1325: "Rejection"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

Soultaker~
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 11:06 pm UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Soultaker~ » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:19 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:What the comic is saying is that people who say B are automatically A. This does *not* imply that everyone in C is A, nor does it make the comic indirectly about C as a whole.

Ok, I see what you are saying. I disagree that people who say B are automatically A, but I agree with your interpretation that that is what the comic implies.

To be clear: I never said that the comic implies that everyone in C is A. I mentioned C as a group of people that might reasonably say B even though they are not A, to refute the point that everyone who says B is A. That's why I think the comic is generalizing unfairly.

Maybe a certain level of generalization is necessary for a three-panel comic to make any kind of point at all. But the fact that these comics only seem to pop up to criticize loser men (which is a relatively “safe” group of people to make fun of) still leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby addams » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:21 am UTC

Kit. wrote:
drazen wrote:Whatever you call it, I am arguing that it is generally unhealthy and unproductive to remain close friends with someone to whom you are strongly romantically attracted. It clouds your judgment and makes you feel lousy, so my answer to that was always "Get away from the situation."

Is it possible for you to work as a team with a romantically-attractive colleague?

Good Question.

Pop culture.
Don't you want your friends to be happy.

It sometimes hurts.
What are friends for, after all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8vzL9Xdm_o
If you are not friends first; how will you be friends second?

Maybe, I don't understand the conversation.
Damn it! This one is completely over my head!

I don't know what the Comic is about!
Its a Moral Lesson?
Don't talk to people that are walking away?

ok. That makes sense.

Noted.
Don't talk to people that walk away.

That makes sense.
People keep talking.

That is stupid.
Don't do that.

When a person walks away; Let them.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:23 am UTC

The thing I've always wondered is why people seem to give such an incredible shit what "nice guys" say in the first place. It's nothing more than guys unable to get dates venting about it. Who does this hurt exactly? Why is it so important that they not make generalizations about women in a moment of frustration? If a woman who's at a frustrating point in her romantic life makes a generalized vent about men, hardly anyone would bat an eye. But when frustrated men do it, it's some incredible faux pas, and probably sexist to boot. What?

This honestly doesn't seem like anything more than a sanctimonious way of picking on men who aren't getting laid.

The Mighty Thesaurus
In your library, eating your students
Posts: 4399
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:47 am UTC
Location: The Daily Bugle

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby The Mighty Thesaurus » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:37 am UTC

Soultaker~ wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:What rule is suggested by the comic, apart from that women don't want "guys who respond to rejection by belittling their judgment and self-awareness"?

The comic is frustrating exactly because it implies that people who realize that being nice does not automatically make you attractive (which I think is true) are implicitly “belittling the judgement and self-awareness of women” (which I think doesn't follow at all).

Do you even read, bro?
Karilyn wrote:I'm already in a relationship

I'm probably too distant to be a good girlfriend, anyway.
adavies42 wrote:So, um, how about we substitute “lonely” for “desperate” and “sad” for “angry”, and try to have a little compassion?

My friend Charlie was compassionate, and now he's dead. Or in Wisconsin. Either way, he'll always be dead to me.
LE4dGOLEM wrote:your ability to tell things from things remains one of your skills.
Weeks wrote:Not only can you tell things from things, you can recognize when a thing is a thing

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

Ilyak1986
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 6:33 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Ilyak1986 » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:37 am UTC

No.

What women want is someone they're attracted to and someone who can provide them "financial security".

AKA look at Tom Brady.

Looks? Check.
Money? Check.

So if you lost the genetic lottery and are stuck in a dead-end job, no girl should want you.

Survival of the fittest and all.

The Mighty Thesaurus
In your library, eating your students
Posts: 4399
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:47 am UTC
Location: The Daily Bugle

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby The Mighty Thesaurus » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:55 am UTC

Ilyak1986 wrote:What women want is someone they're attracted to and someone who can provide them "financial security".

That's odd, your username says 1986, but your post quite clearly says 1956. I'm totally flummoxed.
LE4dGOLEM wrote:your ability to tell things from things remains one of your skills.
Weeks wrote:Not only can you tell things from things, you can recognize when a thing is a thing

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby addams » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:59 am UTC

Ilyak1986 wrote:No.

