I love people who don't suffer from LS or incel telling us how we should feel, and using shaming tactics on top of it. Real classy.

I agree. Stand up to bullshitters man.

No one is ever going to shame me into thinking that "admitting honestly when something is extremely painful" is being "negative."

No matter how many assholes say that in my lifetime, I will not stand for that kind of garbage. Admitting pain, even admitting unbearable pain is not being negative.

If you have no compassion for pain, then why the fuck would you be here if you don't have to suffer from the condition yourself? If not to try to shame others in pain and feel superior about yourself?

Shaming other people who are in pain to feel guilty about being in pain, is truly negative behavior. It's abusive, and destructive. I have no respect at all for it.

I sometimes think the internet brings out the worst in people.

Would CoolWoman or Lemonlime be so quick to make these little passive aggressive dismissive remarks in real life? I don't think so. Though from my experience women like that are no more sympathetic in real life. They tend to dismiss your problems with some simplistic one-liner and then continue with their narcissistic talk. Regardless of how many good women are out there, you can guarantee that plenty are only skirting by because they are reasonably attractive females.

There's also the issue of people who are suffering vs. those not suffering, and those lying to themselves. Suffering through an earthquake is real bad, and I feel for the people who suffered loss because of it, but it's just not the same type of suffering as, say, cancer or some kind of debilitating chronic disease (which both thechak and I, and several others in here, suffer from). What people, women especially, don't realize is that this type of stuff changes your outward mannerisms and makes it difficult all snarky and suave like the modern woman expects. Women misinterpret this as a "lack of confidence" and then dismiss a guy because of it.

There's a poster here people love to hate named fschmidt. One of his (many, some justified, others not) criticisms of women is that they only see confidence with (1) women and (2) party-style social situations as genuine confidence. They don't see confidence in being able to solve complex problems, confidence in hobbies, etc. as confidence. Many of the guys in the computer science class I was in were very confident in computers, and otherwise decent (not overweight, good hygiene, not antisocial, etc.) but not matters of the heart. And so they were starved of women and perennially ignored because they committed the sin of not being confident in seduction.

This whole "you can't help who you're attracted to" is overly simplistic. There were many relationships in the past were love grew. Modern social environments don't give men who need time to show their confidence a chance. And so they are perennially ignored. Doubly so people with physical health problems like thechak and I. Women don't care because they have plenty of men to choose from and if some are desperate, who cares? Just tell them they need to gain confidence and you can assuage yourself of any guilty feeling that lots of men are being left out for no reason.

Of course you try to explain this to women and it's like talking to a wall. I've learned that women are generally bad at implementing efficient societal paradigms. They're great at setting up stuff that gives them an enormous number of men to choose from and makes tons of men desperate. Only problem is that societies like that tend to not last longer than about 50 years or so before descending into chaos.

thechalk, you have a chip on your shoulder which is so huge, than soon you will have to add "a split scapula" to the list you gave me on your first post... I wish you could see it yourself, because having a chip on your shoulder is a specially unattractive trait, both in males and females. And please do not take this as a personal attack, I do mean it and I do hope you become conscious of it. It makes you obsessive, hysterical, and in the end an absolute bore when you keep going over and over the same subject, exaggerating it more and more.

Noncel woman tells incel guy who can't swallow or talk that he has a chip on his shoulder after spending time to elucidate his point of view. I love this!

so much so for helping to guys in here. bring more cool sister I am sure they need more.Heh even in here we are judged for being negative. I wonder one of these bitches were in our condition what they would feel about it?

obviously there was an attraction there or they wouldn't have dated me in the first place

all in all your reaction is useless to me and i disagree, if a women stops dating me for those reasons i will definitely hold that against them, they should have been more understanding, patient and helpfull!

i'm shure you mean well but you clearly don't know what its like and understand to be loveshy and/or incel and what that does to you

So rather than address the points I made, and possibly discuss them respectively with me as an equal, or even concede that your way of condescending on people less fortunate than you by calling them negative isn't always the right thing to do, you insult me as hysterical because you have no real way of addressing my points. Classy. Last time I checked, hysterical is an insult, and not even a valid medical condition, it doesn't even exist.

By the way, I had a girl I've been friends with for 4 years online, who speaks to me daily in depth in great detail, read this thread, and she thinks you're a very condescending person and what I posted was very attractive, well intentioned, brave, and honest for a man to post. So I have the word of a female with four years of experience respecting me and finding me attractive, against some condescending stranger eager to toss out insults at me, because I dared to question her ways when she started putting down people less fortunate than she is.

You claim I am unattractive, and insult me, yet that isn't the case. Do you always resort to personal attacks with no validity when people point out something hypocritical or demeaning in what you say? Maybe you should try to be the better person for once, as I can see your passive aggressive nature slipping. No hugs now, eh? That's because they were never honest, well intentioned hugs in the first place. You're a liar.

Hi quitforlife,

By the way you describe your "fake personality", I don't believe it is doing you any favours with women. Most women feel uncomfortable with overtly sexual jokes (sorry, what exactly are "wet-willies and noogies"?). Apart from that, if you intend to meet a partner, that being a person who will love you and want to be with you, and you start by offering her a fake personality, that just can't work, can it? When she gets to know the real you, she will feel cheated. You have mentioned you don't show yourself like this in front of women... but you may do without noticing. The woman who will be your partner may well meet you by seeing you interact with your male friends at first, and that is the image she will get of you.

1.) How obvious do you think that it tends to be if somebody is behaving as they are because of a defense mechanism such as in my example? In other words, would you think that somebody behaving like that is most likely just very immature, is extremely socially awkward and distrusting of others or some combination of the above?

Difficult to say anything without actually witnessing your behaviour. I tend to assume the way a person behaves is the way a person is, and I like people who are themselves. So if I met you behaving in one way and then learned that you actually are quite the opposite, I would probably also feel cheated. The immaturity and social awkwardness are impossible to judge without actually being there and seeing you.

2.) