says, "No," meaning that there is something wrong with them, not you. You are a victim of feminism, shallow female whims, or unfair discrimination.

Four, if a girl says "No" before the first date or after five dates, you deserve a full, complete, and honest explanation as to why.

Five, women don't actually know what they want. They read romance novels and "Fifty Shades of Grey" and then complain that they don't want to be raped, beaten, sexually harassed, or coerced into sex. What gives?

One and two are obviously contradictory, but I have heard both. Trying to control whether or not someone says "Yes" or "No" to a date is contrary to the idea of consent--and trying to control a person's motivations in general feels fishy.

For three and four, being rejected sucks, obviously. But believing that someone else is "wrong" for rejecting you or that the the entire female population is delusional because they are not romantically interested in you is also contrary to the idea of consent--particularly to the idea that a woman should be able to choose to date or not date someone for any reason. Yes, any reason, even one you think is shallow or stupid.

Also contrary to consent is manipulating a person into unwanted contact of any kind.

For five--well, perhaps that is the subject of another blog post, but it boggles the mind that women are still not allowed to be complex or contradictory beings with a freedom of choice and personal autonomy that transcends one particular sexual fantasy or choice of reading material. "Women don't know what they want" seems highly correlated with the myth of persistence--"Women don't know what they want" but "I (a man) know what they should want." Gross.

In conclusion, if a guy will not take "No" for an answer he is, in my opinion, undateable.

Up next in the Dented Cans series, a post on entitlement.

Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - The Coward

Aristotle on bravery in "Nicomachean Ethics," from a translation by Terence Irwin

Welcome to my series on dented cans AKA single Christian guys who are undateable (to me!). 

After tackling the fluffy, soft as a guinea pig's butt cheeks topic of misogyny, we are now moving onto a much less potentially inflammatory topic: cowardice. 

[I swear, I am literally drawing these topics out of a jar. Swear to Blog.]

Now, you may see "coward" and "cowardice" and think, "I know where she's going with this!" And I bet you two pounds of canned beets that you're wrong (I hate beets. Hate 'em). 

You see, I too am familiar with the diatribes, written and otherwise, urging Christian dudes to just step up to the complementarian gender roles plate and ask a girl out already. I mean c'mon! How hard can it be? Think of all those lovely, eligible, extremely single Christian girls who are not too busy writing wistful letters to their future husbands to say "Yes" to dinner and a PG movie with you (and who if you play your cards right, might even agree to marry you after the third date!).  

This is not that blog. If you want to read (or hear) about how Christian men should stop being such [women?] already and just ask a girl out, you can go here, here, or here. And good dating to you, sir or madam.

The truth is, I'm as ambivalent about this topic as a single Christian woman could possibly be. I feel like the "Be a man and ask her out" and "Be a woman and wait for him to make the first move" setup smells awfully like the traditional gender roles that have traditionally kept women in a one-down position of power in adult relationships (such as those between a boyfriend and girlfriend or husband and wife). 

Just speaking personally, if my church wants to reinforce these gender roles--you know, the ones where men get the final say on all decisions, men lead and women follow, men love and women submit, etc.--then I also want a "real man" who will carry me 20 miles in 5 feet of snow so that I don't get my dainty feet wet, who will bring home the bison while I sit at home sipping tea and refining my embroidery skills, and who has the physique of Chris Hemsworth and goes shirtless at all times. Just saying. 

So, no. This is not a blog about how Christian guys are cowards for not asking girls out. I really can't speak for any one guy's motivation for not asking any one girl out. The closest I can get is that he doesn't want to. The whys beyond that are beyond me and my personal scope of knowledge. However, if someone wanted to write a blog about this, I would support him or her at least 101%. 

And now to get back to my subject: Cowardice. Merriam Webster unhelpfully defines cowardice as "the absence of courage." I have a different definition, which I will expound here, at length (you lucky readers, you).

I define cowardice as deliberately hurting, humiliating, abusing, harming, putting down, or bullying someone from a position of power, privilege, or advantage (usually because you can and because it makes you feel good, (read, more powerful)). 

A story: 

I was working in a small business packing and shipping books for a living. I had long thought that the office manager had a crush on me (it wasn't reciprocal). 

So one day we were particularly busy, everyone was present, and I was packing and shipping the heck out of some books. The OM became irate and started yelling at me for overpacking the boxes. 

He took out some of the books that I had already packed and threw them (well, maybe he placed them) on my desk. 

He yelled at me in front of everyone: in front of my boss (his boss too) and in front of my coworkers. 

I was so angry. I confronted him the next day and told him I was not okay with what he did. He admitted to "being a huge jerk" and said he had actually been angry at another coworker who was not me.

This incident has always stuck with me for some reason. I think it's because when I thought back to the power dynamics of the situation, there was no one else in the room who would have been safe to yell at. He couldn't yell at our boss. He couldn't yell at my married female coworker or either of my male coworkers. 

I was it. 

The only way I can explain it is that liking me gave him some kind of carte blanche to vent his anger on me--

Or perhaps I was just the least powerful person in that room. 

I wish I could say that this was an isolated incident. That I've never before or since had a male boss/coworker/supervisor with romantic interest in me treat me with disrespect and anger because I rejected him. That I've never again had a man humiliate me, abuse me, condescend to me, or shame me under the guise of "just doing his job." 

I wish I could say I have never felt trapped in a job in which a man repeatedly violated my boundaries and made me feel profoundly unsafe. 

You see--here's what I don't get about abuse in our current culture: 

All the shame accrues to the victim: "Why didn't she leave him when he hit her?", "Why didn't you walk away?", "What were you thinking dating him in the first place?"

Why are we neglecting to call out the abusers and the bullies for the cowards that they are? I see nothing as more cowardly than punching out a woman who is half your size or using your position of power as a white, male, conservative blogger to further shame rape victims into silence (I'm looking at you, Matt Walsh). 

I fail to understand why Ray Rice dares to show his face in public while Janay Rice fields questions about why she stayed.

Somehow the definition of "being a man" still includes dominating women and treating them as objects to be controlled. Slap her around and you're a "man," not a coward.

After the incident above, I left that job soon after. I was afraid. I didn't want to become OM's emotional punching bag merely because he had a romantic interest in me. I felt like the most likely target, and I had no way to predict that there would be no future incidents--what if he had a really bad day? What if the mice ate all the books or I packed books into boxes in a way that just didn't suit him or the sound of me hitting the "s" key repeatedly started jangling his nerves? These things are impossible to predict. 

This is what I'm having trouble wrapping my head around. That abusers abuse because they can, because they want to, and because it makes them feel good.

He yelled at me because he could.

[Little to no risk to himself: If he yelled at the boss, he would risk getting fired. If he yelled at a male coworker, he might risk getting punched.]

He yelled at me because he wanted to.

[Anger feels bad.]

He yelled at me because it made him feel better.

[Letting anger out feels good.]

In the nearer past, a man viciously attacked and shamed me at work. I'm still traumatized by what happened. 

But here's the thing: 

He used what power he had to punish me, to put me down, to degrade me and "put me in my place" and it made him feel good. If not that, I'm sure it made him feel better--more empowered, more in control.

I also knew, based on past experience (I'd been to this rodeo before), that this was part of a pattern of abuse: His actions signaled to me that this could and probably would happen again: anytime he felt disempowered, received a nasty letter from the IRS, or felt angry about something else going on in his life--

It wouldn't matter. How I did my job wouldn't matter. What I said or did wouldn't matter. If he wanted to take out his anger out on me, he would find a reason.

Imagine that being your everyday, working reality: stretches of rainbows! and sunshine! punctuated only by abuse for no other reason than he "felt like it."

A coward will not confront his boss about injustice or mistreatment, but he will take it out on someone weaker than he is. In fact, he feels justified in doing so and often feels like a victim himself.

That's the problem with cowards. They are too smart to attack someone who has more power than they do, because they know they will suffer the consequences. They don't even much care for engaging an equal. But someone who is "weaker"? Perfect. 

For whatever reason, cowardly men also seem to feel perfectly justified taking out their anger on women who have romantically rejected them. Often, they take on the mantle of "victim" (of society, women, the government, their boss) to justify their behavior and deny their own power and culpability:

"I wouldn't be such an asshole if a woman hadn't broken my heart."
"I was a nice guy until I got rejected for the 20th time."

So, that leads to the question, how do you deal with a coward? 

Directly. To his face. Tell him in no uncertain terms that his behavior is unacceptable.

There's a great book called Verbal Judo about conflict and communication. In it, he talks about three kinds of people: nice people, difficult people, and wimps. You can guess who the cowards are. He recommends calling wimps out in public or confronting them in private (not recommended unless you are in a position of authority). 

Faced with real power, a coward will back down 100% of the time. It's that cliche you see in movies: the underdog can't take it anymore and fights back, leaving the bully a blubbering mess. 

There's some truth to that.  

This is not about playing nice, conflict resolution between equals, or fighting fair. Cowards never fight fair, so watch your back and enlist the help of an older brother or sister if necessary. Here are some possible responses:

"I will not tolerate being spoken to like that."

"Stop it."

"Back off."

Make yourself look as big and threatening as possible. Pretend you're at Yosemite and he is a brown bear. Show that you will not be intimidated and he will scuttle away with his tail between his legs.

Remember, he is not looking for an equal fight. He only abuses those he perceives to be weaker or more vulnerable than he is and will probably be shocked if you actually fight back.

Or you could just punch him in the face (I take no legal responsibility if you decide to take this route but I'll probably be cheering for you from the sidelines).

I jest. But in all seriousness, watch out for the coward. I had a lot of difficulty processing what happened to me until I started looking at it from the lens of power. To you, it might be a conflict between equals, but to him, it's all about making you feel small by any means available (shame, condescension, repeating negative things other people have said about you, attacking your character and personality, blaming you for everything, etc.). You become an object of uncontrolled hatred and rage.

The crux of what makes Christian guys undateable is that their actions often indicate that they don't view women as human beings worthy of equal respect.

Cowards don't respond to rejection very well (how would you feel if some inferior object rejected you?). And neither do some Christian guys. More on that later.

The glass jar has yet to speak on what I'll be writing about next. Till then.

Next: The Myth of Persistence

Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - The Misogynist

[For an introduction to this series, go here.]

There's nothing subtle about misogyny. The word literally means, "the hatred of women."

To me, if a guy is a misogynist, it makes him undateable. Harsh, I know. But a girl's gotta have her standards. If a man hates women and wants to date me, I consider it a conflict of interest. Because I am a woman. Sorry. It's not something that I chose. You could say it chose me.

Recently, I checked out this book from the library and had it sitting relatively inconspicuously in my apartment. Three different women came over in one evening, each arriving at a different time. All three immediately noticed the book and had a strong reaction to it:

Christian Men Who Hate Women

Despite the cheesy title and vaguely 80s slasher flick cover, the book reads as just as relevant and resonant (Mark Driscoll) now as it did when it was published 24 years ago. From the book:

"Christian men who hate women are in some ways even more dangerous than their non-Christian counterparts. Non-Christian misogynists do not have the additional arsenal of church doctrines, God-talk, and the "sanctioning" of male authority, which comes in a Christian marriage. Their wives are not taught from childhood to 'submit' to men 'no matter what' because it is 'God's will.' Thus Christian relationships based on misogyny are much more complicated due to the theological, cultural, and traditional influences that tend to reinforce the misogynist's prejudice against his wife." (Dr. Margaret J. Rinck, Christian Men Who Hate Women)

This leads to an important question as someone who dates and has dated Christian men: How do you tell if a Christian guy is a misogynist? If he doesn't walk around with a T-shirt that reads 1 Cor. 14:34 or ask you about how much you like to cook and clean on the first date, how will you know?

In addition, should we draw a clear distinction between the dude who makes tasteless and unfunny jokes about women (we all know this dude) from a man who uses or abuses women?

The misogynist is probably always sexist, but is the sexist always a misogynist?

Good question. There is probably no foolproof detection method, but I do know that a guy I dated turned out to be both (it was an unpleasant surprise to say the least).

It started with banal, oft-repeated (by men in general) sexist comments and stereotypes and turned into full-blown hatred, emotional manipulation, and abuse.

So on that fun note, here are some things that might be true of the misogynistic Christian guy:

He believes in rigid, non-negotiable gender roles

I'm not talking having complementarian leanings, I'm talking:

"A woman's primary role is to stay home and take care of the children and the household."

"Women should never hold a leadership role in church."

"If a man isn't the sole provider for his family, then he's not a real man,"

I've definitely met guys who say they would prefer for their wife or future wife to stay at home with the kids--but when confronted with specifics, they actually have no hard-and-fast rules, and that's key. 

He refers to his ex-girlfriend(s) as "a bitch," "crazy," "gold digger," "slut," "overly emotional," etc.

This one seems like common sense, but if your date starts talking about how crazy, deceptive, and destructive his ex was, you might think, "Wow, I'm so much better than his last girlfriend" instead of "I wonder if he's going to talk about me that way too."

Of course, a guy may have been treated very poorly in past relationships. This doesn't excuse talking about another human being with a lack of respect, and there's something about gender-inflected stereotypes and insults that is especially telling--of his character, not hers. 

He uses one tone of voice and type of language around his "bros," and another around you.

He may use sexist humor or the degradation of women and femininity to establish or build rapport with other men. He is one way with his buddies and another way around you.

He often uses hierarchical language to describe himself or other men.

He refers to men as either "alphas" or "betas." He's preoccupied with power differences, particularly between himself and other men his age. He's concerned with appearing "weak" or feminine in front of other guys and looks for their approval in subtle ways.

He's racist, sexist, homophobic and/or speaks about "the Other" with disgust

How does he talk about and treat those he sees as "Other"?  Does he talk about UCLA fans as if they are less than human? Use derogatory language to describe muslims or those of other faiths? Make cruel jokes about those he considers unattractive?

He generally blames other people or things for his problems.

This is a larger character defect obviously not limited to men. But if a man tends to blame others for his actions, failures, mistakes, or shortcomings, this will also apply to his closest relationships. He will be able to justify any abusive words or actions, because they will never, ever be his fault. In fact, they will probably be yours.

He becomes defensive or hurt or attacks you if you confront him about his misogyny or sexism.

Defensiveness is a corollary of the last point. Men who do not take responsibility for their actions are by nature extremely defensive. They have built-in defense mechanisms against anything that might threaten their own views about themselves (as caring, loving, rational, good, etc.).

If you find yourself defending your own actions after confronting his, that is a bad sign. If you let him, he will turn the scrutiny onto you and your perceived faults.

He puts you on a pedestal.

"[T]he greater the idealization, the greater the devaluation when it finally occurs."
- Dr. John Townsend in Hiding From Love

You know what you put on pedestals? Things. Idealization is simply another form of objectification, and has far more to do with his needs than your perfection.

He might treat you like an extremely valuable, fragile glass vase at the beginning of the relationship--striving to meet your every need, handling you with care. Unfortunately, objects are made to be used, and when they no longer serve their (his) purpose, or when they cease to be useful, they are made to be destroyed.

How do you distinguish between the man who treats you with love and respect and the man who idealizes you as an object he can worship?

Is he secure or is he anxious? Does he respect your boundaries? Does he hear what you say or what he wants to hear?

He abuses you physically, mentally, emotionally, or spiritually

I started writing about misogyny, and here I am writing about abuse. I think this because abuse is the end game of misogyny. If you find yourself in a relationship with a misogynistic man, it's only a matter of time before he turns this hatred on you.

Questions:
Is he hurting you?
Is he destroying what you love?
Are you living in fear of "the next time"?
Are you constantly in "fight or flight"?
Are you caught up in a cycle that seems impossible to break?

Please check out more resources about this topic at the end of the post.

I'm not saying that any one of these traits is necessarily indicative of misogyny (with the exception of abuse), but a cluster of them could be a pretty big red flag.

Abusers rarely batter you (physically or verbally) on the first date. In fact, at the beginning of the relationship, an abuser will pour on the love, idealization, empathy, etc., so that when he starts the abuse, you are already "hooked."

The point of this post is simply to point out some of the warning signs of misogyny--so hopefully you can leave before it ever gets to that point.

He eats peanut butter Cap'n Crunch for breakfast

Just kidding about this last one. Peanut butter Cap'n Crunch is my favorite.

Resources:
Christian Men Who Hate Women
Why Does He Do That?
The Verbally Abusive Relationship
Power and Control Wheel
Should I stay or should I go?
The National Domestic Violence Hotline

Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - Introduction

I love the miscellaneous sale section at Ralphs. Tucked between the dairy section and the packaged meats you can find nine dollar bottles of wine, congealed donuts, leftover Halloween decorations, six-day-old apple pies, Duck Dynasty costume castoffs, cartons of pedialyte, bruised apples, liver-spotted bananas, and Barbie bandaids.

Way, way in the back, hidden behind a few dubious boxes of laxative tea and 100 count bottles of aspirin, it sits.

Our friend, the dented can.

Back when I worked full-time at a book warehouse, I used to read a lot of books (more like skim, but who's judging). One of those books was a chick lit novel called The Big Love written by Sarah Dunn.

The twist in this particular novel is that the heroine was a lapsed evangelical Christian. And there was this one passage that stuck out to me, which I've excerpted at length below, that made me go Yes Yes I SAID YES:

Photo by labullets.blogspot.com

I should have known about Gil, of course. I should have known the way you know about a dented can. But this is the thing: everyone has been warned about dented cans, but surely not every dented can is bad, or they wouldn’t be allowed to sell them, right? Someone’s buying those dented cans. Someone’s taking them home and opening them up and examining the contents and then making a bet about whether or not the stuff inside is safe to eat. And let me tell you, when you’re twenty-five, and a virgin, and you refuse to date anybody but a Christian—and not just any Christian but a certain kind of Christian—your options are all dented cans. When Gil and I finally broke up, I took another look around the church basement, and I had the closest thing I’ve ever had to an actual vision. There sat Brian Berryman. Single. Thirty-two. An attorney. Crown prince of the church basement. So morally upright he didn’t believe in dating; he believed in praying. He’d been praying for a wife since he was sixteen. He’d drawn up a list of all the qualities he wanted her to possess, a list which he was continually revising, and then praying about, and then revising some more, and then informally circulating among the single women at the church. A woman of pure heart, the list would go. A gentle and quiet spirit. A submissive nature. Is this what you want in a husband? I heard a voice saying. Well, not an actual voice, but it was as clear as day. I realized that if I kept searching for husbands in church basements I was going to end up with a seriously dented can. [from The Big Love by Sarah Dunn, emphasis mine]

"So, what, Ms. Blogger, are you saying that all single Christian men are dented cans?"

Yes. Hell, I've dated a few of them.

No, but it sure feels like it sometimes, as if I'm walking by the sale section, scoping out the goods and thinking, "Oh please, Lord. Not that one."

When it comes to dating within Christian evangelical culture, it often feels as if you're screwed if you do, and screwed if you don't (or not screwed either way, now that I think about it).

That's the honesty part of this post--the hopelessness part. But this series (Yes! A series!) is not about hopelessness--it's about those qualities in single Christian guys that make them undateable.

I'm well aware that we are all dented cans. But perhaps a distinction can be made between the can of diced tomatoes sporting a few delightful and adorable indentations from being dropped on its head a few times and the can of sliced yellow peaches in a light syrup that gives you a fatal case of botulism.

Join us next time for a lighthearted take on:

Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - The Misogynist
Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - The Coward
Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - The Racist
Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - The Myth of Persistence 
Undateable: Why Single Christian Guys Are All Dented Cans - Entitlement

What side should you hug a girl, dating women at church, and how to hit on girls with a facebook status

More advice from Google searches below. I'm kind of starting to sense a theme here...

"what side you should hug a girl" 

Okay. This sounds like a personal question. But may I suggest hugging the side that is facing you, unless that side is her backside. Hugging from behind is not recommended unless you are already in a relationship. 

As for which side is better to hug, the left or the right, I can't really say that I have a preference. I'm right-handed, so I guess it's more natural for me to side-hug with my right arm. 

Perhaps you can observe the girl in question for a few minutes to see whether she's right or left-handed, then go in for the kill, er, I mean side hug. 

"a lot side hugs from a guy at church" 

Hmm. This is perplexing. Is this guy chasing you around the foyer giving you lots and lots of side hugs? That's kind of creepy. Especially if he's alternating sides. *shudder*

Or is he just giving a friendly, Christian, brotherly hug every time he sees you? 

I'm guessing this is one of two things. 

1. A guy at church is side-hugging you a lot. You do not like him and it's making you uncomfortable. 

2. A guy at church is side-hugging you a lot. You sort of kind of like him and you especially like his hugs (maybe a little too much). You want to know if there's something more than brotherly affection going on here. 

If it's #1, simple, don't hug him. I don't care how nice he is, or how Christian you are, no one should be side-hugged without their consent. Period. 

If it's #2, observe how he interacts with other women. Does he promiscuously side-hug women left and right? Is he just a really friendly, sincere kind of guy? 

Maybe it's nothing. 

I say keep hugging him (and maybe a few other guys too). The bigger your sample size, the better you'll be able to tell "It's so good to see you, person I only feel platonically for!" from "Maybe some day we can take this side hug a little bit further but not too far because that would cheating on our future spouses unless you are my future spouse in which case how do you feel about full-frontal hugging before marriage?" 

"how to hit on girls with a facebook status"

This is a new one. Are we talking hitting on one girl or a bunch of girls at once? 

Let's hope it's just one girl. Here's what I would do: 

Tag her in a status update that either A) Lightly teases her for something funny she did, or B) Challenges her to a friendly and fun competition, or C) Both.

The key here is to keep it light and low-pressure. Think good-natured teasing or something harmless you can be competitive about (progressively squee-worthy pictures of baby animals?).

"dating a guy with no qualifications" 

What kinds of qualifications are we talking about? How's his side-hug technique? 

"dating women at church" 

If you want to date women at church, or if you want to attend church solely to date women, here's what I would do: 

1. Show up.
2. Be attractive or have a good personality or both.

3. Ask a woman out. 

That's all I've got. Best of luck to all you huggers and daters out there. 

Is it Awkward to Date Someone From Your Church? & Why You Should Hit on Women at Church ... Stay Tuned

There's a lot of angst over dating within the church (as if anyone needed a few dozen Google searches to figure that out). This post is dedicated to the trials, tribulations and titillations of church dating. All questions brought to you by a search engine near you! 

"I really like a boy that goes to my church"

If there's one thing I've learned, it's that churches are veritable hotbeds of unrequited longing. Welcome to the club, my friend.

Okay, so you like this boy. Is he single? What are you waiting for? Sit beside him at church at the next available opportunity. Careful though! You only want to sit by him. Avoid eye contact or any form of "talk." In fact, pretend he doesn't exist while taking copious notes on the sermon. 

This is a widely recognized form of Christian courtship. Anything else and you'll come across as too pushy. And if there's anything a church boy likes less than a chili cook-off before ultimate frisbee, it's a pushy woman.

"The woman in church is attracted to you where will she sit[?]"

Attracted to you = As close as Christianly possible

Not attracted to you = With her friends, several rows down.

You are Ryan Gosling = In your lap

Realize that she is making a conscious choice and that it absolutely relates to you and her level of attraction to you. These things must be read carefully and with attention to nuance, like the Book of Revelation or the entrails of a ground squirrel.

"There are no girls in my church"

That's awful. I would suggest finding a new church, posthaste. Given your church's stance on gender segregation, I would carefully review their mission, vision and core values. Compare these to the teachings of Jesus and make your decision accordingly.

If that's not possible, there's always eHarmony. I hear they have a favorable male/female ratio. [But be wary of their doctrine of the trinity]

"Is it awkward to date someone from your church[?]"

So awkward. However, judging from some of these other queries, the only thing more awkward than dating in church is not dating in church--I imagine single guys and girls completely shutting down in the presence of the desired sex.

The problem--as I see it: some single and seeking church members completely missed "Flirting & Attraction 101." They are unable to accurately gauge the interest or lack of interest displayed by another person. They are likewise unable to constructively and lightheartedly display interest in another person. 

Maybe it's because the stakes (marriage) feel too high. And if them's the stakes, why even play? 

"Why you should hit on women at church" 

Some of you guys/girls need to lay off the hitting on for a bit. Stop playing the field and be the field, so to speak. I mean, good grief, you start chatting up everything with a Bible and a smile. You're making people uncomfortable. You read "desperate." Just stop. Take a break.

Others of you...maybe you've given up altogether and you're just going to church for the "fellowship." Good for you. But if you feel like maybe someday in the future possibly if the timing's right you might I dunno potentially want to date someone who goes to your church--

Ask them out.

Your first fb message to a girl, awkward first date hugs, and how to know if an INTP likes you : Advice From The Google Trenches

These are all google searches that led to my blog. I offer advice to the hapless masses.

"First fb message to a girl"

First off, I applaud your ingenuity and forward-thinking--you are using facebook as an online dating website. Bravo, my friend. Bravo. Your pioneering spirit is an inspiration to us all.

After painstakingly selecting this praiseworthy and promising specimen of womanhood ["hot chick who might make out with me"], all that remains is to craft that perfect first missive that will win her heart [convince her to come over and "watch a movie"].

So ask yourself: What do you have in common with this person? Do you have a mutual friend? Do you both like the same kind of music? Do you use the same hair products? Does she resemble your best buddy Thor from kindergarten?

Now take that thing that you have in common and use it in a sentence. Yes, this is third grade. Go ahead. I'll wait.

"I LOVE Five Iron Frenzy. They were my favorite band in college. Have you ever been to one of their shows?"

You get the idea.

Now, you're going to do something a little daring. It's scary, but trust me. A brave, dashing gentleman such as yourself--who would be so bold, courageous even, as to message a girl on fb--can handle a little bit of risk.

Think about how you might suggest meeting up with a friend, then extend that invitation to her--even better if you can connect it to the thing that you have in common.

"I was going to sample all 31 flavors of Baskin-Robbins on Thursday. Wanna join?"

"But wait," you say, "what if she says no?"

Unlikely. She probably won't respond at all.

Newsflash: There is no magical formula for getting a girl to message you back. There is no forumla for getting a girl to go out with you or have sex with you. Anyone who tells you differently is selling something.

Nevertheless, establishing rapport (mutual interests) and actually asking her out might set you apart from the other dudes out there, whose first messages read something like,

"dam u sexy"

Thanks?

"Awkward first date hug"

Wow. There are evidently a lot of awkward hugs going down on first dates. And I mean, it makes sense. First dates are usually a little bit anxiety-inducing and hugging a stranger is an implosion of awkward just waiting to happen.

Here are some tips:

1. Read his/her body language.

It's the end of the date. Is he slowly backing away from you while saying, "Thanks! I had a great time"? Is she facing you at an angle and looking toward the door? Is he not making any eye contact at all? Is she clutching her purse to her chest and running away? DO NOT HUG.

2. If you're not sure one way or the other, ask.

Take a step forward and if they don't balk or back away say, "Awkward hug?" or "Can I hug you?" This is helpful because it lets the other person know that you are not going to try to kiss them. It also lets them know that you want to hug them. Because you are a friendly person and you like hugging people, dammit.

3. Don't panic.

That agonizing pause between saying your goodbyes and the possible physical manifestation of the conclusion of your date will pass. Trust me.

4. Flee.

This one is my favorite. Simply vacate the scene, swiftly, precluding any awkward hugging that might occur. You risk alienating your date, of course. But anything is better than an awkward first date hug. Right?

"Flirt with intp"

Now this is my kind of question. INTPs can be hard to flirt with because they're not always tuned in to "I'm hitting on you" social cues. If you try to flirt with them as if they were, uh, normal, they might just give you a dirty look, as in, "What's wrong with you?"

Don't take it personally. If you want to flirt with an INTP, I would:

1. Ask them questions about what they think.

What have you been reading lately?
What topic has been of interest to you?
Do you have any thoughts on ___?

2. Notice the nuances of their arguments/statements/thoughts. Push them to elaborate.

I notice you used the word ___ about ___. What do you mean by that? What about ___? Would that also apply?

3. Listen and let them finish their thought before interjecting.

4. Offer your own ideas, building on / responding to what they said and creating a brand new work of thought origami.

That's hot!

"How to know if an intp likes you"

1. They talk to you.

[Yes, this is a big one.]

2. They want to know what you think and how you think.

3. They ask you a lot of questions.

4. They tell you all their theories.

5. They blush when they talk to you.

Oh wait. That's just me. Nevermind. Nothing to see here. What are you looking at.

A Side Hug on the First Date, A Guy Asked Me Out at Church and it Was Awkward, and the "Good Christian Guy" Label

"Side hug first date like you or not"

Okay, fine. Hugs are meaningful. But still, it really depends on the person doing the hugging. I have friends (guy friends) who real-hug everybody. Everybody. Male. Female. Vulcan. There is no Jew nor Greek, slave nor free. That's just how they roll.

I have other friends (guy friends) who will never real-hug any woman they are not related to, other than their wives.

Do I have thoughts on this? Maybe.

Maybe, if you pressed me (ha), I might start talking about the unhealthy sexualization of any and all physical contact. This happens in the church and elsewhere. [Full disclosure: I attended a discipleship program in which side-hugs were THE RULE between guys and girls].

As a side note, there's nothing quite like going in for a hug, only to have the guy draw back in terror, to make you an awkward hugger.

You're wondering whether the side hug was a "Thanks, but no thanks." Maybe. My gut says yes, but I could be wrong. Maybe this person wants to save real hugs for marriage. Who knows.

The tip-off for me is whether or not they initiated the hug. If it were me, I would rather avoid hugging altogether than go in for a side hug. All or nothing, baby.

"A man offering a side hug to a woman"

I say sidestep him. Then tackle him in a bear hug. Oh, you want to know what it means? No clue. Why don't you ask him.

"A guy asked me out church awkward"

Was he awkward or was the asking out at church awkward? Were beads of sweat rolling down his forehead? Did he preface it with, "I know you only see me as a brother in Christ, but..."? Did he storm the stage, grab the microphone from the pastor and ask you out right then and there? Did he ask you out on a date to church (now that's awkward)?

Was it cute awkward or socially awkward awkward? I dunno, I'm kind of impressed with this guy for asking you out. I say go out for coffee, then if you're not feeling it, make it a point to side hug him at the end. He'll know what's up.

"Good Christian guy" label

"Good Christian guy" is in quotation marks for a reason you have rightfully ascertained: it's basically a cop out.

It's patronizing. It's BS. It's patronizing BS.

It's tantamount to being a nice guy, as in, "He's a nice guy, but..."

Instead of calling someone a "good Christian guy," why not refer to him as "the most generous person I know," or "my best friend," or "the bomb diggity at ultimate frisbee."

So much better. 

"How to drag girls to have sex on fb"

Please don't be a real person, please don't be a real person, please don't be a real person...

That's it, folks. May you real-hug a member of the opposite sex with pure or impure motives, and may it mean as much or as little as you want it to mean. And may no one ever refer to you as a "good Christian guy." Good luck. May the hugs be ever in your favor.



More hugging advice here. 

Advice From the Google Trenches: Hitting on Girls, Respect at Work, and Why a Guy Might Think You're Desperate

And we're back! It's time for the next installment of "advice you didn't really ask for based on google search queries that led to this blog." You can find the first installment here. Let's get down to it.

"How to hit on a girl"

Today is your lucky day. I'm going to let you in on a little secret: you can talk to girls as if they are real people. Seriously! I'm not joking. Oh, you want me to be more specific? Okay.

1) Make eye contact. I'm not saying stare intensely into her eyes--I am saying don't stare at the ground the entire time if you can help it.
2) Smile. More specifically, smile while making eye contact. Be prepared to catch her if she swoons.
3) Ask her questions, preferably about herself.
4) Listen intently to what she says. You can even repeat back key points, so she knows you're paying attention.
5) Watch your body language. Are you facing toward her, facing her at an angle, or facing completely away? If you're making eye contact and smiling, this shouldn't be an issue.
6) If you are talking to a girl and you like her, it will probably be obvious that you like her. Hitting-on-girl mission accomplished.
7) It's okay to be nervous. If she likes you, she'll probably think it's cute.

If you're ready for some next level stuff, I suggest reading this post over at LABullets. Be careful though--it's not for the faint of heart.

"Thoughts about work and respect"

I have a lot of thoughts about work and respect:
-Playful banter and/or ribbing is not the same as disrespect. Of course, every workplace is different.
-If you feel you are not getting the respect you are due, there could be a deeper issue.
-This deeper issue could be with you--are you placing your worth in your job? Will any amount of respect ever be enough? Imagine getting what you want. How would it make you feel?
-This deeper issue could be with workplace dynamics or politics. It could have nothing to do with you.
-If someone condescends to you or puts you down, it might be worth it to call them out on it--to say, "Hey, what do you mean by that?"
-Ultimately, you can't change someone else's behavior or attitude. Think about why this is so important to you. Can you make peace with not getting the respect you think you deserve? If not, it might be time to look for a different job.

"Why a guy might think you're desperate"

Whoa. Hold up right there, girlfriend. Did a guy actually tell you he thinks you're desperate? No? Then what are you worried about?

There's tons of advice out there (I should know, I googled it) on not appearing desperate. But chances are if you're asking why a guy might think you're desperate, you're too self-aware to actually be desperate.

Desperate people are not self-aware. They are too busy etching their crushes' names into their forearms.

Speaking of which, if you like a guy, it's okay to tell him. Telling him does not make you desperate. Flirting with him does not make you desperate. Wanting a boyfriend does not make you desperate. Holding someone's favorite stuffed animal hostage until he agrees to date you--that makes you desperate.

Your question does bring up another issue: the difficulty of navigating the often contradictory demands placed on women by contemporary culture: being sexy, but not slutty; being intelligent, but non-threatening; being attractive, but low-maintenance; being independent, but still needing a man; being just-interested-enough, but not desperate. You can read more about this here.

Now, if you'll excuse me--I need to go mail this ransom note from "Binky."

Advice From the Google Trenches: Your Dating Queries Answered

I'm probably the least qualified person to dish out advice about dating. If you poured all of my serious relationships into a measuring device, you would still be 1/4 cup short on flour to make chocolate chip cookies. Or something like that. But for some reason, Google keeps sending me people who seem in need of a little relational help. So here goes nothing--straight from the search engine that brought you such hits as "Gmail" and "Google+", I bring you the following search queries:

"How to ask a guy to sit with you at church"

My advice: Don't do it! Are you ready to marry this guy? No? Then don't ask him to sit next to you at church. We all know what that means. No good can come of it. But if you must, here's how the conversation might go down:

INT. CHURCH FOYER

You: Hey, where are you sitting?
Him: I'm not sure yet. Wanna join me?

There you go.

"When no one asks you out"

Wow. This makes me sad. I'm sorry that no one is asking you out. Have you thought about asking them out instead? I know rejection is rough, but who knows, he/she could say yes. Also, there are other ways to pursue someone other than asking them out. I hear from other women a lot that "no one pursues me." This could mean a lot of different things. Just make sure it doesn't mean, "No one is asking me out, therefore I am completely undesirable." Because that's not true. And if you feel that way, it has very little to do with the fact that no one is asking you out.

"How to hit on a girl on facebook"

For the love of Myspace. Why would you think that hitting on a girl on facebook is a good idea? I have never had a guy hit on me on facebook and thought to myself, "Wow, I'm so impressed. I can't believe this guy had the guts to hit on me via social media." And those other articles about facebook flirting--did you notice how they're all written by guys? Don't believe the hype. Facebook + You !=  The second incarnation of Casanova.

"Christian girls guide to wedding"

You are at the wrong blog, my friend. Let me suggest you check out Pinterest instead.

"Christian girls just not into you"

Ooh. Would this be all Christian girls, ever? Or just the ones you've been asking out? Are you "that guy"?

You might be that guy if...

You immediately ask out every cute girl who walks in the doors of your church.
You've hit on that one girl. And her friend. And her other friend. All within the same 15 minutes.
You're not sure why the girl you've been calling, texting, or emailing never responds.
You are completely oblivious about being that guy.

Maybe you're not that guy. Maybe she's just not that into you. As I remember, the point of the book was to find someone who is into you instead of pursuing the ones who are not.

This concludes the first round of "ask me anything via a google search that leads you to my blog." I hope you've enjoyed it. I know I have.

The blog that got me a date and the followup post

[These blog posts are from 2009 and may or may not reflect my current views.]

Blog 1 

Readers of this blog may know that passive guys drive me crazy--and not in a good way.

To be completely straight, dear reader, I have been burned. And I am not, nor will I ever be, a neutral commentator on the passive male phenomenon. In fact, I probably have nothing new to say. 

"Blah, blah, blah, passive guys suck." 

Nonetheless, here are a few thoughts: 

1. Everytime I/somegirl criticizes passive men, I/they feel compelled to add something along the lines of, "But we really shouldn't be too hard on the poor emotionally stunted wimps, because then they will simply retreat even further into the narcissistic void of lapsed masculinity." 

2. Criticizing passive men is a remarkable waste of time. 

3. Men are passive (eg "hanging out" instead of "asking out") because it benefits them. This isn't rocket science, but at its heart, the whole "asking out" system of male pursuit benefits women, not men. 

Women get to feel wanted. Men get to be (potentially) rejected. 

"Just hanging out" benefits men (or should I say "boys"?). All of the benefits of female companionship without a) Having to pay for anything, and b) The possibility of rejection. 

The girl eventually gets hurt by his (passive) rejection, and he moves on to hang out with someone else. What's not to like? 

4. Until we have a dating culture that stops rewarding passivity, nothing will change. 

5. I have figured out that if a guy isn't willing to risk rejection with me, then he isn't worth it. 

Blog 2

(This is part of an email to a (guy) friend who read my previous blog)

I agree, it's a complex issue. Often for girls the guys they don't want to ask them out do, and the ones they do don't. So when a girl complains about a passive guy, the issue could really be that she likes him, but he doesn't like her. 

Also, would you rather a girl "give you a chance" or tell you upfront that you don't have a chance (if that's the case)? Just as guys have trouble getting rejected, girls have trouble doing the rejecting while trying not to hurt the guy's feelings. 

Also, some girls have no problem whatsoever with more passive guys. These are usually girls who know what they want and are more than willing to control/direct nearly every aspect of the relationship. I'm just not that kind of person. It sounds exhausting. 

Also, although it seems like it's the guy doing all the work, usually the girl non-verbally "asks" the guy to ask her out before he does so. You know, body language and such. 

(I've done this with several passive guys, and though it took them long enough, they did ask me out. It's really a seize-the-moment kind of thing. Wait too long and duck season may be over.)

Also, creepy guys can be a lot of things, but they are rarely passive. 

Also, it's not just asking her out, it's how you act on the date. I had one guy ask me out to the movies. He kind of made a big deal about it. On the evening of the actual date, he acted like he would rather be doing LSAT logic problems. 

He acted like he didn't care. And despite the fact that I know he did care--probably a lot--I couldn't reconcile myself to being with a guy who would rather appear nonchalant than wait for me before walking out of a building. 

Even now, when I picture him, I see his back. 

He's walking away. 

The Mythical Nice Guy

I have become convinced that there really is no such thing as a "nice guy"--the emotionally crippled, the perennially passive, the socially awkward, the impressively f-ed up, maybe. But nice guys? No such thing.

Have you ever pondered the nice guys on TV? Take Ted Mosby for instance, the main character in the sitcom "How I Met Your Mother." Ted is a romantic. He believes in true love and finding The One. He's also kind of an a**hole. But that's just it. He's not an unrepentant womanizer like Barney, nor is he a one-woman man like Marshall (is the correct word here "whipped"?). He's alternately cowardly, lustful, chauvinistic and predatory, but because he's really just trying to find his soul mate, he's a nice guy.

Has a friend ever tried to set you up? When the date goes badly, they say, "Oh, but he's a nice guy." This can be translated roughly as: "Oh, but he's not a serial killer or a rapist." Never mind that he has an elbow fetish or the clap.

Why is there no equivalent nice girl? (Usually this just means she's unattractive.)

Nice guys are the necessary fictive counterpoint to the a**holes that women supposedly always go for. They are the guys who are not just trying to get into your pants. (Is it just me, or is the bar set pretty low?) The rationale goes: "I'm a nice guy, but women only like jerks. Therefore, I am single." I won't bother poking holes in that potato.

This nice guy myth wouldn't be quite so irritating if there did not seem to be practically a moral imperative to find, date and marry one. 

O nice guys. You are the stalker that won't take "no" for an answer--yet wouldn't hurt a fly. You are the guy that asks me out, then spends the entire date talking to the wall. You tell I'm beautiful, then call me a bitch for turning you down. You like me, but you act like you don't give a crap--'cause giving a crap would be too scary.

You would ask me out or listen when I say "I just want to be friends" or act like you care or treat me like, I dunno, another human being. But you're just too nice.

Stop it.