So if you lost the genetic lottery and are stuck in a dead-end job, no girl should want you.

Survival of the fittest and all.


And; That is why a person should cultivate friendships;
No matter how attractive and delightful your friends happen to be.

Attractive friends make us look better.
Some people instinctively know this.

That is why some people look at their friends before going anywhere with them.
You can tell a friend they are not dressed correctly. You can't say that to a date?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:05 am UTC

Ilyak1986 wrote:No.

What women want is someone they're attracted to and someone who can provide them "financial security".

AKA look at Tom Brady.

Looks? Check.
Money? Check.

So if you lost the genetic lottery and are stuck in a dead-end job, no girl should want you.

Survival of the fittest and all.


In my experience, very few people are that shallow. Well, few people I associate with in any meaningful way, anyway.

"Survival of the fittest" is a factor in how choices about desirability are made, but it isn't the only factor, and I don't think it's the biggest factor either. One of the advantages of having a social infrastructure that allows for the survival of nearly everyone to mating age, I suppose.
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26440
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:08 am UTC

Goranson wrote:The thing I've always wondered is why people seem to give such an incredible shit what "nice guys" say in the first place. It's nothing more than guys unable to get dates venting about it. Who does this hurt exactly?
All the women who have the misfortune of interacting with those guys, for a start.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:17 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:All the women who have the misfortune of interacting with those guys, for a start.

Do women have a special right not to interact with annoying people or something?

User avatar
mythago
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:27 pm UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby mythago » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:29 am UTC

Goranson wrote:If a woman who's at a frustrating point in her romantic life makes a generalized vent about men, hardly anyone would bat an eye. But when frustrated men do it, it's some incredible faux pas, and probably sexist to boot. What?


Sorry, I missed the xkcd comic where a needy, immature woman says "Men are so shallow, they say they want nice girls but what they really want is a RealDoll that can open a beer can!" and Hat Guy high-fives her. Link, please?

Goranson wrote:This honestly doesn't seem like anything more than a sanctimonious way of picking on men who aren't getting laid.


Wow. You really think all men who aren't getting laid wander around ranting about what lying psychos women are? That's pretty sexist.
three lines of plaintext
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:37 am UTC

mythago wrote:Sorry, I missed the xkcd comic where a needy, immature woman says "Men are so shallow, they say they want nice girls but what they really want is a RealDoll that can open a beer can!" and Hat Guy high-fives her. Link, please?

I'm commenting on the general phenomenon of the existence of "nice guys" and the rhetoric surrounding them, and the complete lack of any equivalent rhetoric for girls who do the same thing. This comic is one example of that.

mythago wrote:Wow. You really think all men who aren't getting laid wander around ranting about what lying psychos women are? That's pretty sexist.

No, but I find making a point of targeting men who aren't getting laid for being bitter about it a little suspect.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:45 am UTC

Goranson wrote:
mythago wrote:Sorry, I missed the xkcd comic where a needy, immature woman says "Men are so shallow, they say they want nice girls but what they really want is a RealDoll that can open a beer can!" and Hat Guy high-fives her. Link, please?

I'm commenting on the general phenomenon of the existence of "nice guys" and the rhetoric surrounding them, and the complete lack of any equivalent rhetoric for girls who do the same thing. This comic is one example of that.


I think a big part of that is that "nice girls" (if that's what you'd like to call them) aren't nearly as common or as vocal as "nice guys". For example, there are none in this thread, afaik.
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:55 am UTC

OmniLiquid wrote:I think a big part of that is that "nice girls" (if that's what you'd like to call them) aren't nearly as common or as vocal as "nice guys". For example, there are none in this thread, afaik.

I've heard plenty of women make generalized comments about what men really want, which seems to be the behavior the comic is specifically calling out in "nice guys". And no, there aren't going to be many "nice girls" because gender dynamics are such that women don't have the same exact problems with romance that men do, but they do have their own set of problems, and these are probably just as frustrating in their own ways.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 5:06 am UTC

Goranson wrote:
OmniLiquid wrote:I think a big part of that is that "nice girls" (if that's what you'd like to call them) aren't nearly as common or as vocal as "nice guys". For example, there are none in this thread, afaik.

