Connect with us

Red Pill

News

Nice guys really do finish last. Study shows women are not attracted to “nice” behavior on first dates

Women are not sexually attracted to nice guys, a new Israeli psychologists study indicates. Men are attracted to niceness and feminine traits in women. Oddly enough women seem attracted to masculine behavior in men, especially early in the dating process. Stop being nice and sweet, man up and get the girl.

Published

on

0 Views

When a man finally makes the move from blue pill to red pill, one of the hardest adjustments to make is to simply stop being nice. All our lives, society, media, family has taught us to be nice and good things will come, especially when on a date.

Open doors, pull out the chair, pay for everything and treat her like the snowflake she is…that’s what men have been inundated with for decades.

Facebook COO and queen feminist Sheryl Sandberg said it best:

“When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home.”

This is about as red pill a statement as anyone could make. Be nice, watch and wait patiently on the sidelines while the woman you pine after ploughs through as much alpha dick as humanly possible, only to settle for you, the ‘nice’ guy, in her later years.

Fuck that. Women do not respect ‘nice’ men…they settle for them, but they do not respect them.  Stop being nice from the get go (i.e. your first date) and she will respect you from the get go. Remember first impressions are everything. Want hard proof, how about this from The Times if Israel…

An Israeli-led research indicates it might not be a good idea to be “nice” on your first date. Women, on the other hand, appear to benefit from being nice.

For what it’s worth, the research indicates women are are looking for “man-like” behavior early in dating.

The research is not definitive. It points to tendencies among members of a specific group — university students — and the results are possible trends, not absolute predictors.

This is how it works. Women are attracted to men who are masculine (not cushy and sweet), and men are attracted to women that are nice and feminine. How about that!

In the small, limited series of studies, single men tended to prefer single women who were more responsive to their needs and wishes in an initial conversation, finding them more feminine. Many of the women, on the other hand, didn’t really care how responsive the men were.

The psychologists behind the study say women may be looking at behaviors other than responsiveness to determine men’s masculinity and fitness as partners. Or, they say, women may interpret men’s responsiveness in a range of gendered ways — to the extent that it’s even possible to generalize about the tendencies of either men or women.

The study actually shows that women do not give a crap about men who are responsive to their needs with regards to sexual desire. So men, slow down and don’t bend over backwards for the girl, especially on your first date. Men on the other hand are more sexually attracted to women who are responsive to their needs and feelings…textbook red pill as the study confirms:

Data analysis of the results [of the study] showed that on average, the men saw more responsive women as more feminine, which made them more sexually aroused, which in turn made them more attracted to and interested in dating the women. It’s not the most cerebral process.

The analysis showed that the women were on average only slightly less attracted to men who seemed more responsive. The women were more attracted to men they found masculine, but they hardly associated responsiveness with masculinity.

The data obviously goes against all the feminists dogma and Disney movie brainwashing we are feed from five years of age up to adulthood…so what gives? The answer is evolution…

The opposite-sex tendency to prefer “manly men” and “girly girls” may be rooted in evolution. Men may be looking for nice nurturers, while women may want proactive providers. But people may rely more than usual on traditional gender roles to cope with the uncertainty of early dating, the psychologists say. The man is still expected to ask the women out and to pay for the date, they note.

‘Men can be sexually appealing in various ways, which are not necessarily associated with expressions of intimacy, whereas women apparently have to be responsive to be appealing.’

It would make sense then that men seem to initially find responsiveness – which they see as a feminine – attractive in women. In some cases, men may also simply be attracted to the attention as a sign of sexual interest, the psychologists say. If so, women looking for long-term relationships should aim to be responsive in a way that is feminine, rather than available – whatever that would look like.

When it comes to women’s desires, the fact that responsiveness isn’t a turn-off on average doesn’t mean women are above gender-based judgments. Rather, the psychologists say, women may be attracted to other behaviors that they perceive as better indicating men’s masculinity and fitness as partners.

References:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/women-really-dont-go-for-nice-guys-study-indicates/

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
5 Comments

5
Leave a Reply

avatar
5 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
0 Comment authors
state farm car insurance paymentxfwmrt5gzngfw5wtrjfgxe85mrwfqdcm59x4ctxckw54mtdfsgw9j5nwmtxcmwnv54ec8tnv5cev5jfdcnv5ccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
trackback

ccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb

[…]one of our visitors recently encouraged the following website[…]

trackback

xcmwnv54ec8tnv5cev5jfdcnv5

[…]very few websites that come about to be detailed below, from our point of view are undoubtedly properly worth checking out[…]

trackback

Title

[…]Here are some of the web sites we suggest for our visitors[…]

trackback

Title

[…]one of our guests a short while ago suggested the following website[…]

trackback

Title

[…]one of our visitors recently recommended the following website[…]

Latest

James Woods Suspended From Twitter Over Satirical Meme That Could “Impact An Election”

James Woods crushes Jack Dorsey: “You are a coward, @Jack.”

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


Outspoken conservative actor James Woods was suspended from posting to Twitter over a two-month-old satirical meme which very clearly parodies a Democratic advertisement campaign. While the actor’s tweets are still visible, he is unable to post new content.

The offending tweet from July 20, features three millennial-aged men with “nu-male smiles” and text that reads “We’re making a Woman’s Vote Worth more by staying home.” Above it, Woods writes “Pretty scary that there is a distinct possibility this could be real. Not likely, but in this day and age of absolute liberal insanity, it is at least possible.”

According to screenshots provided by an associate of Woods’, Twitter directed the actor to delete the post on the grounds that it contained “text and imagery that has the potential to be misleading in a way that could impact an election.

In other words, James Woods, who has approximately 1.72 million followers, was suspended because liberals who don’t identify as women might actually take the meme seriously and not vote. 

In a statement released through associate Sara Miller, Woods said “You are a coward, @Jack,” referring to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. “There is no free speech for Conservatives on @Twitter.

Earlier this month, Woods opined on the mass-platform ban of Alex Jones, tweeting: ““I’ve never read Alex Jones nor watched any of his video presence on the internet. A friend told me he was an extremist. Believe me that I know nothing about him. That said, I think banning him from the internet is a slippery slope. This is the beginning of real fascism. Trust me.”

Nu-males everywhere non-threateningly smirk at Woods’ bad fortune…

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

This Man’s Incredible Story Proves Why Due Process Matters In The Kavanaugh Case

Accused of rape by a fellow student, Brian Banks accepted a plea deal and went to prison on his 18th birthday. Years later he was exonerated.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by James Miller of The Political Insider:


Somewhere between the creation of the Magna Carta and now, leftists have forgotten why due process matters; and in some cases, such as that of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, they choose to outright ignore the judicial and civil rights put in place by the U.S. Constitution.

In this age of social media justice mobs, the accused are often convicted in the court of (liberal) public opinion long before any substantial evidence emerges to warrant an investigation or trial. This is certainly true for Kavanaugh. His accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, cannot recall the date of the alleged assault and has no supporting witnesses, yet law professors are ready to ruin his entire life and career. Not because they genuinely believe he’s guilty, but because he’s a pro-life Trump nominee for the Supreme Court.

It goes without saying: to “sink Kavanaugh even if” Ford’s allegation is untrue is unethical, unconstitutional, and undemocratic. He has a right to due process, and before liberals sharpen their pitchforks any further they would do well to remember what happened to Brian Banks.

In the summer of 2002, Banks was a highly recruited 16-year-old linebacker at Polytechnic High School in California with plans to play football on a full scholarship to the University of Southern California. However, those plans were destroyed when Banks’s classmate, Wanetta Gibson, claimed that Banks had dragged her into a stairway at their high school and raped her.

Gibson’s claim was false, but it was Banks’s word against hers. Banks had two options: go to trial and risk spending 41 years-to-life in prison, or take a plea deal that included five years in prison, five years probation, and registering as a sex offender. Banks accepted the plea deal under the counsel of his lawyer, who told him that he stood no chance at trial because the all-white jury would “automatically assume” he was guilty because he was a “big, black teenager.”

Gibson and her mother subsequently sued the Long Beach Unified School District and won a $1.5 million settlement. It wasn’t until nearly a decade later, long after Banks’s promising football career had already been tanked, that Gibson admitted she’d fabricated the entire story.

Following Gibson’s confession, Banks was exonerated with the help of the California Innocence Project. Hopeful to get his life back on track, he played for Las Vegas Locomotives of the now-defunct United Football League in 2012 and signed with the Atlanta Falcons in 2013. But while Banks finally received justice, he will never get back the years or the prospective pro football career that Gibson selfishly stole from him.

Banks’ story is timely, and it serves as a powerful warning to anyone too eager to condemn those accused of sexual assault. In fact, a film about Banks’s ordeal, Brian Banks, is set to premiere at the Los Angeles Film Festival next week.

Perhaps all the #MeToo Hollywood elites and their liberal friends should attend the screening – and keep Kavanaugh in their minds as they watch.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

“Transphobic” Swedish Professor May Lose Job After Noting Biological Differences Between Sexes

A university professor in Sweden is under investigation after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded”

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


A university professor in Sweden is under investigation for “anti-feminism” and “transphobia” after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded” and that genders cannot be regarded as “social constructs alone,” reports Academic Rights Watch.

For his transgression, Germund Hesslow – a professor of neuroscience at Lund University – who holds dual PhDs in philosophy and neurophysiology, may lose his job – telling RT that a “full investigation” has been ordered, and that there “have been discussions about trying to stop the lecture or get rid of me, or have someone else give the lecture or not give the lecture at all.”

“If you answer such a question you are under severe time pressure, you have to be extremely brief — and I used wording which I think was completely innocuous, and that apparently the student didn’t,” Hesslow said.

Hesslow was ordered to attend a meeting by Christer Larsson, chairman of the program board for medical education, after a female student complained that Hesslow had a “personal anti-feminist agenda.” He was asked to distance himself from two specific comments; that gay women have a “male sexual orientation” and that the sexual orientation of transsexuals is “a matter of definition.”

The student’s complaint reads in part (translated):

I have also heard from senior lecturers that Germund Hesslow at the last lecture expressed himself transfobically. In response to a question of transexuallism, he said something like “sex change is a fly”. Secondly, it is outrageous because there may be students during the lecture who are themselves exposed to transfobin, but also because it may affect how later students in their professional lives meet transgender people. Transpersonals already have a high level of overrepresentation in suicide statistics and there are already major shortcomings in the treatment of transgender in care, should not it be countered? How does this kind of statement coincide with the university’s equal treatment plan? What has this statement given for consequences? What has been done for this to not be repeated? –Academic Rights Watch

After being admonished, Hesslow refused to distance himself from his comments, saying that he had “done enough” already and didn’t have to explain and defend his choice of words.

At some point, one must ask for a sense of proportion among those involved. If it were to become acceptable for students to record lectures in order to find compromising formulations and then involve faculty staff with meetings and long letters, we should let go of the medical education altogether,” Hesslow said in a written reply to Larsson.

He also rejected the accusation that he had a political agenda – stating that his only agenda was to let scientific factnot new social conventions, dictate how he teaches his courses.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending