Why Shy Inexperienced Men Should Consider Dating A Fat Chick

[elaine567]

I haven't posted much in this thread because my advice is something you've definitely heard before. Whatever has happened in your past is a predictor for your future, only because you are not anticipated to change your behavior. If you change your behavior...then all bets are out the window. I'm not saying you haven't tried but the reality is, that is the solution. I'm not sure if anyone needs to go over what changes are recommended but the main thing is to try and fail and laugh about it. If you could modify your lifestyle to have more opportunities to try and fail, I think you'd find success more easily.

 

I think being averse to changing behaviour is something many of the people here who are struggling have in common.

[DJOkawari]

People will boast about the most stupid things.

 

The girls I've slept with drunk, you'd orbit sober.

 

---

 

I feel like I've personally offended you with my previous post, Jabron1. I'm sorry I damaged your ego. I recommend not tying your personal worth to your lifestyle - in that sense, you're the same as the people asking for advice in this thread.

[LookAtThisPOst]

It is definitely "to each their own". Having lived on both sides of this coin, I feel any person has the ability to choose what is "their own".

 

Right, I recall someone asking me if I ever smoked pot. I said I didn't, and they asked, "You didn't even experiment" and I said, "Nope, no desire to."

 

They looked at ME with judgement after that.

 

I can't relate.

 

It's funny how I am in a group of people and they start talking about their drinking escapades, even in their 40s about the stupid crap they did when they were drunk and they laugh about it.

 

The stories I heard had been frat boy-like shenanigans that were stupid. Like waking up naked somewhere or something like that. I guess THEY can relate to the tom foolery.

 

I heard someone mention that, "I don't trust a person that doesn't drink." It's like people who partake in certain vices judge those who don't for some reason.

 

I drink socially, but not to the point of inebriation, and if people start lighting up joints...that's my que to leave the party or hang with non-pot smokers at the other end of the party.

 

The girls I've slept with drunk, you'd orbit sober.

 

I'm better off that way.

Edited June 29, 2016 by LookAtThisPOst

[PrettyEmily77]

So this thread has taken a turn, 12 pages on...

 

I thought OP had accepted his premise was a little (a lot) on the silly/offensive side and let it drop?

 

I mean, how much is there to say about the merits of shy inexperienced guys dating a 'fat chick' to hick up their self-esteem - which amount to exactly zero anyway?

Edited June 29, 2016 by PrettyEmily77

[BlueIris]

I think this is how virtually every struggling guy would define "living the dream . . ."

 

 

 

You're very fortunate - it's a miserable existence. It puts so much pressure on situations that should be light and fun. You're constantly looking for any hint of a glimmer of interest. Any lost opportunity can mean months or years before the next one comes along. And in those dry spells, it seems like every woman who is even remotely attractive and/or interesting is coupled up.

 

There is no dignity in being alone unless you are able to hook up with someone at least occasionally. There is no dignity in adopting a take-you-will-have-you mindset - although that's probably the place where a lot of us end up - and there is no dignity in intentionally using people. Where do you turn?

 

“Miserable existence?” You are in “misery” if you don’t get as much attention and choice of sex partners as you want? That’s more likely the cause than the effect.

 

Also, it’s not “fortune.” Being miserable, undignified and covetous is not the result of luck or fate just as being interpersonally attractive and enjoyable to be around is not luck or fate. Covetous self-pity does not justify exploiting other people and viewing them as tools for your pleasure or desires.

 

While I am NOT saying that anyone here is a sociopath, I think it’s worth considering what Martha Stout, Ph.D., says in her book The Sociopath Next Door: "The most reliable sign, the most universal behavior of unscrupulous people is not directed, as one might imagine, at our fearfulness,” Stout says. “It is, perversely, an appeal to our sympathy.” The combination of consistently bad or inadequate behavior and frequent pity plays, Stout continues, is the closest thing to a warning you’ll ever get that you are being manipulated by a sociopath. http://www.lovefraud.com/beware-the-sociopath/how-to-spot-a-con/the-pity-play/

 

Even if it doesn't rise to that level, The Pity Play is merely a transparent manipulation, a diversion. Don't view human beings as things to exploit for your desire and you'll make a great deal of progress toward being respected and liked.

[TooLegitToQuit]

Well, I have hooked up w someone I wasn't attracted to once or twice in my past from a long while ago when I was young and dumb--and all I ended up w was disgusted w myself. Nothing good came from it. It sure didn't make me feel more confident w the women I was attracted to.

 

I just can't imagine hooking up w someone I'm not attracted to now.

[LookAtThisPOst]

Well, I have hooked up w someone I wasn't attracted to once or twice in my past from a long while ago when I was young and dumb--and all I ended up w was disgusted w myself. Nothing good came from it. It sure didn't make me feel more confident w the women I was attracted to.

 

I just can't imagine hooking up w someone I'm not attracted to now.

 

Well, at least you woke up, some people seem to enjoy it.

[SammySammy]

So this thread has taken a turn, 12 pages on...

 

I thought OP had accepted his premise was a little (a lot) on the silly/offensive side and let it drop?

 

I mean, how much is there to say about the merits of shy inexperienced guys dating a 'fat chick' to hick up their self-esteem - which amount to exactly zero anyway?

 

It would seem working on their self-esteem would be the obvious and most effective solution.

 

But, as elaine567 said, resistance to change seems to be the common thread with guys like this.

[DJOkawari]

Well, at least you woke up, some people seem to enjoy it.

 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying it.

[LookAtThisPOst]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying it.

 

Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree.

[DJOkawari]

Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree.

 

Earlier I said I do not sleep with people who I am not attracted to. I agree with you on that principle. I'm speaking of the idea of judging others. There is absolutely nothing wrong with someone enjoying something that you do not. For example, your comments regarding: "waking up".

 

Here is your own post:

 

Right, I recall someone asking me if I ever smoked pot. I said I didn't, and they asked, "You didn't even experiment" and I said, "Nope, no desire to."

 

They looked at ME with judgement after that.

 

I can't relate.

 

I agree that they should not judge you. For consistency, you should not judge them either. I felt you had reached that point philosophically, but I guess not.

 

.

Edited June 29, 2016 by DJOkawari

[jen1447]

---

 

I feel like I've personally offended you with my previous post, Jabron1. I'm sorry I damaged your ego. I recommend not tying your personal worth to your lifestyle - in that sense, you're the same as the people asking for advice in this thread.

 

J-Bro's not really a 'guru' but I think this thread still illustrates an interesting social phenomenon where you have a sort of baseline of ....let's just cal it less-than-exemplary humanity and its attendant 'values' advising ppl who are less socially experienced than them on how to conduct themselves in such a way as to put them on the same ethical scale as the baseline. Sort of like used car salesmen selling first-time buyers on the notion that used cars are really where the sweet spot in car ownership lies and that the dream they should aspire to is driving away in that '97 Volvo.

[TooLegitToQuit]

Well, I don't think having a one-night-stand w someone you're not attracted to is necessarily "using" someone. Or rather, she may very well be "using" the guy as well.

 

Women aren't these naive and fragile flowers. They know what's up, and they like sex as much as we do. If she hooks up w a guy she just met from a party or the bar, she probably knows it's just a hookup too.

 

(I'm not contradicting what I said earlier though. Nothing good came from getting w a girl I wasn't into, not even a boost of confidence. The best-case scenario involved her feeling the same way, a few hours of stunted sleep after the act, and an awkward parting in the morning.)

Edited June 29, 2016 by TooLegitToQuit

[Jabron1]

Well, I don't think having a one-night-stand w someone you're not attracted to is necessarily "using" someone. Or rather, she may very well be "using" the guy as well.

 

Women aren't these naive and fragile flowers. They know what's up, and they like sex as much as we do. If she hooks up w a guy she just met from a party or the bar, she probably knows it's just a hookup too.

 

You are talking way too much sense.

[jen1447]

Well, I don't think having a one-night-stand w someone you're not attracted to is necessarily "using" someone. Or rather, she may very well be "using" the guy as well.

 

Using implies deception, so no, as long as everyone knows what they're getting and isn't being led on I think it's fine. But if you mislead them into thinking it's sth it isn't, that's using. And the next step beyond that would be exploitation - deceiving someone who's exceptionally vulnerable for whatever reason - emotional immaturity, low intelligence, etc. Or in the case of these "fat chicks," ppl who are presumably socially isolated to some extent and starved for social attention and validation. The person preying on them would be selling social acceptance or advancement under the guise of a brief sexual relationship that was never actually intended to be fulfilling for the victim, and the inevitable result would be the predator getting 'practice' while the victim ultimately gets rejected when they're no longer useful and has their esteem just go further into the toilet.

[Hyperion227]

I think there's a lot of sanctimonious rubbish being talked from the women on this thread. Yes, the OP's terms are a bit blunt and I can only hope that the casual advocacy of this course of action is a bit tongue in cheek. But the idea that women don't judge men on their appearance, don't express a level of disgust with their friends when joking about a particular ugly or fat man they know or don't immediately write many men off on their looks alone is just ridiculous. I was only in a coffee shop the other day when I overheard a group of women discussing how unattractive all the men in their office are.

[BlueIris]

I think there's a lot of sanctimonious rubbish being talked from the women on this thread. Yes, the OP's terms are a bit blunt and I can only hope that the casual advocacy of this course of action is a bit tongue in cheek. But the idea that women don't judge men on their appearance, don't express a level of disgust with their friends when joking about a particular ugly or fat man they know or don't immediately write many men off on their looks alone is just ridiculous. I was only in a coffee shop the other day when I overheard a group of women discussing how unattractive all the men in their office are.

 

Were they talking about how they would use those guys as training tools because they consider them unattractive? If they were, they'd be doing the same thing that OP is recommending.

[DJOkawari]

Well, I don't think having a one-night-stand w someone you're not attracted to is necessarily "using" someone. Or rather, she may very well be "using" the guy as well.

 

Women aren't these naive and fragile flowers. They know what's up, and they like sex as much as we do. If she hooks up w a guy she just met from a party or the bar, she probably knows it's just a hookup too.

 

You've quoted the word "using" however I'm not sure which post you are referring to. The terms "used car" and "using a human" are two different forms of the word. I'm not sure who disagrees with you. Both men and women know "what's up". I don't see anyone recently saying otherwise.

 

So, I agree, but who are you responding to?

 

 

But the idea that women don't judge men on their appearance, don't express a level of disgust with their friends when joking about a particular ugly or fat man they know or don't immediately write many men off on their looks alone is just ridiculous. I was only in a coffee shop the other day when I overheard a group of women discussing how unattractive all the men in their office are.

 

Maybe you're referring to posts deep in the thread, but without a quotation, it is impossible to tell whom you are referring to. As far as I can tell just about everyone would agree that appearance is a factor in determining potential partners for both genders.

 

So, I agree, but who are you responding to?

[jen1447]

But the idea that women don't judge men on their appearance, don't express a level of disgust with their friends when joking about a particular ugly or fat man they know or don't immediately write many men off on their looks alone is just ridiculous.

 

Was that idea actually ever stated in this thread?

[Hyperion227]

Were they talking about how they would use those guys as training tools because they consider them unattractive? If they were, they'd be doing the same thing that OP is recommending.

 

No hence the first part of my post. But there have been many posts here bemoaning the shallowness of dividing women into hot or fat chicks or pretending how women are so much deeper than men where attraction ism concerned. Quotes from this thread:

 

 

And yep, that's the thing with most women - more than looks when it comes to a guy. While, with men it's the contrary...looks are more important to them.

 

 

 

God, wouldn't the dating world be so much better if we could just rid ourselves of the ridiculous notion that "hot" is better and that "fat" is less-than?

Edited June 29, 2016 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
fixed quotes ~T

[losangelena]

No hence the first part of my post. But there have been many posts here bemoaning the shallowness of dividing women into hot or fat chicks or pretending how women are so much deeper than men where attraction ism concerned. Quotes from this thread:

 

 

'And yep, that's the thing with most women - more than looks when it comes to a guy. While, with men it's the contrary...looks are more important to them.'

 

 

'God, wouldn't the dating world be so much better if we could just rid ourselves of the ridiculous notion that "hot" is better and that "fat" is less-than?'

 

Considering that you have no idea what I or the men I've dated look like, you've got about, mmm, zero ground to stand on to judge me for being sanctimonious. I doubt anyone would call me shallow if they knew. Secondly, as it pertains to my post, where did I say that women aren't shallow? Did you read the rest of my post? I called out both genders. Don't get on my case, I practice what I preach.

[LookAtThisPOst]

Earlier I said I do not sleep with people who I am not attracted to. I agree with you on that principle. I'm speaking of the idea of judging others. There is absolutely nothing wrong with someone enjoying something that you do not. For example, your comments regarding: "waking up".

 

Here is your own post:

 

 

 

I agree that they should not judge you. For consistency, you should not judge them either. I felt you had reached that point philosophically, but I guess not.

 

.

 

I think it may come off as judging only because I feel I'm meeting too many people who participate in this behavior. I encounter a lot in the dating pool and quite frankly it disturbs me that there is this cavalier attitude towards it.

 

More of a "kids these days! speech if you can see where I'm coming from.

 

Yet, I'm getting brow beaten for "being a sober, orbiter than getting laid drunk" kind of person. So you can understand how it can be a reactionary post.

[Ensam]

I don't even know why fat chicks are always dragged up as some sort of stereotype of the lowest or worst a guy could do. It's excessive weight. Yeah ideally not something one has as we weren't designed to carry around a lot of superfluous weight out of health reasons as well as aesthetical reasons. Doesn't change who they are as persons though, doesn't mean they can't be attractive anyways and certainly doesn't mean they can't look good if they get into shape.

 

I could think of many things far worse with a person than being overweight or fat.

[jen1447]

I think there's a lot of sanctimonious rubbish being talked from the women on this thread. Yes, the OP's terms are a bit blunt and I can only hope that the casual advocacy of this course of action is a bit tongue in cheek. But the idea that women don't judge men on their appearance, don't express a level of disgust with their friends when joking about a particular ugly or fat man they know or don't immediately write many men off on their looks alone is just ridiculous. I was only in a coffee shop the other day when I overheard a group of women discussing how unattractive all the men in their office are.

 

No hence the first part of my post. But there have been many posts here bemoaning the shallowness of dividing women into hot or fat chicks or pretending how women are so much deeper than men where attraction ism concerned. Quotes from this thread:

And yep, that's the thing with most women - more than looks when it comes to a guy. While, with men it's the contrary...looks are more important to them.

God, wouldn't the dating world be so much better if we could just rid ourselves of the ridiculous notion that "hot" is better and that "fat" is less-than?

 

Please explain how you equate those two quotes with claiming that "women don't judge men on their appearance, don't express a level of disgust with their friends when joking about a particular ugly or fat man they know or don't immediately write many men off on their looks alone."

 

Gloria seemed to simply say that she thinks men care about looks more than women, and losangelina was making a point about realism in social values. I don't see where either makes the claims you attribute to them.

Edited June 29, 2016 by jen1447

[Hyperion227]

Please explain how you equate those two quotes with claiming that "women don't judge men on their appearance, don't express a level of disgust with their friends when joking about a particular ugly or fat man they know or don't immediately write many men off on their looks alone."

 

Gloria seemed to simply say that she thinks men care about looks more than women, and losangelina was making a point about realism in social values. I don't see where either makes the claims you attribute to them.

 

Yes jen. I agree. Don't know what I was thinking