Page 3 of 3
Posted: 2003-09-15 09:55pm
by Anarchist Bunny
Nova Andromeda wrote:LadyTevar wrote:Since I see nothing from one of the Sisterhood in this thread, let me state a woman's take on this guy:
He's fat, prolly ugly, and not worth a second look at, except as to point out to children as a bad example.
If I was JW, I'd 'poach off the range' before even considering anything remoltly romantic with this guy.
Man-boobs and fatty thighs... Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

--Somehow I doubt his looks are what prevents him from getting laid. I've seen (and known) plenty of men who do not look good and do far better than other men who do look good. As far as I can tell your game
skillz (or lack thereof) are the only things that will make or break a your chances for certain.
-Think about it this way. Which guy has a better chance with women:
Guy A: Nerd that likes to talk about fourier transforms and the latests encryption algorithms. Resembles a fish in clorine water during social gatherings. Happens to be smart, has average looks, would probably make a good parent (due to being responsible, smart, etc.), and make a decent income (isn't rich though).
Guy B: Ugly and over weight guy that is nevertheless good at chatting up women, making them feel comfortable, is funny, etc. Is the "life of the party." Wouldn't be as good a parent as Guy A due to being somewhat irresponsible and not terribly smart. Makes enough money to get by, but that is about it.
-In my experience Guy A has little to no chance with women while Guy B will do just fine.
Yeah, being Guy A(kinda, more on the fish in cholorine, I tend to keep my nerdiness to myself) sucks. Ofcourse my problem is that I have a tendancy to fuck up my chances before I realize they are there.
Posted: 2003-09-15 10:05pm
by Ghost Rider
Nova Andromeda wrote:
--Somehow I doubt his looks are what prevents him from getting laid. I've seen (and known) plenty of men who do not look good and do far better than other men who do look good. As far as I can tell your game skillz (or lack thereof) are the only things that will make or break a your chances for certain.
-Think about it this way. Which guy has a better chance with women:
Guy A: Nerd that likes to talk about fourier transforms and the latests encryption algorithms. Resembles a fish in clorine water during social gatherings. Happens to be smart, has average looks, would probably make a good parent (due to being responsible, smart, etc.), and make a decent income (isn't rich though).
Guy B: Ugly and over weight guy that is nevertheless good at chatting up women, making them feel comfortable, is funny, etc. Is the "life of the party." Wouldn't be as good a parent as Guy A due to being somewhat irresponsible and not terribly smart. Makes enough money to get by, but that is about it.
-In my experience Guy A has little to no chance with women while Guy B will do just fine.
That's because spouting off algorithms does very little in any sort of social enviroment...even with women who understand them. And gee if you talk about algorithms and fourier transforms but has no social skills how is the woman supposed to know guy A makes a decent income and could make a good parent?
Telepathy?
Basically you're comparing uber nerd to an average guy who can socialize...gee I wonder which the woman is going to pick
And AB...it's not bad not getting chances you just have to recognize them better. College improves chances better then High School in terms of socializing with the fairer sex.
Posted: 2003-09-15 10:16pm
by aerius
Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:Not to go off-topic, but I haven`t met very many women who weren`t at least a little religious. Is this a general trend, or is it just me?
Seems to be a general trend from what I've seen. Most chicks in my university are religiously inclined in some way, and at my Canada Customs job I was surrounded by religious fundies. This is also the experience of most of my friends, in that most of the chicks they know are more or less into religion.
Posted: 2003-09-15 10:19pm
by Darth Wong
LadyTevar wrote:Enigma wrote:It might work if he lost considerable weight and visited other congregations. That is unless he's butt ugly to begin with.
That's the general idea I'm getting from Wong. The guy's ugly and has a bad personality to match.
It gets worse, believe it or not. He is incredibly critical of womens' appearance, and when his father tried to set him up on a date once, he saw the girl and turned her down flat because she was overweight (yes, I know, the hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife). As I said, it's sad that his life is going nowhere, but you can only muster so much pity when you know that everything is his own damned fault.
By the way, he also insists that a woman must recognize the man as her superior and head of the household or she must be an arrogant godless harpy and he won't want to talk to her.
It's almost as if he's deliberately trying to stack the deck against himself.
Posted: 2003-09-15 10:20pm
by Darth Wong
aerius wrote:Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:Not to go off-topic, but I haven`t met very many women who weren`t at least a little religious. Is this a general trend, or is it just me?
Seems to be a general trend from what I've seen. Most chicks in my university are religiously inclined in some way, and at my Canada Customs job I was surrounded by religious fundies. This is also the experience of most of my friends, in that most of the chicks they know are more or less into religion.
Women tend to be more emotional, men tend to be more analytical. That probably has something to do with it.
Posted: 2003-09-15 10:22pm
by Nova Andromeda
Ghost Rider wrote:Nova Andromeda wrote:
--Somehow I doubt his looks are what prevents him from getting laid. I've seen (and known) plenty of men who do not look good and do far better than other men who do look good. As far as I can tell your game skillz (or lack thereof) are the only things that will make or break a your chances for certain.
-Think about it this way. Which guy has a better chance with women:
Guy A: Nerd that likes to talk about fourier transforms and the latests encryption algorithms. Resembles a fish in clorine water during social gatherings. Happens to be smart, has average looks, would probably make a good parent (due to being responsible, smart, etc.), and make a decent income (isn't rich though).
Guy B: Ugly and over weight guy that is nevertheless good at chatting up women, making them feel comfortable, is funny, etc. Is the "life of the party." Wouldn't be as good a parent as Guy A due to being somewhat irresponsible and not terribly smart. Makes enough money to get by, but that is about it.
-In my experience Guy A has little to no chance with women while Guy B will do just fine.
That's because spouting off algorithms does very little in any sort of social enviroment...even with women who understand them. And gee if you talk about algorithms and fourier transforms but has no social skills how is the woman supposed to know guy A makes a decent income and could make a good parent?
Telepathy?
Basically you're comparing uber nerd to an average guy who can socialize...gee I wonder which the woman is going to pick
And AB...it's not bad not getting chances you just have to recognize them better. College improves chances better then High School in terms of socializing with the fairer sex.
--The woman can get whatever info. she wants from the nerd by asking (nerds are very forcoming you know). The problem is the nerb wouldn't approach her, she wouldn't even give him the time of day if he did, and even if she did he wouldn't have a clue on how to progress the conversation beyond what he knows (i.e., fourier transforms, etc.) or read all the clues she's sending (which must be properly responded too to get anywhere).
-Basically, you seem to agree that a nerd stands a far worse chance than an ugly guy.
Posted: 2003-09-15 10:25pm
by Frank Hipper
Darth Wong wrote:It's almost as if he's deliberately trying to stack the deck against himself.
Slow suicide.
He hates himself.
He hates others.
He uses "self improvement" as an excuse to aggravate his weight problem, fueling the fire of his self loathing.
I'd lay you odds that he's aware of all this, and is beyond giving a fuck.
Very sad.

Posted: 2003-09-15 11:30pm
by Nova Andromeda
Frank Hipper wrote:Darth Wong wrote:It's almost as if he's deliberately trying to stack the deck against himself.
Slow suicide.
He hates himself.
He hates others.
He uses "self improvement" as an excuse to aggravate his weight problem, fueling the fire of his self loathing.
I'd lay you odds that he's aware of all this, and is beyond giving a fuck.
Very sad.

--An interesting question is what to do with such people. They are probably a danger to society and should probably not be left to their own devices.
Posted: 2003-09-15 11:33pm
by Illuminatus Primus
I don't know about that actually. I know quite a few deist, agnostic, and atheist girls.
Posted: 2003-09-15 11:36pm
by Frank Hipper
Nova Andromeda wrote:Frank Hipper wrote:Darth Wong wrote:It's almost as if he's deliberately trying to stack the deck against himself.
Slow suicide.
He hates himself.
He hates others.
He uses "self improvement" as an excuse to aggravate his weight problem, fueling the fire of his self loathing.
I'd lay you odds that he's aware of all this, and is beyond giving a fuck.
Very sad.

--An interesting question is what to do with such people. They are probably a danger to society and should probably not be left to their own devices.
Considering that they probably make up a large proportion of society, let 'em be, I suppose.
I'm no Hemlock Society member, but if someone is doing
themselves, and only themselves harm, what is there to do about it?
Can it really be proven would be a better question. If they argue ignorance, how can you refute it? Stupidity is rife, after all.

Posted: 2003-09-16 01:17am
by aronkerkhof
Nova Andromeda wrote:
--An interesting question is what to do with such people. They are probably a danger to society and should probably not be left to their own devices.
Whew! For a moment I thought you were talking about the comments RE: women being emotional.

Posted: 2003-09-16 03:09am
by UltraViolence83
Eggs? Mayonaise? Potatos? Milk? Excluding milk, sounds like a normal potato salad. Only liquified. And blended. And drunken.
*Projectile vomits*
Posted: 2003-09-16 01:46pm
by Arthur_Tuxedo
Darth Wong wrote:aerius wrote:Seems to be a general trend from what I've seen. Most chicks in my university are religiously inclined in some way, and at my Canada Customs job I was surrounded by religious fundies. This is also the experience of most of my friends, in that most of the chicks they know are more or less into religion.
Women tend to be more emotional, men tend to be more analytical. That probably has something to do with it.
Now I´m
really gonna go out on a limb here and try and tie this into an evolutionary context. We know that for until very recently in an evolutionary sense, humans were hunter-gatherer-scavengers, and that generally the men would go out, often for long periods of time to find sustenance while the women generally stayed back and created and enforced a social structure. This is the explanation I´m familiar with for why women tend to communicate more than men and be less interested in politics and more interested in local affairs, and maybe it explains the greater religious tendencies as well. After all, for early humans it is hard to imagine a better tool than religion to keep things (people) in line, and as the women generally stayed back and administrated things, too many women who did not readily accept religion would cause chaos and disorder, and they would be unable to pass on their genes. This would be less important for the men, for whom much time was spent in an dangerous and hostile environment and being ousted from the group would surely mean death, and this should be enough to keep order without as great a need for religion.
I´m not stating any of this as fact, nor do I have a degree in evolutionary studies (though I do have a small amount of formal training), but it´s an enticing puzzle that I would love to be able to figure out.
Posted: 2003-09-16 03:19pm
by Utsanomiko
I would go out on a limb and suggest it's due to differences between the ways men and women have been usually raised in society, but that's just me.
*Goes back to not watching sports*

Posted: 2003-09-16 04:47pm
by LadyTevar
Darth Wong wrote:
It gets worse, believe it or not. He is incredibly critical of womens' appearance, and when his father tried to set him up on a date once, he saw the girl and turned her down flat because she was overweight (yes, I know, the hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife). As I said, it's sad that his life is going nowhere, but you can only muster so much pity when you know that everything is his own damned fault.
By the way, he also insists that a woman must recognize the man as her superior and head of the household or she must be an arrogant godless harpy and he won't want to talk to her.
It's almost as if he's deliberately trying to stack the deck against himself.
............ Darwin at work.
Posted: 2003-09-16 07:16pm
by The Dark
Darth Wong wrote:
It gets worse, believe it or not. He is incredibly critical of womens' appearance, and when his father tried to set him up on a date once, he saw the girl and turned her down flat because she was overweight (yes, I know, the hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife). As I said, it's sad that his life is going nowhere, but you can only muster so much pity when you know that everything is his own damned fault.
By the way, he also insists that a woman must recognize the man as her superior and head of the household or she must be an arrogant godless harpy and he won't want to talk to her.
It's almost as if he's deliberately trying to stack the deck against himself.

...um...wow. Yeesh. This guy sounds like a real winner

. Of course, the JWs do tend to be a more conservative congregation, so that "head of the household" thing doesn't really surprise me (that much...). I still don't understand how people can hold such a view in this day and age. I'm going to have to agree with the general consensus around here: unless he changes his attitudes (looks aren't as important), he will have removed his genes from the gene pool through lack of relationship.
Posted: 2003-09-16 07:18pm
by Enigma
Darth Wong wrote:LadyTevar wrote:Enigma wrote:It might work if he lost considerable weight and visited other congregations. That is unless he's butt ugly to begin with.
That's the general idea I'm getting from Wong. The guy's ugly and has a bad personality to match.
It gets worse, believe it or not. He is incredibly critical of womens' appearance, and when his father tried to set him up on a date once, he saw the girl and turned her down flat because she was overweight (yes, I know, the hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife). As I said, it's sad that his life is going nowhere, but you can only muster so much pity when you know that everything is his own damned fault.
By the way, he also insists that a woman must recognize the man as her superior and head of the household or she must be an arrogant godless harpy and he won't want to talk to her.
It's almost as if he's deliberately trying to stack the deck against himself.
Get a frying pan quick! He needs readjustment!

Posted: 2003-09-16 08:10pm
by Admiral Valdemar
I'd gather it's because this orifice is larger than this orifice.
And the guy has the audacity to become a critic of other people's physiques.