A two part post, or well, two posts in one…

Posted: July 29, 2011 in Assholes, Blogging, Men

Part One:  “All women are bitches, why don’t they like me?”

So, since I am doing that whole lets take my mind off shit cause I am a goddamn burn out at the moment, I went out and read some blogs this evening.  As y’all know, I read Hugo’s blog, but damn if some of the comments at his place do not crack my shit up and make me laugh at (rather than weep for) humanity.  Without fail, at least once a week, the whole PUA (pick up artist) culture will be mentioned and all that stuff- the whole Nice Guys or Lonely Guys or whatever blah kinda guys who just seem to have no luck with the ladies, and thusly, some read books or pay gurus or whatever to hopefully increase their odds with women.  Now, I have actually read the holy bible of  PUA-dome, “The Game”  and learned a fair amount about some of this shit.  And actually, some of the advice in it is not bad.  There is discussion on how a dude can improve his self-confidence, take better care of himself, so on so forth, hell, yer basic self-help shit that might actually be useful.  Then there is the other stuff.  And well, the dudes who buy into some of it.  And frankly y’all, it makes my head spin.  You read some of this stuff and its like gee, no wonder you are lonely, and ya sure as hell ain’t nice, and when ya got that attitude about women-all of ’em- its no fuckin’ wonder you’re dating yer hand.   True enough, there may be sometimes where being a nice guy isn’t gonna get ya far.  Like when yer really a bitter whining douchebag claiming to be a nice guy, or only nice to hot chicks who may in fact actually BE outta your league, or when you figure being nice is some sorta strategy game to land yourself a woman.   I mean, a pretty basic theory would stand to be- if ya fuckin’ hate women even though ya think they are good lookin’ and would like to fuck them?  Ya ain’t nice, and most people, even us evil bitches who are so mean to all those lonely nice guys, well, if its thinly veiled to fuckin’ obvious that you think we are shit?  Chances are, we’re not gonna figure you are worth a damn second glance, let alone a relationship.  Not sure how that is some great mystery to some of these fellas really.  And sure enough, I may be a far cry from the typical modern gal in the current dating scene, but Jesus H. Christ and all his associates, I don’t reckon being a whiny, needy, bitter, petulant woman-hating jackwagon is something too many gals are gonna find an attractive quality.  Hell, I may be a slightly insane burn out, but I ain’t an idiot- nor are most women really- and douchebag is not a big selling point in the pursuit of romance! 

As for all the “Well, chicks only dig the alpha bad boy blah blah blah types”  you know what?  There may actually be truth to this.  Hell, it’s a subject I have beaten worse- the whole white knight bad boy so on so forth shit- than a dead horse.  And true enough, I have seen a lot of women a lot of dudes would prolly like to date go for some dudes who are Bad News, but you know what these fellas have going for ’em that Our Poor Beset Upon Lonely “nice” Guys don’t?  They tend to be confident, and often straight-forward, and they Do Not Fucking Whine.  THERE IT IS, RIGHT THERE.  THAT is the ATTRACTION.  They are not whiners!  Not being a goddamn whiner is a stunningly, amazingly, intoxicatingly attractive quality in a man!  And it is totally NOT the exclusive domain of “bad boys” either!  Plenty of men of all kinds have women in their lives and good love lives and girl friends and wives and sex and all that stuff because they are the anthesis of these so-called Lonely Nice Guys…and NOT whiners!  There ya go, great mystery of the world solved!  *

Part Two: Are you a Preacher or an Engager?

This one also comes from being out in blogland.  It seems there are two types of bloggers out there: Preachers and Engagers.  I have sorta come to the conclusion while I might read blogs written by Preachers, I don’t like their style.  Sure, they might post good shit, but that’s kinda what they do for the most part:  Post something- like it’s proof evident from upon high, then walk away and do not engage, discuss, defend, debate, or even just joke around when discussion occurs on their blog.  It’s like they have passed down the holy word to the masses and well, time to move on, cause their shit is irrefutable solid and not up for discussion.  This tends to make Ren a Grumpy Burn Out.  The other kinda blogger is an engager; someone who will post shit, then actually engage / discuss/ debate/ talk with the folk who comment on it.  They may not change their minds, but they are open to discussion, dissent, and conversation.  This kinda blogger I far prefer, and hell, it is supposed to be a social media kinda thing, yeah?  I mean sure, one can do shit their own way and by their own rules on their own blog- but I far prefer discussions over preaching, and try to be a more engager type of blogger myself.  Preaching after all, is for church.

* The exception to this is the chicks who TOTALLY go for the whiny tortured oh the world is so cruel heroin addict goth type artsy dudes-but them boys generally ain’t considered alpha or manly or any of that other PUA shit by anyone, even the girls who go for ’em….they are like the male versions of Damsels in Distress!

  1. I far prefer discussions over preaching, and try to be a more engager type of blogger myself. Preaching after all, is for church.

    Amen to that!

    (Sorry, it was just such an obvious joke, I couldn’t resist 😉 )

    I wish more commenters would comment at my blog so I could have more engagement there, I do think blogging is better when it’s about the conversation, not the message.

  2. PM says:

    The last bit about Preachers and Engagers is sooooo true! I usually can’t tell which a blogger is until I’ve read ~5 or more posts, and then it’s pretty clear. I’ve also seen some Preachers operate under the guise of Engagers: they’ll allow a comment through moderation, then beat down the commenter in public just to make a point. It’s not productive and nowhere near civil.

    • Ren says:

      Well, civil can be overrated, but hell, I don’t even much go for moderation! But yeah, I far prefer bloggers who engage with those who bother to read ’em.

  3. polly says:

    Ha ha, the first bit made me laugh. There may well be some women out there who are self hating fuckwits, who will go for all that ‘the game’ stuff, but quite frankly, I also think they’re few and far between. Women want to go out with alpha male types for the same reason men want to go out with beautiful women – a lot of people are quite superficial. Certainly I’ve heard women say “I prefer bastards” (or some variation thereof) but they don’t prefer UGLY bastards with questionable hygiene and no cash.

  4. Ren says:

    “but they don’t prefer UGLY bastards with questionable hygiene and no cash.”

    HAHAHAHAH, i’ve met one or two women who will even overlook the hygiene….

  5. CuriousMale says:


    Judging by your photo above I would be willing to bet you do not have a problem attracting members of the opposite sex, or the same sex if you are bisexual (all indications from your own writings imply you are straight). Some people of either gender might be put off by your mouth, language, muscles and style, but I am fairly certain when you have wanted for romantic or sexual company, you have not wanted for it too long. As that is most likely the case, it is unfair of you to make fun of or draw conclusions about those who are not so lucky in romantic or sexual areas, and your speculation and jeers about men being whiners are actually somewhat cruel. Not all people who lack relationships are whiners. I have found, as a man who has not been so lucky with romantic and sexual relationships with women that often people such as yourself, both men and women alike, do tend to be flippant and cruel about the matter because it is not something they’ve personally experienced. I am not a perfect person and I have flaws like anyone else but I do wonder what about me is so horrible that I cannot seem to find a companion when so many other men who truly do treat their girlfriends poorly never seem to be without. I do not buy into a great deal of the PUA propaganda, but some of it certainly seems to make sense, and it admittedly does baffle me to see women getting with and staying with men who cheat on them, degraded them, lie about them, even beat them but all this is tolerated because they have money or are good looking and edgy. I truly do not understand why any women, most of whom have educations and jobs of their own these days, would put up with that. It’s not that I think they should be with me, but I do not understand why they stay with men who have no respect at all for them. I realize that I have difficulties in relationship areas because I am overweight. I am fat and that works against me. Yet I wonder why being fat is less tolerable than being abusive, degrading and unfaithful.

    I do think Alpha personalities exist, and often manifest differently in men and in women. The highschool football star and head cheerleader seem to be timeless examples. Commonalities are attractive and popular, also both tend to be leaders or powerful figures within their social circles, though the manifestations of that power seem to be different. Men will express physical prowess, where with women it seems social prowess is more valued. Women are not often valued for physical prowess outside of sexuality and appearance, and men are not as valued for social graces. You would seem to be an Alpha, Ren, but perhaps in a more traditionally masculine sense. What are your feelings on that if I may ask?

    Also, as a self-admitted “bad girl” (as you have admitted to your proclivities involving sex, drugs, alcohol, and violence) what sort of man is able to keep up with you, or if you were to pick an “ideal man” what sort of qualities would he possess?

    • Ren says:


      Okay, it was perhaps not nice of me to make fun of lonely dudes- truly lonely ones anyway. By no means are all fellas who don’t have S.O.’s whiners and jerks like the folk I was poking fun at up there, and if I offended ya or made you think that I think of ALL lonely folk the same way I think of the un-nice “nice guys” I apologize.

      However, despite how I look, in that photo up there or anywhere else really, I did spend a long period of time where for various reasons- from my own choice to focus on other shit to my, er, charming personality, class status and scary-lookin’ brother and uncles- the fellas were not exactly knockin’ down my door. I probably went on a whole four or five actual dates in high school, and sure enough, I did wonder why I wasn’t gettin’ asked out like my friends or what was it about me that made me unsuitable girl-friend material. A few of the guys I did date asked me out solely to piss off their parents, actually, which is not exactly nice or on the level really. Hell, even to this day, I am the sort of gal who a lot of men folk would NOT take home to mother. I get that, and I am okay with it. I’m even married, but I can tell ya straight up his mother doesn’t have a real high opinion of me at all. Is that the same as your situation? Nah, and I prolly got no idea what it is like to be you or how frustrating it probably is to be in your situation- and if you are not one of those fake pretend to be nice guys and actually, well, a nice guy, then I apologize for my jaded snark there.

      As for why are gals willing to overlook dudes being completely abusive jerkwads to ’em but not willing to overlook weight? That there is a complicated answer, and really prolly more than one complicated answer, and heck, I only got theories. But here we go:

      One, horrible as it may feel or sound? Well, its a real thing nevertheless: When folk are considering romantic relations, sex is a part of that, and well, a lot of folk, men and women alike, ain’t gonna be real inclined at least from the get go to want to have sex with someone they’re not physically attracted to. Does that suck? Yeah, I reckon it does, but it is a very real factor for a whole lotta people. Some folk can be interested in, even romantically and physically, folk who don’t necessarily “turn ’em on”. Others can’t, and that no doubt plays into their choices. Some are just superficial and will pick a good lookin’ or rich jerk over a not so good lookin’ decent guy. And well, society as a whole puts a whole lotta emphasis on looks, and that affects folk in a whole lotta ways.

      As for why women put up with dudes who treat ’em like shit- what with the degrading and cheating and even beating? I think there are a couple of reasons for that. Some figure that they cannot do any better and have self esteem issues that make ’em believe that sorta treatment is what they deserve or the best they are gonna get. Others have had a number done on ’em where they think regardless of how smart, pretty or successful they are or what they really do have to share with the world? Well, they ain’t nothing if they ain’t gotta man, and even if that man is a world class asshole, he is still a man- and without him, she’s nothing. Some are just young or naive and don’t know any better, and some, especially if they don’t have jobs or educations, or if they do have kids, or heck, even if they are just beat down- well, they feel trapped and terrified about how shit could be even worse if the jerk wasn’t around.

      As for the alpha thing- yep, i think they do exist, and I think yer pretty much right on that- in that such things manifest differently. Am I an alpha type person? I reckon I am. Am I what folk would actually consider a typical alpha female type? Nope, not at all. I’m too unconventional, mouthy, and heck, even aggressive to be alpha in the general “alpha female” sense- and in truth, not as conventionally attractive as most women who are considered to be so in MOST “normal people” circles.

      As for that last question, about my ideal kinda guy as a bad girl sort? Eh, that might take some more thought, but I am kinda curious why you want to know.

      • CuriousMale says:


        I ask mostly because I think many men would be intimidated by you. Not in a physical fear manner, but because of the force of your personality, openness about controversial subjects and proclivities, and because a great many men have problems even dealing with women as equals, let alone women who can out do them in traditionally male activities. You do not come across as particularly feminine in any way, and I would think that might make it hard for you to find men truly interested in relationships. This will sound rude and I do not mean it to, but do you have problems with men thinking you are fun to party with and have sex with, but do not consider you suitable for actual relationships? There is a hint of that in your previous reply to me, but that refers more to your class status.

        I would think because it is hard for heterosexual men who are considered feminine in various ways to find relationships, it would also be hard for women who are considered masculine, specifically in a “bad boy” sort of way, to find relationships. Is this true at all?

        • Ren says:


          Well, the answer to pretty much all of that is “yes”. I do tend to intimidate people- not just men- because a lot of that stuff, and I am sorta one of those people folk either like, or hate- not a lot of inbetween. And yep, sure enough, I am the sorta gal a lot of fellas do find fun to party with/have sex with but well, am not the type they think of settling down with- but hell, I personally think settling down is over rated. All folk have to grow up and see that their business is handled, but so long as it is? Well, I don’t see why they still shouldn’t have some fun so long as they ain’t complete idiots about it 🙂 For many years amid a lot of my groups of friends, I have sorta been just one of the guys, but, well, a chick they wouldn’t mind sleeping with at all were the opportunity present itself, and yep, in some cases it has, more than once even. And sure enough, that did and even does still get old occassionally- but well, I am who I am, and not of a mind to change it much…fortunately, I have never been one of those gals who was offended and horrified by the notion of just having sex for the fun of it- and even gals like me can find a guy who can deal with us- as is.

          But yes, being wired like me and having the tastes in various things that I have can make finding relationships difficult. Not impossible, but difficult. One of the things that makes it difficult is that people like myself, male or female, tend to stick to our own kind pretty stictly, and while there are gals in any group, gals like me are seen as different than the gals dudes like me date- we tend to be this odd sorta in between types….females, but with the same interests and proclivities as the males we hang with, and this not so much dating material but friend/ally material- because truthfully? A lot of guys do not want to have to compete with gals they date. The whole friendly rival thing flies right out the window when romance or relationship type behavior enters the picture, and well, not my style.

          But to actually answer the question I did not answer previously? There is no “Ideal Man”. Ideal partners do not exist outside of fiction, but qualties I look for/ like? Sense of humor is key. Not lazy. SOME common interests, but interests of his own as well. Not possessive. Has to be able to go do his own thing and be okay with me going and doing my own thing. Taller than me. Not excessively vain. Not needy. Not utterly white bread suburban boring. Willing to deal with/accept my massive anti-social streak and generally surly attitude. Absolutely not a Hippy. Cannot expect me to change or be out to change me. Mutual respect and mutual responsibility. Bail money is a huge plus…and I will never date another Momma’s Boy again, ever. I get respect for and love of family, but if I am gonna be the woman in some guy’s life, I gotta come first- hell, I don’t even care if he parties up and has sex with other gals, but when it comes to whose first, it’s gotta be me, because I offer up the same consideration.

          And there’s my answer.

          • CuriousMale says:

            “Bail money is a huge plus”

            LOL! Even if you are not joking, that is funny.

            Interesting theory on being first, yet willing to allow your partner to “party up” and have sex with other women. Most people would consider a way of putting someone first would be to remain faithful to them; you seem to feel otherwise. Is this due to your participation in pornography, or for some other reason? It is also different from the way your stereotypical counterpart males are depicted, in that they feel it is fine to have sex with other women, but would not generally tolerate/be okay with their partners having sex with other men. How does one show they are putting someone first if they are having sex with other people?

            Another question if you don’t mind me asking: Amid your circle of friends, do you have male friends who are disrespectful to their wives or girlfriends, and if so, how do you deal with that?

            • Ren says:


              I ain’t joking….

              It’s for some other reason. I don’t, by nature, think humans are sexually monogamous. I think some do very well at being sexually monogamous, but I’m not so great at it, and I don’t expect others to be either. Now, there are good reasons to make the choice to be sexually monogamous- many of them health related, like STD’s/STI’s and pregnancy. However, even though nothing is foolproof, if one exercises caution and takes the right preventive/safety measures, those concerns can be narrowed drastically. Many folk choose to be sexually monogamous for religious and social reasons- and I am fine with that- as THEIR choice. But it ain’t mine, and well, despite the fact that for eons it has been dictated by religion and society that humans of fine moral character and what not are sexually monogamous- well, I think via nature we’re not and being so really has shit all to do with moral character. Plenty of folk who swear up and down that they are fine moral sorts and monogamous? Well, they ain’t. And lying about it? Well, that is where the real pain comes in IMHO. I figure that NOT lying about it and saying upfront and flat out “this is how I see it” is a consideration that DOES put whoever I might be with first- and I expect the same consideration. It’s the lying that makes someone lesser in my eyes, not the lack of sexual monogamy.

              I am also one of those folk who sees sex as a physical thing. To me, sex, love and intimacy are not all rolled up together as an exclusive deal. As I am fond of saying: “Intimacy lives in the heart and head, not the crotch”. So to me, being first and putting someone else first ain’t got shit all to do with fucking. It has to do with how you treat them, talk to and engage them, consider them, countless other things above and beyond and aside from sex. Personally, so long as who ever I am with exercises caution and prevention and is careful? I don’t much care who they fuck. Fucking is fucking. Its a fun physical thing to do that feels good, or that’s at least my opinion on it. So remaining sexually monogamous to me means shit all to me with regards to putting me first. There are plenty of ways someone can show me who is first. Sex ain’t one of ’em.

              As to the other question- Yeah, I got some male friends who do not treat their partners so great. Got some female friends who don’t treat their partners so great either. So long as physical violence ain’t involved, well, I go between it ain’t my business to trying to talk to the parties involved depending on the scale of how not so great it is, and I don’t tolerate it in my presence. I can’t make other people leave folk I feel are mistreating ’em. I can talk to ’em, let ’em know I got their back, but ultimately who they are with and where they go ain’t my decision to make. If physical violence is involved, well, then that shit gets dragged to light as it were, but even if a guy/gal is slappin’ their partner around? I can’t make ’em leave their abuser. I can help ’em when they need it or they let me, but I can’t force ’em to do shit. And I can choose to not be around folk who treat their partners like shit, and have exercised that right on many occasions.

    • Curious Male, I once helped a disabled man write a personal profile/ad (like for Match.com), since in his past ads, he was “apologetic” about his disability. He had always written his ads like that, and not surprisingly, had no takers. He believed it was due to the fact of the disability itself, and I know that is partially true. But the apology was ALSO an off-putting thing, in my opinion. I told him to take it out and I rewrote it thusly: I am ____ (disability type) and if you can’t handle that kind of challenge, I am not the person for you. I enjoy the challenge of my life and I’m looking for someone who also enjoys a challenge… (etc) I wrote it as more of a dare.

      Now, whaddaya think? Did he get girls? YES, Daisy brags, he DID get takers. So it was not just the disability, but the attitude that he was projecting. And you know, all the apologizing was not something he really FELT but something he thought he was expected to say to put women at ease, blah blah. I think the Nice Guy Whining is similar: If I whine, I look harmless and nice and she will take pity on me. It just doesn’t work like that, at least not in the long run.

      Maybe me or Ren should write your next ad?

    • Roy Kay says:

      Uh, I am pretty far removed from being a high school football player, but at age 61, with not much disposable income and a 2004 scratched up Hyundai Accent I still manage to get play partners and dates. (Married 38 years, open marriage). Lover/play-partner ages vary from 25-68.

      So, what’s the secret? Self-confidence, just as Ren advised. I have some sad stories but keep ’em to myself – unless I can make ’em funny. Actually laughing at yourself is usually taken as a sign of self confidence. Also, I can be nice, just to be nice. Robert Townsend in “Up the Organization” noted that he never got anywhere with contrived self-promotion, but seemed to rise when he was helping his people succeed at their jobs. The same is true in sex and romance. Usually the more you are a source of joy and pleasure (or at least solace and sustenance), the more people appreciate you. They may not jump in bed with you, but that’s a numbers game – the more people there are attracted to you in some ways, the increased odds that some of them will want to share their life – emotional, intellectual, social, sexual – with you.

      One more thing. Ya gotta screw up the nerve to actually ask for it. It can be something as simple as “Hey. I gotta tell you I am interested. I’d love it if the feeling was mutual.” Rejection is part of the system. But like they say in sales “You fail to close 100% of the calls you don’t make.” Even 2% beats that. And it can be a pretty soft sell. Not always. Sometime, they LIKE a hard sell, but you’ll pick that up in their amiable combativeness, amiable being the operative word. But in any event take rejection with good will and good grace.

      One other thing, always acknowledge self-interest. Actually counterfeit some self-interest if you have to. When someone says “You’re so nice to me.”, reply with a laugh “Nah. I’m just trying to get into your pants.” People LIKE altruism, but they TRUST self-interest. Besides, no one wants to fell like they’re a mercy fuck.

      • Ren says:

        ” “You’re so nice to me.”, reply with a laugh “Nah. I’m just trying to get into your pants.”

        I’d either hit somone who said that, or if I did sleep with them, it would be more like something outta a prison movie than a romance one.

        • Roy Kay says:

          I’ll take door #2, Ren. Not that it’s any safer, but at least I’d be delivering what I promised and take a spin of the wheel to whatever effect. Also, finding out if I should tender such a promise again.

          All in all, it’s really better to note agenda items early and often, whatever the repercussions. At least that way you aren’t leading someone to invest you with more virtue than you really have. Besides, self-interest is always there, admitted or not. Might as well err on the side of disclosing more self interest than less.

          • Ren says:

            heh, door #2 is NEVER a good idea. EVER.

            and I believe in being straight forward….but I guess I am not humorous about it.

            • Roy Kay says:

              Well, since I did open door # 2 ………

              Ladies and Gentlemen.

              In this corner, weighing in at less than 100# is Renegade Evolution, hot MILFy east coast professional sexual mercenary. In that corner, weighing in at 200# is Roy Kay, dowdy middle-aged midwestern rubber molding salesman. Who will fair the worst?

              The smart money is said to be on Renegade Evolution with Roy Kay to die in the first round; but we must recall that Renegade Evolution too will not emerge unscathed, for she will suffer a long and lingering ignomony of even having gotten in the ring with him (or rather having him getting in her rings).

              Both contenders are advised that this shall be conducted according to Marquis de Sade rules. Now you each shall go to your separate corners and come out and fuck dirty!

              • Ren says:

                i have a taser gun. totally not a fair fight. and you called me “milfy” I hate the term milf.

                • When we will have the term gilf? LOL– Too much to ask for?

                  • Ren says:

                    LOL, I got a friend who is a grandma, and a damn fine lookin’ woman, and she has a t-shirt with “GILF” on it…so, Its out there.

                  • rootietoot says:

                    I like “mamil”- referring to those ridiculous dudes on street bikes: Middle Aged Men In Lycra

                    I do NOT like milf.

                • Roy Kay says:

                  Eh, I need something other than middle aged, which was to be my bailiwick. Edit as you wish. I trust you. I’m remarkably oblivious that way.

                  Memo to self: Wear thick rubber suit.

                  • Ren says:

                    39 is middle aged? really?

                  • Roy Kay says:

                    I figure older than 35, but apparently the definition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_age varies from 35-50 to 45-65. The next slot younger seems to be called “young adult”, but “hot young adult east coast professional sexual mercenary” loses something by using the term.

                    I considered myself “middle aged” at 25, and probably will remain so for a good long while. I don’t exactly plan on being “old” at 65, even though that probably puts me in the last quartile of my lifespan.

  6. Ren says:

    i always figured like this:

    18-30 young adult
    30-50 adult
    50-65 middle aged adult
    65+ hell, bring on the retirement goodies!!!

  7. I don’t know why I’m just responding to this, but a thousand times YES! I especially agree on the difference between genuine nice guys who may be lonely or single and the whiners (MRA/PUA types) who blame their personal problems and life failures on women/feminism (Dude, you suck at life. THAT is why you fail.)

    I’ve dated bad boy types in the past because, well, I’m have a “horrible, vicious cunt” streak a mile wide, that most people don’t get to see. I tend to exude the confidence and general don’t-fuck-with-me-despite-my-smile aura that precludes that side of my personality having to come out. I have a quick temper, I’m slow to forgive, etc etc. I’ve dated alpha males because I am ambitious and a go-getter myself. But I’ve also dated genuine nice guys who are usually huge scifi-fantasy nerds because I’m that too. Basically, I date male versions of myself.

    I never have and never will be attracted to whiners of any sex. “My life sucks, it’s all men’s fault!”; “My life sucks, it’s all women’s fault!” Ugh, shut up!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s