Don't trust what women have to say in regards to relationships

NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
edited June 2011 in Life
You should never listen to women about what they want, they either don't really know or are completely dishonest about it, I'm going for a mixture of the two. Women actually like "bad boys" but claim that they don't.
Manginas befriend girls because they want to be with them and girls befriend them because they don't want to be with them. This is true 9 times out of 10.

Manginas/feminist indoctrinated males fall for a girl only for her to completely discount them because of their "friendship." I know many people who have been there and constantly see it on Q&A forums and relationship advice columns, as well as on this forum. Even myself, when I was 13 I did the whole befriend girls and then get with them later on, it didn't work unless there was copious amounts of alcohol available.

There's an easy solution to the friendzone, it's called alcohol, or simply not being friends with females. Females are boring at the best of times, they're even worse as friends. Women use male friends to make their partners jealous and thus raise the costs of sex, in order for the partner to keep her interested.

Now we have that cleared up, this thread was made in reply to hooloovoo and some other bitch in another thread on zoklet. This thread is to present empirical evidence that women actually like "bad boys" but claim that they don't.

McDaniel (2005) and Urbaniak (2006) show that women claim to want a "nice guy", yet are searching for a personality type that is quite the contrary.

McDaniel (Young women's dating behavior: Why/Why not date a nice guy?, 2005) writes:
A common refrain among men is the observation that women do not like (or more appropriately, do not want to date) nice guys. Popular cultural texts that range from Kuriansky's (1996) The Complete Idiot's Guide to Dating to Internet articles such as's "The Myth of the Nice Guy" (Guy in a Trenchcoat, 2002) suggest that [highlight]women claim they want a "nice guy" because they believe that that is what is expected of them when, in reality, they want the so-called "challenge" that comes with dating a not-so-nice guy.[.highlight] Scholarly texts seem to echo this general claim, as does the opinion of the anonymous man.

The gentle, compassionate man who reads magazine surveys indicating that his qualities are the very ones that most women prefer in a mate may be the same man who is repeatedly turned down by women who seek the company of more atavistic males ... [highlight]Women go for heroes while saying they want vulnerability and later try to persuade their partners to become more sensitive and vulnerable, rather than initially pursuing sensitive and vulnerable men (Desrochers, 1995, p. 376).[/highlight]

However, when women are asked about the subject, [highlight]they almost always claim to desire a nice guy ... so long as he is not too nice (Gray, 1997).[/highlight]

MacDaniel's study confirms with considerable evidence that women prefer "bad boys."

Urbaniak and Kilman (Niceness and dating success: a further test of the nice guy stereotype, 2006):
The nice guy stereotype asserts that women in today's society display contradictory attitudes and behaviors regarding whom they choose as dating partners. At least [highlight]since the rise of the second wave of feminism, many women have expressed a desire to date kind, sensitive, and emotionally expressive men, rather than more traditionally masculine, distant, and insensitive "macho men" (or, more pejoratively, "jerks.") Despite this stated preference, however, proponents of the nice guy stereotype argue that, in reality, women still choose to date macho men over nice guys, especially if the macho men are more physically attractive.[/highlight] The nice guys are, subsequently, either outright rejected or relegated to the category of "just friends." The stereotype even transcends the notion of "looks versus niceness" by suggesting that [highlight]if a man is "too nice," a woman will reject him, regardless of physical appearance, in favor of a more macho man who treats her with less respect (e.g., Hollandsworth, 1994; Iverson, 1994; Muller, 2002; Virtual Voyage, 1999).[/highlight]

Urbaniak and Kilman have shown in this 2006 study that women prefer “bad boys” or “jerks” for both short term, casual dating and long term, committed relationships, directly contradicting the findings of Herold & Milhausen (1999), as well as their own 2003 research, which suggested “nice guys” would be preferred for longer, more stable relationships.

The "nice guy" construct can be defined as a potential male sex partner who is cooperative, kind, placid, generous and sympathetic. It is with great interest that I present the 1995 study of Jensen-Campbell et al (Dominance, prosocial orientation, and female preferences: Do nice guys really finish last?), where this nice guy was operationalized; more recent investigators found that he was rejected [highlight]every time[/highlight] as a prospective date or marriage partner. “Nice guys” were typically seen by women as being socially undesirable, sexually unattractive, and were frequently ignored by women who were actively searching for sex/marriage partners. [highlight]It found that both male dominance and having a prosocial behavioural orientation (“being nice”) were highly correlated with female heterosexual attraction.[/highlight] The authors write that:
[highlight]Across all measures attraction was an interactive function of dominance and prosocial tendencies. Dominance alone did not increase any form of attraction measured.[/highlight]

Its diametrical opposite, the “bad boy” construct, has been successfully operationalized by Jonason et al (2008) as the “dark triad” cluster of personality characteristics.

Preferences in human mate selection (Buss & Barnes, 1986) revealed that kindness and understanding were the two most desired traits in a sex partner. Writing of sexual dimorphism in terms of mate selection preferences, Buss and Barnes observe that:
[highlight]In relation to men, the women in this sample tended to prefer the following spouse characteristics: considerate, honest, dependable, kind, understanding, fond of children, well-liked by others, good earning capacity, ambitious and career-oriented, good family background, and tall...[/highlight]

[highlight]Keep in mind, these results were only obtained based on self-reportage rather than empirical observation of actual female socio-sexual action.[/highlight] The saying "actions speak louder than words" have never been more truthful.

Urbaniak and Kilman (2003, 2006), suggest that when multiple regression and factor analysis of questionnaire results are substituted for actual observation of female behavioural response, women will more often than not choose the most aggressive, physically dominant, and least agreeable male available for reproductive access, because the principles which underlie female self-reportage conflict with the well-established empirical finding in other studies that there is a clash between what women say they want and what they actually do want and choose. Thus, we learn that actions are not highly related to self-reporting. Sprecher's (1989) experiment is a good example of that. [highlight]Expressiveness was said to be the most important characteristic, but it was in actual fact physical attractiveness that was the most important factor behaviorally.[/highlight]

In a study by Wiederman and Dubois (1998) the same phenomenon was found amongst the women, [highlight]however the males were straight forward and accurately noted physical attractiveness as the most important characteristic towards finding a suitable partner. Women on the other hand rated desired level of relationship commitment as the most important factor that influenced their mate selection, but it was one of the least important factors behaviorally.[/highlight]

Here's the truth about women, as I've said in other threads on here but will repeat.
Women do enjoy sex as much if not more than men. If you think they don't you're not doing it right.

What is it with you morons pandering to feminist lies?
As if we didn't already know enough about the frigidity of women.

As if we needed a study to tell us the obvious. According to Baumeister et. al. (2001), women have much lower sex drives than men:
The sex drive refers to the strength of sexual motivation. Across many different studies and measures, men have been shown to have more frequent and more intense sexual desires than women, as reflected in spontaneous thoughts about sex, frequency and variety of sexual fantasies, desired frequency of intercourse, desired number of partners, masturbation, liking for various sexual practices, willingness to forego sex, initiating versus refusing sex, making sacrifices for sex, and other measures. No contrary findings (indicating stronger sexual motivation among women) were found. Hence we conclude that the male sex drive is stronger than the female sex drive. The gender difference in sex drive should not be generalized to other constructs such as sexual or orgasmic capacity, enjoyment of sex, or extrinsically motivated sex.

Women do not like sex, it is just means to an end, with men sex is the end itself. They only have sex if there is something in it for them in terms of social status, economics, power, their own self-esteem and any other reason other than having sex as a way of gaining pleasure. I posted in various threads the study which shows that a woman's orgasm is correlated to the size of a man's wallet. The reason rape is also not acceptable is because women do not enjoy sex, certainly not as much as men and I'd go as far as to say not at all. All women are frigid cunts. Women like misery, pain and suffering; this is why they like "tough guys", deep down. I've made multiple posts detailing the socio-economic use of the cunt, which females use it for.

Good alternatives to sex are drugs such as alcohol, marijuana, cocaine and especially heroin. These drugs stimulate the pleasure centres. It is no coincidence most substance abuse is by males because we are predominantly pleasure-seekers. Rigorous exercise, extreme sports and heavy duty and a devotion to completing important work to success (more fun on cocaine/methamphetamine) are also forms of pleasure seeking.

Males are basically pleasure-seekers. The primary sexual activity of the male is copulating. A major group of male sex substitutes satisfy the male's pleasure-seeking instincts. Males substitute for sex anything which builds up to a climax and is then resolved.

The error being committed in this thread is a very old one; it is a fundamental confusion as to the distinction between having an extrinsic drive versus an intrinsic drive for sexual gratification. This is the same error committed by the Roman author Juvenal who, in his Satires, assumes that women are more lustful than men based on the deeds of a few prostitutes, which as I said earlier is done for economic reasons.

Women are motivated to seek out sexual intercourse of course; but they will only have sex in exchange for things economically, such as fast cars, big houses, and cold hard cash, or power in the form of males with huge muscles, high levels of testosterone, and a penchant for violent criminality. Although women like and go with effeminate guys because they are more faithful, however what they have is not what they want, they will cheat on these effeminate men regularly and walk all over them until they get a man they want. As long as the female is receiving something in exchange for her sexual activity, she will enjoy sex immensely and often cannot do without (as I explained with the orgasm relating to the size of your wallet earlier); hence, the female enjoyment of sex is really the pleasure of receiving; it is the pleasure of being treated with economic resources.

Men, on the other hand, are intrinsically motivated to seek out sexual intercourse; the male simply enjoys sex because of an innate biological impulse determined by the relative concentration of testosterone within the bloodstream. The fact that a substantial percentage of men will sleep with anything that breathes and moves and resembles a human female (this can be seen by the majority of males on zoklet fawning after just pictures of the females to jerk to- a mighty fine pathetic example can be seen throughout this entire LLR board, the picture thread and the my tits are good thread), which automatically means that all women, regardless of appearance or behaviour, are attractive to some large segment of the male population.

The man needs nothing in exchange for sex, the woman on the other hand does not. No woman has sex for nothing, without being offered money or power in exchange for sex, sex is pointless to the female. This is what I mean when I say that all women are frigid creatures who hate sex.

Here are some interesting reads;

The vast majority of women have virtually no interest in such things as masturbating to pornography, hiring male prostitutes for fun, picking up random men for sexual intercourse, being sexually aroused by fetishes or paraphilias, or even something as simple as merely fantasizing about sex. The only time women explore their sexuality is when they are being paid to do so, such as being offered a fast car, place to stay or money and presents in exchange for their efforts.

Read that. Much of Glenn Wilson's research is interesting and competent about sex differences and sexuality. Just tells it how it is.
Search by speaker > Glenn D Wilson

I've just come to the realization that there's much better things to do and get done than being hanged by the balls with your life revolving around pleasing a woman, society is becoming severely feminized and to the point where the woman has so much self-importance it's unhealthy. It's no coincidence that any man who ever made a difference and the finest thinkers of the past were misogynists. They had better ways to spend their time.

Here's a good excerpt from a piece by Simon Sheppard, it sums up my post much quicker and in simpler terms:
Next, it is suggested that "There are women, who marry and settle down, have children and make a wonderful home, bring up our children to be decent respectable members of society" etc. The point here is that the woman, if she does it at all, is doing it for her own benefit. Suppose she is dutifully ironing her husband's shirts. In doing so she is gratifying herself by satisfying her instinct to mark her husband. True, the husband gets his shirts ironed, but in seeking to understand the underlying mechanisms we should not deceive ourselves that it is being done for his benefit. (This threatens to open a can of worms on the subject of altruism, and a discussion of whether true altruism exists or not, which I shall avoid.) Similarly when a woman makes a cosy nest of a family home – the husband's enjoyment of it is almost incidental. We can see this when an increasingly "female friendly" society, using male technology, allows the female to have almost all of the benefits without a "troublesome man" around who would formerly have been needed to pay for it all. Now, in an increasing number of cases, she simply does without him.

All "good" features of women – besides the obvious biological ones, of furthering the race – are either the result of masculine influence or the expression of masculine traits (just as many males express feminine characteristics). I have yet to find an exception to this rule.


  • familyguyfamilyguy Acolyte
    edited June 2011
    I agree with almost everything except the part about women not liking sex. I can see the point your trying to make, but it's still bullshit. Women do like sex. Women also masturbate. They have needs just like we do. I suppose you also do not believe in women having orgasms. :rolleyes:
Sign In or Register to comment.