Talk:Nice guy syndrome/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I wrote this page because, sooner or later, someone would.

Any bets on when it first gets protected? Mike Church 02:32, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Nice girl syndrome?

I have heard "nice guys" claim that women are only attracted to abusers, but I have never heard of "nice girls" claiming that men are only attracted to abusers. This new "Nice girl syndrome" section is even more questionable than the original article. Rosemary Amey 22:29, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

I've heard women claim that men are attracted to emotional abusers or "heartbreakers". I've never heard women claim that men are attracted to physical abusers, because female physical abusers of men (in romantic relationships) are relatively rare. Mike Church 22:32, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

Every relationship a guy has with a girl is emotionally abusive, to some degree. Theres always gonna be miscommunication and arguments. Ha.

I think this entry is worse than ever. Rather than make it less POV, subsequent editing has made this article more of a mess of original "research" and personal opinion. I regret not voting for its deletion. -- Tlotoxl 09:58, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Sorry if I break any protocols as this is my first attempt at an edit. A website called Heartless Bitches International has a highly interesting take on the Nice Guy Syndrome. As far as they are concerned, instead of it being linked to an attraction pathology exibited by women, causing men to suffer, they assert it is in fact a cognitive distortion on the part of the so-called nice guys, who in reality are seen as passive-aggressive losers. Now having lived my whole life as a so-called "Nice Guy," and experiencing all the pathologies that that produces, such as eventually becoming mysogynistic, I think they have absolutely nailed it on the head. Now then, once I was illuminated by this understanding about myself, I saw in a flash, that the so-called Madonna-Whore complex is the exact analogy of this in women. Forget the concept of the Nice Girl Syndrome; that is a misnomer. In fact then, the Madonna-Whore complex is an analogous cognitive distortion of females, in which they try to explain their lack of romantic success with men as being caused by the alleged fact that men want only Madonnas or Whores, and not well-balanced women. In so doing, they become whiny losers precisely the same way as men in the Nice Guy Syndrome. This cognitive distortion then becomes, just like the Nice Guy Syndrome, a self-defeating, self-fulfilling effect.

Oops I guess I should claim that last rant. I'm new, KevinMulrooney, but can not figure out how to add my profile link.

Hi KevinMulrooney, welcome to Wikipedia. You can sign your name and the time quickly by typing four tildes (~) together. I agree with what you say about "nice guy syndrome".Rosemary Amey 22:15, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Rosemary

There's actually a bit more that the girls at HBI say about this, a way out of this syndrome. Basically they say of course a guy should be nice to his girlfriends/ or his wife. Just like he should be nice to his sister and brother and mother and father and little old ladies crossing the street. But he has to act like a Real Man, he shouldn't be fakey nice. He should take charge but not be bossy, act confidently but be willing to admit when he's taken the wrong road. They argue that modern men have become too feminized, too afraid to just boldly step up on a date and say "here's what I picked for us tonight," instead of "I don't know, what do yo wanna do??!!"

Well, this sort of thing you can hear other places, but they also give what I consider is some good advice. They recommend you drop or reduce contact with your friends who just happen to be girls but aren't quite girlfriends, who may be taking advantage of you and keeping you locked in the Friend Zone pattern (my wording). This advice I thought was really cool because it shows the Heartless Bitches really like men after all, that they would say something that might cause a sister to have a tougher time finding men to tell their boyfriend problems to, in order to help a brother become more manly and get more chicks, it almost makes me get all googly eyed. Then in your new-found free time, they recommend men get outside and do something "manly." Not like walking or hiking, but more like mountain biking or kayaking, play an action sport like basketball or football, some activity where there is a non-zero chance of getting mangled. This "manly" activity not only makes you more fit, a must if you are serious about being in the dating pool, and would like to get in farther than the kiddie section, but it also makes you more aggressive and surprisingly more confident in your everyday life. I have found this to be the case almost to a miraculous extent, as I have been getting into mountain biking over the last 2 years. Over and over, they point out that confidence is the key.

What some of the Nice Guys perceive as "jerk behavior" in romantically successful men is actually these guys standing up for themselves and not taking any crap off of women, which women respect, not out of fear, at least not in non-abusive relationships, but in admiration. And you can take it to the bank that women are generally much hotter for guys whose behavior they admire. In fact they even say to not be surprised if it seems that after you have transformed yourself from Feminized Man to Manly Man your former "girls who are friends not quite girlfriends" find you oddly more attractive. Maybe so, maybe not, you'll be too busy out being a Real Man to worry if they want you or not.

I know that this has been long, or as I think the HBs call it, may have been somewhere else I saw this, I am guilty of "Male Pattern Lecturing," a no-no on dates, but I hope that here at least a little bit can be indulged with the reader's grace. As to my comment above about the proposed analogy between the Nice Guy Syndrome and the idea of the Madonna-Whore complex, that was one of those things that occurred to me as being a resonance type of thing, in terms of both being self-defeating cognitively distorted thought patterns, that result in the further romantic non-success of the sufferer. I am a big believer in the cognitive psychological view of the world, and I'm also a big believer in the concept of symmetry in male-female relationships. I could be wrong, and the analogy may break down on closer examination, but it seems to at least be a more productive area of inquiry.

I appreciate that such long relatively mindless blather would not be acceptable in the main Wikipedia section, but I'm easily confused as I'm a dyslexic and I need to write it all out so I can make some sense of my thoughts. So I figured that's why they call it Talk. Or anyway that's my story and I'm a sticking to it.... Guys you may not like some or most of what I'm saying, now that, as I see it, your fig leaf has been blown away by a freak summer wind and you must face your own possible role in your lack of success with women. No pain, no gain. All I ask is you put this away and chew on it a bit, the Heartless Bitches took a while to grow on me too, but I think they are really watching out for us guys.

Dyslexics of the world untie!

see if this works now where is that tilde, here it is..

63.238.166.9 08:02, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"Vut he has to act like a Real Man, he shouldn't be fakey nice. He should take charge but not be bossy, act confidently but be willing to admit when he's taken the wrong road. They argue that modern men have become too feminized, too afraid to just boldly step up on a date and say "here's what I picked for us tonight," instead of "I don't know, what do yo wanna do??!!""

One thing that needs to be mentioned as a possible cause of dating problems, is simply the gigant gulf between the way man and woman think. Now, the exact differences on how they think vary on whos telling you, but everyone either willingly or unwillingly admits that they both think very differently. Take a look at what this HBI group is saying. "he should act like a Real Man, he shouldn't be fakey nice". What the hell kind of man would lay down such strict and subtle requirements for a woman? For the level of casual sex the vast majority of men couldn't give a fuck about almost any level of personality, not to mention subtle twists in personality (from "fakey nice" to "real man") as this. More men might be more concerned about more subtle aspects of personality in long term dating, but it needs to be made clear that most of the guys with "nice guy" snydrome are being rejected for casual sex, short term and long term dating.

"What some of the Nice Guys perceive as "jerk behavior" in romantically successful men is actually these guys standing up for themselves and not taking any crap off of women" There needs to be many distinctions made that are never made by dating advice websites: Depending on what the "nice guy" is looking for he encounters different types of problems. If the nice guy is looking for casual one night stands, he is less sucsessfull then the "asshole player", although both are very unsucsessful compared to the ideals and expectations of modern media and literature. If he is looking for the most consistant sex, and he if makes the mistake that taking a "player" approach of trying to have as many casual one night stands as possible with different women, he will not be anywhere as sucsessfull as if he had a constant girlfriend. But if he is smart enough to realize this, he may be discouraged by the fallout of his "asshole player" brethren who often have to pretend they are interested in girls for more then a one night stand in order to do one, and the result is that the girl is pissed off and on the sidelines for a while. Seeking to get a long term girlfriend is essentially a zero sum game, where the only morally acceptable pool of girls are those that are both single, looking, and attractive enough for the "nice guy". Think of it as a pure numbers scenario, if a newly single "nice guy" is ready to find a new girlfriend almost immediately, whereas his "ex" has a 2 week "cool off" period where she will refuse any advances, that effect alone will over time dwindle the amount of available woman to any one "nice guy". "Players" can turn this into a non zero sum game if they break the rules, such as try and seduce non single woman.

bold editing

Hi. The prior versions of this were really a lot of essay writing, opinions masked as "it is often said that... " and "original research"

So I made some bold edits to the article. Later, I noticed that nobody's even linking to this. Grrr. Hopefully it's more "encyclopediac" now... --Frogcat 19:27, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Support from research?

I've found some books and research that relate to the Nice Guy Syndrome, so it's not true that the phenomenon is completely unsupported empirically. I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the book No More Mr. Nice Guy or evolutionary psychology yet.

I will be adding stuff soon. I am a little slow because this is my first time editing on this wiki.--SecondSight 09:49, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Im suprised that no one has mentioned that this page is now one big advertisement for the book/career that is clearly being hawked by Dr. Robert A. Glover. The whole page's neutrality should now be in question. Three references, come on!

It's true that Glover's book is not research. Nevertheless, it is a relevant discussion of the "nice guy," phenomenon, because it offers theories on "nice guys," and it is part of the spread of the "nice guy" concept. --SecondSight 11:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The concept isn't Glover's. He might be the one capitalising on it the most at the moment, but that doesn't make it his. Unfortunatly, the Wikipedia rules don't deal with topics without a lot of published material well. Just because something can't be cited doesn't make it untrue. The whole Darwinian Wikipedia peer review process can be enough to distill useful truth. matturn 12:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

bollocks

I am sorry, but this whole 'Nice Guy Syndrome' concept is such bollocks. Firstly, it is a complete misnomer as it should be in fact called 'Wimpy Snag Syndrome', as a man can still be exciting and ooze sex appeal and style and still be 'nice'. In fact I know many love-losers that are anything but nice, and are in fact complete jerks. Secondly all this poppy folk psychology nonsense is completely unscientific; Where are the case studies? Have any sample populations been analysed? In fact, is there anything but conjecture to support this nonsense? I'd say not.

Grow up!

My advice to blokes who consider themselves to be suffering from 'Nice Guy Syndrome' or to be in the 'Friend Zone' (pfffff) is to get out there, play some sport, practice socialising, make new friends, stop whingeing, go to parties, i.e. get an exciting life that others will want to be a part of! Once this happens, people in general, not just women will start seeing you in a different light, and everything will go from there.

I agree that it could just as easily be called the "Wimpy Snag Syndrome." You say that "a man can still be exciting and ooze sex appeal and style and still be 'nice'." This may be true the way you define "nice." But "nice" is a ridiculously ambiguous term. Some guys get taught that being "nice" means being ridiculously chivalrous and hiding their sexual interest in women. You suggest that these guys grow up, play some sport, practice socialising, make new friends, go to parties, etc... That may be basically good advice, but have you considered that maybe those activities aren't easy or natural for everyone? What about the many guys who are shy and hate sports? If you can't relate to these guys, then don't be so quick to moralize and judge them. --SecondSight 08:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Schrödinger's Date

Maybe this should be merged here since it is a symptome of the same "syndrome"?--Esprit15d 15:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Such dates can occur for other reasons though. It can occur any time two people get together alone and one party feels there's a possibility of mutual sexual attraction. Also, the article also be equally be merged with the Schrödinger's cat article. Or it could be shifted to the Wikionary, given that it's just a simple definition. matturn 15:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Schrodinger's date is cute, but I think doesn't deserve an article. It's a funny one-liner more than anything else.

Schrödinger's Date has been deleted per AfD, so I'm removing the merge tag. jmb 12:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

The Mask (1994)

The 1994 adaptation of The Mask mentioned "nice guy" in spoken scripts.

Maggie: Stanley, you are the nicest guy. Really, you are.

Stanley Ipkiss: Yeah?

Maggie: Charlie, isn't Stanley the nicest guy?

Charlie Schumacher: The best.

[Maggie walks off]

Charlie Schumacher: That was THE most sickening display I've ever seen.

Stanley Ipkiss: I disagree. I think I'm wearing her down.

AirBa 03:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Original research

I just put up an original research template. This is a very poorly done article, and I think there needs to be a warning for those readers inclined to take this kind of speculation seriously. BrianGCrawfordMA 17:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Dispute

It appears we have an edit war going on between an IP and various users who are rolling back on account of blanking etc, would all parites care to discuss what is wrong with the article and come to a compromise please? -- Tawker 22:49, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Both versions seem to be riddled with original research, but the version written by the anon is blatant vandalism, at least in part (see, for example, the change of "Robert" to "Roberta", and the attack on Glover's book as though it were written by a man-hating woman). If the anon wishes to contribute, I strongly recommend he read WP:NOR, WP:NPOV and WP:V for starters. Antandrus (talk) 23:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not trying to condone it here, but I got a kick out of some of the anon's edits. Mail order brides are never not funny! RC Cola 04:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

This is the best article EVER

"Women are often sexually attracted to men who are not nice, either because the attractiveness of their other traits overpower the negativity of their nastyness, or the nastyness is desired."

Because that isn't personal opinion.Loodog 02:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Every theory our society is built on was the personal opinion of someone (or a committee). There have been studies quoted by New Scientist supporting the "desirability of nastyness" assertion. They should be cited of course. matturn 06:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

And until the sources are cited, the article remains unprofessional and all-around poorly written. I don't claim to know the first thing about "Nice Guy Syndrome," but somebody who does should re-write the entire article. ASBands 02:06, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

NPOV Dispute

I posted an NPOV tag on this article and changed a few things, but much more needs to be done. This article is unashamedly biased against sufferers of this "Nice guy syndrome." Statements such as "the irony is obvious" make it seem as if "Nice Guys" are lesser people.

It's like writing an article on multiple sclerosis, and then stating that everyone with MS is bad because they were unfortunate enough to have the disease. And it's worse than that, because few would believe that MS is a positive attribute. "Nice guy syndrome," on the other hand, involves many positive attributes that are even listed in the article, like intelligence.

I would list this article for deletion if it hadn't already been kept. --Quintin3265 20:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

"Intelligence" being positive isn't NPOV either. I believe most if not all of the piece was put together by self-defined "nice guys". The negativity is there because the concept is defined in the negative - it's something that stops certain guys from attracting women. matturn 10:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

You're making an assumption that not attracting women for these reasons is negative. There are some people who would disagree with this assertion. --Quintin3265 14:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- True, but you don't find men who don't want to attract women (or perhaps men if they prefer) calling themselves a "nice guy" as described by this concept. The syndrome is largely (if not near-exclusively) a self-help device. matturn 11:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Useful for discussion

This article has been valuable to me as a way of expressing myself to a friend. Though she found it upsetting, our discussion finally began to address my feelings and frustrations.

We should not expext that this article will ever be fair and balanced as it deals with gender and romance, with two individuals attempting to express what is most personal to them. But I hope that it continues to grow as a site of discussion and a tool for friends who find timeselves confronting this situation.

Thanks wikipedia!

This isn't a support group. It's an article talk page, and it's here so people can talk about the encyclopedia article, not their personal problems. Erik the Rude 14:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, you certainly are rude, Erik. A little compassion goes a long way. I don't see how adding a few sentences to a talk page thanking everyone who worked on the article is a bad thing. It's only a small section, and it's not like it's in the main article. --Quintin3265 14:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

- I wasn't being rude. If I were being rude, I'd say that this article is bullshit, and anyone who takes it seriously is a dolt. Erik the Rude 02:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Another article

Okay...okay...The next article will be the "wussy"...lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by B rip (talk • contribs) 10:55, April 27, 2006

Bs, complete bs

I'm sick of reading about this constant barrage attack blasting "nice" guys. *Whiney voice*: "It the nice guys fault. Nice guys are sooo boring. Nice guys this. Nice guys that." I know a fuck load of nice guys who have partners. What we are not discussing here is that it's a cultural problem as well as a problem with the male.

Women are taught to desire the risky and seek the confident and brash. The cocky. It is drummed into them from the moment they are born. MOST OF THESE WOMEN DON'T F**KING EVEN KNOW WHO IS BEHIND THE FACADE. IF THEY HAD A TINY LITTLE BIT OF FAITH IN THE OTHER PERSON, THEY MIGHT BE SURPRISED. THE NICE GUY WOULD GAIN CONFIDENCE FROM HIS FEMALE PARTNER AND BECOME AN ASSHOLE. WOW, WHAT A SIMPLE REVELATION. SO STFU ABOUT THIS ALL AND MARK IT FOR DELETION, BECAUSE THIS ARTICLE IS HEAVILY BIASED.

I can't understate the importance of this cultural factor enough. The consistent, negative attacks on these men have gone on too long. It's sickening and evil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.240.194.154 (talk • contribs) 14:13, April 30, 2006

"Low or misguided" confidence?

So if the guy doesn't have confidence, he has low confidence; but if he does have it, it's misguided. This makes it look like it isn't a confidence issue at all, since a guy can be a nice guy whether he has confidence or not. Can this be cleaned up?

Relationship with love-shyness

Section 'Love-shyness' says "The love-shy are a subset of nice guys," whereas section "Disputed existence" says "The concept of love-shyness has been explored in greater depth by psychologists, but is only tangentially related to this syndrome." Not exactly coherent...

I have no background in psychology, therefore can only suggest that all the contents about love-shyness should be removed, except for the link in the 'See Also' section. That's what the article on love-shyness does in relation to this article, avoiding speculation on the relationship between the two problems and allowing people to draw their own conclusions.

Should someone come up with a well-justified passage on that relationship, then I guess it should be included in both articles. Pedro Gomes 22:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Nice guys in film and literature

How about a list, or a mention, of all those movies with the Nice Guy getting the girl in the end (but only after a lot of trouble, and a mean guy getting in the way). There seems to be quite a bit of this in popular fiction - and designed to appeal to both males and females. - Matthew238 02:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't do that. It's a terrible idea. How would a bunch of movie references illuminate this rather questionable pop-psych concept? I think it would confuse matters. Erik the Rude 03:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

My Rambles

The first time I came across this article, I was going through NPOV violations. I've revisited several times. This article has a lot of debate around it, and it is one that is hard to resolve due to a lot of personal emotions from all sides. My first thought after visiting it today was to suggest slapping an AfD tag on the page, but after thinking about it a bit I think it just needs one or two people to clean it up a bit (whether you think my first idea is better or the second, I'd love to hear the opinion of others). The important thing to bear in mind is the article name "Nice Guy Syndrome", especially "Syndrome" this is what defines the article: the fact that such guys perceive themselves to be nice and yet get nowhere with girls. The article should not state that such guys are better than other guys. It is merely a social/psychological term. Please may all comments hereafter bear this in mind. Dessydes 12:49, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Nominate it for deletion, and I'll surely back you. This article is bunkum. Erik the Rude 03:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Me, too. It is. It's nothing but opinion wrapped up in emotion. As has been said, there are thousands of reasons why guys might not have luck with girls (referring to people as 'guys and girls' might be one of them, I dunno). There are equally thousands of reasons why women might not have luck with men. Millions, in fact. Probably a whole bunch of reasons for each person on this planet. "Nice guy syndrome" is just an excuse for one side or the other to use rather than say what they really think. This article gives the impression it's something real. - Adaru 01:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Don't waste your time nominating it for deletion, because that's been tried three times already. Each time, there was no consensus. I made one of the nominations. This article is trash, and it violates nearly every WP policy, though. I wonder if we nominate this for speedy deletion based on original research or if we try to do an uncontested deletion if someone would remove the template? It may be that shining a spotlight on the article at AFD brings just enough attention to create a no-consensus vote. --Quintin3265 11:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Pseudo-Nice Guys

The general idea is of a Nice Guy vs. a Jerk, where the argument is that women like jerks and avoid nice guys intentionally. However, that is not always the case. Women do like nice guys and prefer them over "jerks", but the successful "jerks" do not actually go out and insult women. They pretend to be nice and genuine but with the goal of sexual conquest. Thus, pseudo-nice guys are the real threat to "real nice guys" because the real nice guys often lack confidence or fear being seen as too forward, while pseudo-nice guys do not care how women perceive them.

Additionally, the lack of confidence in nice guys is often intentionally implanted by pseudo-nice guys, by pretending to be their friends and giving them "advice" such as vague hints that girls find them unappealing or creepy to further discourage the nice guy from trying to date. Furthermore, the pseudo-nice guy will often purposely go for the girls that the nice guy likes, and then tell the nice guy that some other girl (one who the pseudo-nice guy has failed to seduce) likes him, so he can have free reign at the target girl.

Even with a disadvantage in looks compared to a real nice guy, because of his ability to lie and manipulate, the pseudo-nice guy has more success with women. However, this can be debatable as the real nice guy is appalled by actions such as sleeping with a drunk girl, but the pseudo-nice guy does not care about that at all.

Ultimately, this condition is caused by a jealousy of truly nice guys. The pseudo-nice guy knows that in a fair "free market" dating society, the nice guy would easily best him, so he utilizes manipulation and dishonesty to keep himself on top.

Thus, it is neither fault of the woman for having poor taste or the nice guy for being too much of a wimp. Both of these issues are just symptoms of the pseudo-nice guy.

I removed this as original research. It looks like one person's musings on dating. Erik the Rude 03:19, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

It's mine, but it's true, I think someone should seriously research this. Electricbassguy 10:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds too true.. at first

Yes, it sounds like I fit the stereotype too well. Makes me angry. Even want to start acting mean. But that's part of the picture too isn't it? Suppressed and misdirected anger. Follow-up discussion is very helpful for a larger perspective. Sort of intellectual therapy.

What is this idiotic article doing here?

Hands down this is the stupidest article I've ever seen in Wikipedia. Nice guy "syndrome" - come on, are there any peer-reviewed studies on this in the academic literature? Is this a documented DSM-IV condition? Does it exist anywhere outside pop psychology books and Internet discussion boards? Delete this travesty. Tyronen 06:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Simply put, it's here because it can't be deleted - three times in a row deletion has failed. As a result, I've resorted to simply adding every applicable tag that lowers the value of this article. Why not help? If we put enough "citation needed" tags where they properly belong, or add cleanup templates, and so on, eventually there might be enough votes to delete the page. --Quintin3265 15:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

As I've said, I'm happy to vote to delete the article (or actually, to have it redirect to "nice guy"), once there is something up on the "Nice guy" describing it as a character archetype. --SecondSight 19:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

So what if it doesn't exist beyond pop psych books and the internet? That doesn't make it an irrelevent topic. Perhaps it's a concept without scientific backing, but that doesn't mean it's not worth keeping (and perhaps rebutting). matturn 13:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think adding a bunch of tags and deleting the article will accomplish much. This is part of modern culture. It should be kept. What shouldn't be done is people getting riled up over it. The key word here is "syndrome". In other words it is a misconception by a bunch of geeks that "nice guys finish last". In order to make it more valid can we look for a term in psychology to which this could potentially be linked. (Or something). From a geek (and proud to be one). Dessydes 20:40, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't doubt that "nice guys" finish last. I fully believe that if I started a relationship with a woman and began to buy her flowers, call her every day to make sure she's OK, pay for all her meals, and treat her like a queen, she would be gone within a week. The Seduction Community has all but proved this. What I disagree with is the tone of this article, and its psudoscience. The tone is very negative, implying that nice guys are lesser people than "jerks." And the article doesn't give any evidence that such a syndrome actually exists or what its cause is. Other articles like Social Anxiety Disorder, seduction, romantic love, and so on cover the miniscule truth in this article enough already. --Quintin3265 20:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Brilliant Quintin3265, I agree with you on that, but at the same time it's hard to explain exactly what THE MAIN PROBLEM is. I found a web page which I think at least has an inkling of what the underlying problems are [1]. A good point to remember is that lots of guys are nice, but "nice guys" tend to be a bit cowardly (no offence please, as I too am a "nice guy", but I prefer the term "geek". I am a geek who wants to change). It's not bad to have a problem, it is though to not do anything about it. Dessydes

Categories: Talk archives