I've heard plenty of women make generalized comments about what men really want, which seems to be the behavior the comic is specifically calling out in "nice guys". And no, there aren't going to be many "nice girls" because gender dynamics are such that women don't have the same exact problems with romance that men do, but they do have their own set of problems, and these are probably just as frustrating in their own ways.


IMO, the strip isn't criticizing gender based generalizations in general, but those of the form "[gender]'s say they want [trait I presumably have], but they don't want me (unstated but implied), so they must want [trait correlated with opposite of previous trait] instead". And idk about you, but I haven't heard any woman say something along those lines that I can recall.
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

User avatar
mythago
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:27 pm UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby mythago » Tue Feb 04, 2014 5:11 am UTC

Goranson wrote:I'm commenting on the general phenomenon of the existence of "nice guys" and the rhetoric surrounding them, and the complete lack of any equivalent rhetoric for girls who do the same thing. This comic is one example of that.


You suggested that frustrated women can rant about men without anyone batting an eye about it. When I asked for a pointer to a comic that demonstrates this half of your complaint - i.e., the tolerance of women indulging in sexist rants - you claim that the complete absence of such a comic is proof. Since xkcd deals with all kinds of human foibles, surely there's been at least one comic where Randall has depicted a rejected woman dissing on men as a normal thing?

Goranson wrote:No, but I find making a point of targeting men who aren't getting laid for being bitter about it a little suspect.


"Being bitter"? The comic is targeting Rejected Dude for making foolish and sexist generalizations, not for being bitter. (Frankly, he doesn't seem bitter. Pompous, maybe.) Why is it "suspect"?
three lines of plaintext
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 5:38 am UTC

mythago wrote:You suggested that frustrated women can rant about men without anyone batting an eye about it. When I asked for a pointer to a comic that demonstrates this half of your complaint - i.e., the tolerance of women indulging in sexist rants - you claim that the complete absence of such a comic is proof. Since xkcd deals with all kinds of human foibles, surely there's been at least one comic where Randall has depicted a rejected woman dissing on men as a normal thing?

Your premise of what constitutes proof is stupid though. How Randall perceives women is not necessarily reality, sort of like the "nice guy" in the comic. Besides which, Randall Munroe is not Harvey Pekar, he's generally not interested in observing normal social interactions but in commenting on what he thinks are flawed ones, at least in his comics that are about social interactions.

mythago wrote:"Being bitter"? The comic is targeting Rejected Dude for making foolish and sexist generalizations, not for being bitter. (Frankly, he doesn't seem bitter. Pompous, maybe.) Why is it "suspect"?

I'd say it's bitterness, the comic is called "Rejection" after all. Is it sexist? I suppose that depends on your definition of sexism. If you think that making any observation about what the opposite gender really wants, or is really thinking despite what they say is sexism, then I guess it is. But then there are plenty of women who are sexist in the same way, but people seem to reserve a special contempt for it when done by "nice guys".

As for it being suspect, it's because making generalized comments about the opposite sex is a behavior I've observed in a lot of people of both genders with varying success in love, but if you're going to criticize it only when done by a group of people at the bottom of the pecking order, then you don't seem to have a problem with the behavior but you're just looking for a morally justifiable excuse to kick the people. At least that's how it appears to me.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby addams » Tue Feb 04, 2014 5:50 am UTC

Our culture, after a great deal of work and struggle, allows people to talk about Sex.

We are a sexually open culture?
Is this conversation about Sex?

I am certain I have seen some behavior that confirms,
"There is a Sexual Expectation among some, if not many, American Acquaintances."

It is a Cultural Thing!
I have no idea.

I did not understand until recently!
I still don't. Not my thing.

Hey! If you fall head-over-heals in Lust with nearly everyone you meet.
Then; Lucky You! Some people do.

For the rest of us, or just me....(shrug)
Is that what is happening with the character in the Comic?

