Nice Guys Finish Last

The #metoo movement is neglecting something in their current crusade:

Historically, nice guys finish last.

The men that the #metoo women endorse: the kind, patient, never aggressive, never instigating, never accosting, never touching without permission, always considerate type of man… he is often taught (by WOMEN) that he is a loser in the race to naturally select, procreate, find a mate, and… get laid!

In my own life, I remember three separate occasions when my “nice guy” approach lost to the complete antithesis of the #metoo movement.

For what it’s worth, I’ve never made an inappropriate advance on a woman. It’s mostly because I have a low sex drive/libido and my Mother was violently insistent on treating women with respect and NOT having sex until marriage (I still did, mind you, but it always took weeks if not months after the first kiss… I was very “slow”).

But I remember the girl I fell for in 8th Grade kind of liked me and almost agreed to “go with me” (my only tactic being polite, respectful conversation over the course of 6 months). That is until the hot, cool guy made a move on her and, without hesitation, she consented to a sex act in the computer room. A week earlier, she had FINALLY agreed to dance with me at the school dance for the greatest three minutes of my adolescence.

I was heartbroken. My most aggressive intention was a kiss. Holding hands would have been pure bliss. But she was overwhelmed by confidence, good looks, and Darwinian impulses that brought her in an instant to her first sexual activity with a boy who she had never really gotten to know and who cared nothing for her… but he was a really popular, handsome, confident guy.

I don’t blame her. I could have been more confident at that age and yet still a gentleman. I was kind of a wimp in 8th Grade and wimpiness is not attractive. I once overheard a girl say “I don’t know how any girl would ever find him attractive. He’s such a loser.” I was nice, but weak. For some reason, strong guys are often assholes, but sexual impulses are millions of years old. Our bodies demand that we pursue the mate that will give our offspring the best genes and greatest chance of survival. Historically, that means the strongest, bravest, and most confident.

Anyhow, in high school, I “courted” a girl for two years. My heart belonged to her and she really seemed to like me, but that didn’t stop her from giving a blowjob to the confident guy that could dance better than me and was über machismo. They started dating. After he cheated on her, she asked me to prom and we dated for two years. It was a really great relationship and I learned not to be jealous of a girl, more accurately a woman, who was just figuring out what she liked.

In college, the girl I liked more than anyone I’d met in my life kept me in the friend zone for eight years before we dated. In that time, she was raped once and date raped twice while drunk by really confident, fun guy-friends whom she had trusted. It was heartbreaking.

I thought I was the perfect guy in regard to behavior, respect, boundaries, and patience. I was almost NEVER rewarded for my good behavior until I married my wife: the most perfect woman I have ever met who lets me know each day how much she appreciates the way I treat and respect her.

But I was playing the long game and I won. How many men lost in this approach? How many men lost time and again to “cavemen” like these current sex offenders in politics and entertainment that are going down in flames?

If there are awful men who still adhere to aggressive, inconsiderate, animal-kingdom norms in pursuit of finding a sexual mate, there are surely awful women as well who have encouraged their behavior.

I’m not victim blaming, I’m not excusing any men for their behavior, and I’m not taking an inch away from the #metoo movement that is so sorely needed to advance our species forward. But I am asking that for every father that must educate his son on how to properly treat another woman (or man), there must also be a mother who teaches her daughter how to properly treat or react to another man (or woman) such that the wrong behavior is not accepted or tolerated.

Young women, if properly educated, can help shape the behavior of young men by only reacting positively to the behavior that #metoo wishes to propagate. Otherwise, who will the young men believe? The adults telling them to act with respect and empathy? Or the beautiful young lady who only gratifies the romantic desires of machismo, caveman aggressors?

In short, behavior is formed in our adolescence. Ladies, it would help us gentlemen if you would please do your part in endorsing better men so that only the best behavior is accepted and continued.

Continue the discussion: Contributor Response

2018 Resolution: Give the Benefit of the Doubt

In 2018, give everyone the benefit of the doubt. When someone challenges you in any way, whether in person or even on a Facebook post, assign them the best of possible intentions. Never villainize anyone. Imagine everyone as being the proverbial “Good Guy” in their own life’s story and therefore assume that their personal ethical code is meant to achieve the greatest good (for at least them, if not everyone else).

Think about a funeral. When reflecting on the recently departed, it is rare to hear slanderous and humiliating stories of misdeeds. More likely (except in rare cases of the truly miserable), the chatter and reflection on the deceased is almost fictionally flattering and fond.

This “photoshopping of character” is much more tenable postmortem. But it begs the question: why do we ever portray each other in a negative light? Is it to cast aspersions on someone who maintains an ethical position opposite our own? Is it out of jealousy? Is it because we see the possibly harmful ramifications of someone else’s actions and wish to manipulate their behavior via biting criticism?

Whatever the reason, framing another person in the worst possible light can only be detrimental to all parties. 2017 showed us how division and character assassination can be so poisonous and fatiguing to the National psyche. Maybe bridging the divide this year could be so much more attainable by appealing to the best in one another.

Let us refuse to hate those we disagree with and let us refuse to think about the world in terms of good and evil. We are all good. We are all worthy of love. We are all trying to live (and live well). We may have different ideas about what is best, but moving hearts and minds toward their greatest potential can never start with contempt.

In 2018: patience, positivity, optimism, and always the benefit of the doubt.

Louis C.K…. Forgive or Forget?

[Balance is the goal of this article, not division, or an attempt to go easy on a millionaire who has been accused of and admitted to sexual misconduct. People want to put everyone in one of two bins, and it’s not always that simple.] 
The current Women’s movement promoting equal rights, equal pay, and an abolition of sexual abuse/harassment is unquestionably good and long overdue. Women are uniting to win elections, overturn sexist laws, and now publicly destroy powerful Men who are guilty of the most vile and sexist offenses.
This battle will not be won by simply bringing down the bad guys. This battle can only be won when our collective society changes its behavior, its words, and its tone. 
I remember when “fag” was a regular part of the American Language – used as an insult. Obviously, the insult was that being “gay” or “homosexual” is a terrible thing to be, so “fag” was equivalent to calling someone terrible.
The movement to end the stigmatization of the LGBTQ community required that “fag” be dropped from colloquial usage. I remember this transition. Really good, non-homophobic people had to retrain themselves NOT to say “fag” as it had become so pervasive a word that even LGBTQ people used it derogatorily at times.
Monkey see, monkey do. We are a very imitative species. So, when Men are trained to aggressively pursue Women by their fathers, by the media, by their own primal urges, and often by Women themselves (50 Shades of Gray), it means that Men will not easily be retrained into the modern Gentleman that currently Progressives demand.
Is this any excuse for rape? Sexual abuse? Using power to coerce Women (and Men as did Kevin Spacey) into compromising situations?
NO. Inarguably, NO!
But as we clarify the lines of sexual engagement in the 21st Century, let us all be very clear about the nuances of these situations and what is at stake. When we take down criminals or bad actors to shift the status quo towards a more enlightened society, let us be sure the collateral damage is minimal. Let us use a very specific brush to address villainy and not such a wide brush that every Man (and some Women) are swept into the mix, subject to irreversible, debilitating public shame and scrutiny, regardless of the severity of their misconduct.
Because: not every sexual misconduct is exactly as terrible as the next. For instance, a Man who aggressively pursues a phone number at a bar is not as terrible as a Man who stalks, beats, and rapes a Woman. Furthermore, a Man who gropes a Woman’s genitals without consent is worse than a Man who asks a Woman if he can masturbate in front of her and then does not proceed to do so when he is denied permission. 
So, let’s address Louis C.K. and the damning New York Times article that just came out alleging he sexually abused 5 Women over a decade ago (which he has since admitted to). Louis C.K.’s entire career now seems doomed because of his actions, but only if his actions are unforgivable and his behavior unchanged.
From his response letter, it’s clear that he knows what he did was wrong. He also clearly stated why he was wrong, why he mistakenly thought he was justified at the time of the misconducts ten years ago (all the Women either gave consent or rejected his offer to masturbate in front of them at which time he ended his pursuit), and why it was wrong that his manager tried to suppress the accusations just to keep their business aspirations undamaged.
Although this admission of guilt and the ensuing apology does not absolve him, Louis C.K. has handled this situation the way we hope every person accused of wrongdoing would handle it: by admitting the guilt, apologizing, and trying to make amends.
Should he be let off the hook entirely? Clearly, no. Should he be banished from the art world and public society forever because he pursued sexual fetishes with Women he misread? That will be up to the personal sense of justice from every individual who reads about Louis C.K.’s behavior and his recent response letter.
Some might want Louie to go down in flames for these misconducts.
Some might see his actions as mistakes that deserve condemnation, but not crucifixion.
Some might not see anything wrong with what he did at all (Trump is still our President after all and has admitted to doing much worse – physically and sexually assaulting Women without consent – and he’s still the President).
I realize this is a sensitive issue for many and that taking any kind of position which might cast favorable light on a Man that has admitted to sexual abuse (even if not as severe as Weinstein or Spacey or Trump) could elicit a negative reaction, but I implore all Women and Men to try and see everything as clearly and unbiased as possible.
Louis C.K. has been recognized as a powerful ally to Women over the past ten years since his misconducts, but these revelations to the public in this current amplified climate all but assure that he will be ineffective as such moving forward.
Can we accept Louis C.K.’s apology and let him continue to have a voice in artistic and moral discussions moving forward? Once again, it’s up to you and your own personal sense of justice. 

Trump is NOT a Racist… He’s Worse

Trump might NOT be a Racist… He could be something worse.

Trump appears to be a megalomaniac who unconditionally supports whatever group or individual who supports him. 

So far, he has targeted the most fanatical and unwavering groups of voters: 

-Pro-Gun

-Anti-Immigrant

-Pro-Religious Freedom

-Anti-LGBTQ

-Pro-Police (Regardless of Brutality)

-Anti-Black Lives Matter

-Pro-Military Expansion

-Anti-Globalism

-Pro-Big Business

-Anti-Government Programs

-Pro-Birth

-Anti-Planned Parenthood

-Anti-Tax the Rich

-Anti-Universal Health Care

He targets these people because he knows that:

1. They will never waver in their support for him, regardless of his egregious mistakes.

2. They are very disciplined voters. 

Only 58% of Americans voted in 2016. That means Trump only needs 29.1% of the country to support him and actually vote. Trump does not care if 70.8% of the country is for or against an issue, so long as his positions line up with the 29.1% of people who will definitely vote for him (his base). 

But to think that Trump is a racist because he supports the Alt-Right or other blatantly racist organizations is a mistake. Trump supports anyone or anything that supports HIM.

If everyone in the Black Lives Matter movement supported Trump and voted for him unconditionally, he’d say (and at least pretend to do) whatever they wanted him to. As it were, Trump does not see this group as obtainable, loyal to him, or worth pursuing so he goes after the lower hanging fruit: the fanatical, simplistic White Nationalists who don’t require much persuading to gain full support (just some coded, “dog whistle” type statements that they hear loud and clear as supporting their cause while everyone else is skeptical of the true meaning).

If Trump knew that he’d be unconditionally backed by:

-Pro-Gun Law Reform

-Pro-Immigrant

-Anti-Religious Infiltration of Public Institutions

-Pro-LGBTQ

-Anti-Police Brutality/Discrimination

-Pro-Black Lives Matter

-Anti-Military Imperialism

-Pro-Globalism

-Anti-Big Business Monopolies/Deregulation

-Pro-Government Programs

-Pro-Planned Parenthood

-Pro-Taxing the Rich

-Pro-Universal Health Care

He’d support THOSE groups instead… (in other words, he’d be Hillary Clinton: another megalomaniac who definitely could have been the subject of this writing had SHE won).

This recent DACA flip-flop is remarkable evidence of Trump’s neglect for any real values and gravitation towards whatever he thinks will make him appear more favorable. Perhaps he doesn’t feel supported by the anti-Dreamers in the GOP as they have not helped him create any meaningful legislation since taking office. Consequently, Trump sees a victory for himself as siding with the Democrats who support DACA because together they might create the first success of his tenure in office (even if he completely trashes a hallmark value of his campaign and Presidency: getting undocumented immigrants out of the country). 

But this is the dangerous thing about power and politics. These men and women don’t necessarily believe in anything. They just want your vote, your money, your supportive social media posts, and your shaming and harassing of the people who oppose them. Maybe integrity, honesty, and consistency should rank above policy when choosing the next leader of our country. 

Want to read similar content from the Left, Center, Right? SUBSCRIBE for only $2/month.