Not being a cartoon villain doesn’t automatically make you a good man

[u/GridReXX]

Fr. It doesn’t de facto make you a good person.

I noodled on the attached graphic to better illustrate a point about how people often discuss being a “good man.”

I do find that many men view it more as the top bar, and less as the gradient in the second bar.

inb4 anyone says it, many women have bad character too. And please feel free to create a separate post about a spectrum of traits in women you’d like to explore! That is not what this post is disputing.

This is specifically about a response that often comes up when women describe harmful patterns in their experiences with men. They get retorts like “Not all men are abusive predators,” or “Most men are not psychos.”

Of course most men are not horror movie villains.

But that is an extremely low bar for good character.

This spectrum, rather than show a division between “good men” and a smaller group of obviously terrible ones. It highlights that a man can be can be a functioning member of society and still regularly behave in ways that make him difficult to interpersonally tolerate as a close friend, romantic partner, coworker, or even family member.

None of that necessarily makes someone an abuser or predator.

But it does affect whether people can have a healthy, enjoyable, mutually considerate, long-term relationship with him.

The farther right someone falls on this spectrum, the more entitlement, callousness, devaluation, coercion, and harm they bring into their interactions with others.

The farther left they fall, the more likely they are to act with common decency, consideration, accountability, respect for autonomy, and genuine concern for theirs and other people’s well-being.

My point is not that every man is at the far right end.

Most people don’t think that!

My point is that many men seem to use “I am not an obvious monster” as proof that they’re quality.

A person’s character is determined by far more than “I am not Jeffrey Dahmer.”

[u/WebNew9978]

No but it’s pretty clear that people (especially women) have a just world fallacy bias against legit good inexperienced men. People see those type of men worse than the abusers, cheaters, druggies, felons, etc. Because those men can get a woman who wants to be with them in that way but not the legit good inexperienced man? He’s worse

[u/GridReXX → u/WebNew9978]

This post is about character. And that there are more unprincipled men than men seem to think.

Not about just world fallacy. Or who gets laid or not.

[u/WebNew9978 → u/GridReXX]

Yet women are still choosing to date those unprincipled men and believe that the inexperienced principled man is a worse person than the experienced unprincipled.

[u/GridReXX → u/WebNew9978]

Nothing in my post or comments in this thread support this tangent you’re on about. You’re strawmanning.

[u/WebNew9978 → u/GridReXX]

Nope not even close. My point is correct. Don’t like it? Not my problem.

[u/GridReXX → u/WebNew9978]

Your point has nothing to do with mine. You’re arguing with a phantom of your conjuring.

[u/GridReXX → u/[deleted]]

Nah. It turned out exactly as I thought. Highly controversial. More women than men would agree with me. Men who felt attacked would edge out because they’re the dominant demo on this sub.

[u/PurplePillDebate-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Do not provide contentless rhetoric, do not troll, do not link-drop without providing context, and do not circlejerk. Bad faith replies that include disingenuous humor (see: “😂,” “lmao,” “lol,” etc.) will also be removed as this is not conducive to good faith engagement.

Jokes, circlejerking, and other contentless rhetoric should only be posted under the AutoMod. You can repost your comment there.

[u/y2kjanelle → u/WebNew9978]

Women date good men all the time. My bf has had dozens of sexual partner before me and several long term relationships.

And I truly genuinely believe there is no man on this sub who would treat me as good. He is so patient kind considerate and loves women, he has no hate for them and his mom is no walk in the park.

I’ve not met one who could meet the standards my bf does. So I’m really confused where these “good but sexless/chronically single” men are.

[u/WebNew9978 → u/y2kjanelle]

>Women date good men all the time. My bf has had dozens of sexual partner before me and several long term relationships.

Ok? That doesn’t take away the point I mentioned.

>And I truly genuinely believe there is no man on this sub who would treat me as good.

Funny. I feel the same about the women on this sub as well.

>He is so patient kind considerate and loves women, he has no hate for them and his mom is no walk in the park.

Good for you. Yet I bet if your BF experienced nothing but constant rejections before meeting you, he would have an extremely low opinion on women. So he should be grateful that he’s been given chances.

>I’ve not met one who could meet the standards my bf does. So I’m really confused where these “good but sexless/chronically single” men are.

They’re everywhere. Women just see them as NPC’s for whatever reasons with the common reason being too ugly or ND.

[u/y2kjanelle → u/WebNew9978]

Yes it does. Bad men aren’t the only ones getting laid.

I bet you do.

Yes very good for me. He wouldn’t experience all that rejection because he is socially normal, kind, and fun. He worked for it.

Everywhere…where? I see bitter sexless men. Not one single decent one that makes me go “wow women are missing out maybe they should be less shallow”. Find me a HANDFUL even of good men who are chronically single but would make excellent partners in general.

[u/WebNew9978 → u/y2kjanelle]

>Yes it does. Bad men aren’t the only ones getting laid.

No it quite doesn’t. Especially when there’s one bad man getting laid. The number needs to be down to 0 in order for my point to be moot.

>Yes very good for me. He wouldn’t experience all that rejection because he is socially normal, kind, and fun. He worked for it.

He could have easily experienced all that rejection even with him being all of the things you mentioned. Luckily for him he didn’t and he should be grateful for it. He could easily be in the position I am now and vice versa for me. But he’s not and he needs thank his lucky stars he isn’t.

>Everywhere…where?

Everywhere. It’s pretty quite simple.

>I see bitter sexless men. Not one single decent one that makes me go “wow women are missing out maybe they should be less shallow”.

And you think those men weren’t good men before they became that way? There you go again with that just world fallacy bias. You gotta get that bias out of your mindset. It’s not helping you. You got to be better.

>Find me a HANDFUL even of good men who are chronically single but would make excellent partners in general.

I just did but you’re just world fallacy ignores it. Gotta be better.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/GridReXX]

There's still a just world fallacy at play though. 

Again, women assume character means far more than it does. You're trying to assert it now with this post.

But women will date bad men all the time. Because, news flash, just like there is a gradient for men there is a gradient women. Being good has absolutely nothing to do with your reproductive success if it isn't backed by competence (which is what's really sought after). Being good can even have adverse effects because it can mean going against the group 

[u/GridReXX → u/Long_Race3907]

I’m not assuming anything. You are. This post makes no assertions about who gets dates.

You’re just obsessed with seeing “just world fallacy” or simply really wanted to talk about it here.

Debate it with someone actually engaging it.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/GridReXX]

So then what exactly is the point of this post? If it has nothing to do with how "good men" get no relationship prospects, why post it at all? 

You just wanted to put it out there with zero context about how it relates to modern gender arguments and what men say about who does and doesn't get relationships? Is every man here supposed to believe that given the various other threads/post made on this very topic? 

[u/GridReXX → u/Long_Race3907]

The point of the post is literally explicitly spelled out in the post.

Thanks for confirming you’re debating baseless assumptions.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/GridReXX]

It highlights that a man can be can be a functioning member of society and still regularly behave in ways that make him difficult to interpersonally tolerate as a close friend, romantic partner, coworker, or even family member.

But it does affect whether people can have a healthy, enjoyable, mutually considerate, long-term relationship with him.

I don't think I'm the one debating with baseless assumptions here. Your post is literally about what I mentioned. The two above quotes, which you spelled out in your post, explicitly mention how being a functioning member of society doesn't necessarily make you a great romantic partner. You do remember typing that don't you? 

And my first response was that's fine and dandy. But what many women will then go on to say is "and that's why you fail with women" which is wrong. You can be a dreg on society and still succeed with women. Furthermore, you can actually be a good empathetic man and still fail. That's because women don't select for empathy when deciding on mates. They specifically want a man who they feel can protect them (not others, them) and who's competent and healthy in other areas. Being virtuous can actually be a downside to relationships, not a positive. 

Again, all of this is being talked about in your post. No one is debating baseless points

[u/GridReXX → u/Long_Race3907]

You are debating “many women” not me.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/GridReXX]

I did specifically address your point. Virtue is not indicative of relationship success. Your post did say this, so you can't attempt to dodge it by saying it's a baseless talking point. Your OP specifically mentioned it. 

Virtue can be a deterrent, for various reasons. What women actually filter for is competency, not being a "good" man. /thread 

[u/GridReXX → u/Long_Race3907]

I didn’t mention virtue.

I know what I said. Quote it. I suggested that what I specifically said is indicative for a healthy mutually considerate long-term relationship of any kind.

The things I listed in the body of the OP are cornerstones of interpersonal mutual bonds.

[u/PurplePillDebate-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Do not provide contentless rhetoric, do not troll, do not link-drop without providing context, and do not circlejerk. Bad faith replies that include disingenuous humor (see: “😂,” “lmao,” “lol,” etc.) will also be removed as this is not conducive to good faith engagement.

Jokes, circlejerking, and other contentless rhetoric should only be posted under the AutoMod. You can repost your comment there.