He encounters people like me.
He expects to be one of those Magnetic Personalities
And; Is simply Nobel. Not reacting much with anyone. (ho humm)

They say they like Nice Guys?
"I'm nice." he says.

But; There is no chemistry?
Chemistry! No! Don't use chemistry!

Excuse me.

Wanders off shaking my head.
How many people that read this forum, are unhappy alone and have a Lab?

That number might be too large.
That number can't be small enough.

If you know someone with a lab;
Make them be Happy.

What ever it takes.
Mad Unhappy Scientists can be such a fucking hazard.

Don't take the Lab away.
That, just, makes 'em madder.

Where were you?
What helps The Mood?

Well....As long as you are being transferred.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To7-3PMqvRo

oh dear; I may agree with the guy that thinks a lot of distance is a good idea.
War is very good for Romance. Damn it!
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 5:53 am UTC

Goranson wrote:I'd say it's bitterness, the comic is called "Rejection" after all. Is it sexist? I suppose that depends on your definition of sexism. If you think that making any observation about what the opposite gender really wants, or is really thinking despite what they say is sexism, then I guess it is. But then there are plenty of women who are sexist in the same way, but people seem to reserve a special contempt for it when done by "nice guys".

As for it being suspect, it's because making generalized comments about the opposite sex is a behavior I've observed in a lot of people of both genders with varying success in love, but if you're going to criticize it only when done by a group of people at the bottom of the pecking order, then you don't seem to have a problem with the behavior but you're just looking for a morally justifiable excuse to kick the people. At least that's how it appears to me.


Perhaps you missed my earlier post (2 or three posts up) in which I explain that "making any observation about what the other sex really wants, or is really thinking despite what they say" is not the behavior being criticized here, but this faulty logic is:

1) Gender says they want someone with property X.
2) I have property X.
3) (a) member(s) of said gender do(es) not want to date me.
4) Therefore, gender is lying about wanting someone with property X.

And from what I see, there are more and/or more vocal men using this logic than women.
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:08 am UTC

OmniLiquid wrote:Perhaps you missed my earlier post (2 or three posts up) in which I explain that "making any observation about what the other sex really wants, or is really thinking despite what they say" is not the behavior being criticized here, but this faulty logic is:

1) Gender says they want someone with property X.
2) I have property X.
3) (a) member(s) of said gender do(es) not want to date me.
4) Therefore, gender is lying about wanting someone with property X.

And from what I see, there are more and/or more vocal men using this logic than women.

This seems an awful lot like begging the question to me. You're making failure with the opposite sex a pre-requisite to making faulty judgements about the opposite sex.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:13 am UTC

Goranson wrote:
OmniLiquid wrote:Perhaps you missed my earlier post (2 or three posts up) in which I explain that "making any observation about what the other sex really wants, or is really thinking despite what they say" is not the behavior being criticized here, but this faulty logic is:

1) Gender says they want someone with property X.
2) I have property X.
3) (a) member(s) of said gender do(es) not want to date me.
4) Therefore, gender is lying about wanting someone with property X.

And from what I see, there are more and/or more vocal men using this logic than women.

This seems an awful lot like begging the question to me. You're making failure with the opposite sex a pre-requisite to making faulty judgements about the opposite sex.


I am not saying this faulty logic is what leads to being rejected, which is what begging the question would require. There are plenty of possible reasons for being rejected (such as faulty logic in general). I'm saying this is bad logic to use afterward. Anyways, I don't often see this attitude among people who haven't been rejected either recently or often.

EDIT: clarified a few points.
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

User avatar
mythago
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:27 pm UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby mythago » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:32 am UTC

Goranson wrote:Your premise of what constitutes proof is stupid though. How Randall perceives women is not necessarily reality, sort of like the "nice guy" in the comic. Besides which, Randall Munroe is not Harvey Pekar, he's generally not interested in observing normal social interactions but in commenting on what he thinks are flawed ones, at least in his comics that are about social interactions.


Other than "you're stupid because you don't agree with me", I genuinely have no idea what you were trying to say in this paragraph. Maybe that's all you were trying to say?

Goranson wrote:I'd say it's bitterness, the comic is called "Rejection" after all. Is it sexist? I suppose that depends on your definition of sexism. If you think that making any observation about what the opposite gender really wants, or is really thinking despite what they say is sexism, then I guess it is. But then there are plenty of women who are sexist in the same way, but people seem to reserve a special contempt for it when done by "nice guys".


Is belittling an entire gender as a group because one member of the group declined to sleep with you sexist? If not, I would wonder exactly what you do consider sexist, particularly as you just (correctly) characterized that behavior as sexist when engaged in by a woman. You seem to be suggesting that Rejection Guy's behavior is not only nonsexist, but is understandable, appropriate and shouldn't be criticized.

Goranson wrote:As for it being suspect, it's because making generalized comments about the opposite sex is a behavior I've observed in a lot of people of both genders with varying success in love, but if you're going to criticize it only when done by a group of people at the bottom of the pecking order, then you don't seem to have a problem with the behavior but you're just looking for a morally justifiable excuse to kick the people. At least that's how it appears to me.


Why do you think Randall only criticizes this behavior when men do it, as opposed to thinking that he's specifically criticizing a type of that behavior prevalent in geek culture (which is, after all, xkcd's audience)? After all "the people" in your sentence there are not "men" or even "male geeks who were rejected", but "guys who assume that because a woman was not interested in them, women aren't really interested in 'nice guys' and are all liars, crazy or both."
three lines of plaintext
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs

Kite
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:01 pm UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Kite » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:11 am UTC

armandoalvarez wrote:My least favorite recurring XKCD format is the one exemplified by this comic: a jerk starts complaining and then Cueball cuts him off to tell him why his complaint is wrong and shows himself to be a jerk. Even when I agree with him (as I do in this and 95% of the cases) I don't find it as funny or informative as most XKCDs.


Yeah, really. At least with the sunset-photography one he had the decency to try and tell a joke at the end. Having a pompous stick figure shallowly moralize at me never fails to brighten my day.

Dontget
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:52 pm UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Dontget » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:13 am UTC

I think the most confusing thing about the way most people take rejection is what rejection actually means in a practical sense. At least in my experience, it means "Hey, don't expect to have sexual relations with me in the near future, but we can go on doing just about anything else you can imagine." So, unless you literally only wanted that person for sex, then you would expect that you could find numerous other qualities that would warrant valuing their friendship to a pretty high degree. I've actually been surprised how intimate my friendships with the opposite sex have gotten. They just didn't involve sex. And that's absolutely fine. Sex is great. But so is a really good conversation. So is having someone to play video games with. There aren't enough amazing people in the world for you to be able to reject all of the ones who won't have sex with you and still come out feeling good about yourself.

I mean, you can say that attacking the "nice guy" is sexist, but I've never run into a situation where a woman would refuse to be "just friends" if I was actually serious about that offer.

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:15 am UTC

mythago wrote:Other than "you're stupid because you don't agree with me", I genuinely have no idea what you were trying to say in this paragraph. Maybe that's all you were trying to say?

I said your premise was stupid, but I figured since you called something I said earlier sexist that you'd be able to take as much as you give. Anyways, if you're having trouble, I'll try to bring some clarity to things:

1. Just because Randall Munroe views the world in a certain way does not make it true, so whether or not he portrays a certain behavior in his comics does not mean it is or isn't a thing.
2. Randall Munroe generally comments on behavior he considers flawed in some way, so the absence of a certain behavior in his comics does not mean he doesn't think it exists, it just means he probably doesn't find it flawed.

mythago wrote:Is belittling an entire gender as a group because one member of the group declined to sleep with you sexist? If not, I would wonder exactly what you do consider sexist, particularly as you just (correctly) characterized that behavior as sexist when engaged in by a woman. You seem to be suggesting that Rejection Guy's behavior is not only nonsexist, but is understandable, appropriate and shouldn't be criticized.

That's what I think, and I think the same thing were a woman to do it. Really, there are more important things most people should be worrying about than what somebody who is having a bad time of things says in frustration.

mythago wrote:Why do you think Randall only criticizes this behavior when men do it, as opposed to thinking that he's specifically criticizing a type of that behavior prevalent in geek culture (which is, after all, xkcd's audience)? After all "the people" in your sentence there are not "men" or even "male geeks who were rejected", but "guys who assume that because a woman was not interested in them, women aren't really interested in 'nice guys' and are all liars, crazy or both."

I really fail to see how women are harmed by the existence of romantically inept losers who say mean things about them, and why they feel like they need to be called out at all. Do you feel the need to call out somebody homeless who says mean things about people with jobs too?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby addams » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:20 am UTC

That is all valid.
I have no idea what the comic is saying.

Humans hate Rejection.
Is the comic Rejection nested in Rejection?

A joke that is floating up in the stratosphere,
while we are not funny down here on the ground.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Dontget
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:52 pm UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Dontget » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:33 am UTC

Goranson wrote:I really fail to see how women are harmed by the existence of romantically inept losers who say mean things about them, and why they feel like they need to be called out at all. Do you feel the need to call out somebody homeless who says mean things about people with jobs too?

Poor analogies always get me going more than the argument itself. Being someone's friend instead of dating them is not analogous to being homeless instead of being employed.

And really, that's exactly where the problem is. These "romantically inept losers" are eternally criticizing women for what is the equivalent of free vanilla iced cream instead of free chocolate iced cream. And of course it isn't a big deal. Most things aren't a big deal. But they're ungrateful to the point of frustration, so if someone wants to make a comic about it I think we could all use the stress relief.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:45 am UTC

Goranson wrote:I really fail to see how women are harmed by the existence of romantically inept losers who say mean things about them, and why they feel like they need to be called out at all. Do you feel the need to call out somebody homeless who says mean things about people with jobs too?


I really fail to see how anyone is harmed by the existence of people on message boards giving advice on how not to be a romantically inept loser, and yet you're calling us out for it. Do you feel the need to stop charities from helping homeless people too?
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:56 am UTC

Dontget wrote:Poor analogies always get me going more than the argument itself. Being someone's friend instead of dating them is not analogous to being homeless instead of being employed.

Well, friendzoned guys who are frustrated enough to rant about how "women don't want nice guys" typically have difficulties finding a romantic partner, which girls who friendzone guys often don't. In that respect, it is analogous, even if you only want to reduce the analogy to a party without something criticizing a party with it.

Dontget wrote:And really, that's exactly where the problem is. These "romantically inept losers" are eternally criticizing women for what is the equivalent of free vanilla iced cream instead of free chocolate iced cream. And of course it isn't a big deal. Most things aren't a big deal. But they're ungrateful to the point of frustration, so if someone wants to make a comic about it I think we could all use the stress relief.

Guys aren't obligated to want friendship from women anymore than women are obligated to want to date men.

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:11 am UTC

OmniLiquid wrote:I really fail to see how anyone is harmed by the existence of people on message boards giving advice on how not to be a romantically inept loser, and yet you're calling us out for it. Do you feel the need to stop charities from helping homeless people too?

It's not advice, though, it's mostly just calling their character into question. Most of what's said about "nice guys" that they really aren't nice and are probably sexist, not anything practical to avoid getting frendzoned.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:21 am UTC

Goranson wrote:
OmniLiquid wrote:I really fail to see how anyone is harmed by the existence of people on message boards giving advice on how not to be a romantically inept loser, and yet you're calling us out for it. Do you feel the need to stop charities from helping homeless people too?

It's not advice, though, it's mostly just calling their character into question. Most of what's said about "nice guys" that they really aren't nice and are probably sexist, not anything practical to avoid getting frendzoned.


My point is, if you think questioning people's actions is useless or bad, why are you doing it here? It's like calling people to tell them not to use phones.
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:34 am UTC

OmniLiquid wrote:My point is, if you think questioning people's actions is useless or bad, why are you doing it here? It's like calling people to tell them not to use phones.

My example specifically involved kicking downwards, which is a place where I think 90% of criticism of "nice guys" comes from, not kicking in the abstract.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:43 am UTC

Goranson wrote:
OmniLiquid wrote:My point is, if you think questioning people's actions is useless or bad, why are you doing it here? It's like calling people to tell them not to use phones.

My example specifically involved kicking downwards, which is a place where I think 90% of criticism of "nice guys" comes from, not kicking in the abstract.


I don't see how pointing out to someone when they are being illogical and unfair is kicking them, and I would like clarification on what you mean by kicking downward. It is, as I said before, giving a bit of advice. Through slight ridicule, sure. But ridiculous ideas deserve to be ridiculed.
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:55 am UTC

OmniLiquid wrote:I don't see how pointing out to someone when they are being illogical and unfair is kicking them, and I would like clarification on what you mean by kicking downward. It is, as I said before, giving a bit of advice. Through slight ridicule, sure. But ridiculous ideas deserve to be ridiculed.

It's not making fun of them for the lack of logic I disagree with, I think that's perfectly reasonable. It's the impugning of their character that often accompanies it that I just find unnecessary and that's where I'd say the kicking downwards comes in.

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 9:20 am UTC

Goranson wrote:It's not making fun of them for the lack of logic I disagree with, I think that's perfectly reasonable. It's the impugning of their character that often accompanies it that I just find unnecessary and that's where I'd say the kicking downwards comes in.


This may be because it's been a few hours since reading through the rest of the topic, but what impugning of character are you referring to?
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 9:46 am UTC

OmniLiquid wrote:This may be because it's been a few hours since reading through the rest of the topic, but what impugning of character are you referring to?

This is the most extreme example from this thread, but I've seen multiple examples like this when people discuss "nice guys":

markfiend wrote:And this is why you're an arsehole. You expect women to fall at your knees (heh) and give you sex in return for you behaving like a civilised human being. That's really not the behaviour of a genuinely nice guy (as opposed to a "Nice Guy™").

User avatar
OmniLiquid
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:24 am UTC
Location: Burning in the Texas heat.

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby OmniLiquid » Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:04 am UTC

Goranson wrote:
OmniLiquid wrote:This may be because it's been a few hours since reading through the rest of the topic, but what impugning of character are you referring to?

This is the most extreme example from this thread, but I've seen multiple examples like this when people discuss "nice guys":

markfiend wrote:And this is why you're an arsehole. You expect women to fall at your knees (heh) and give you sex in return for you behaving like a civilised human being. That's really not the behaviour of a genuinely nice guy (as opposed to a "Nice Guy™").


Ah, I see. Let's look at our failed logic once again (using more specific language this time).

1. Women say they want nice men.
2. I am a nice man (or perceive myself to be one).
3. A woman rejected me (did not want me)
therefore 4. Women don't really want nice men and are lying.

For this logic to work "Women really want nice men" (which is for the most part true, btw) would have to lead to "No woman would ever reject a nice man's sexual/dating advances". This seems identical to thinking women should fall on their knees and give sex in return for being nice, which is an arsehole way of thinking.

I don't think it is improper to call out someone for being an arsehole, when they are in fact being one.

Edit: is
Eris = best deity.
(cis male he/him/his)

User avatar
zjxs
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:04 am UTC
Location: The Cloud

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby zjxs » Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:15 am UTC

Oh, the humanity.

This cheese is moderately lukewarm.

User avatar
Quicksilver
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:21 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Quicksilver » Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:17 am UTC

Rejectionception.

Goranson
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:36 am UTC

Re: 1325: "Rejection"

Postby Goranson » Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:29 am UTC

OmniLiquid wrote:1. Women say they want nice men.
2. I am a nice man (or perceive myself to be one).
3. A woman rejected me (did not want me)
therefore 4. Women don't really want nice men and are lying.

Except that you're letting someone who clearly has nothing but contempt for "nice guys" speak for them and are taking him as their mouthpiece, and then you're pretending that a logical argument precisely describes what is often just emotionally colored frustration over a lack of dating success. In my experience it's not that "nice guys" expect sex anymore than anyone else, it's just that they genuinely don't know how to express romantic interest where other people do, and mistake their own incompetence and shyness with niceness. They're putting forward what they consider to be adequate signals of sexual interest that nobody else is picking up on.

The feminist boogeyman of a "nice guy" whose entire friendship with a girl is an elaborate trap that ends with him begging her for sex is something I've never seen.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests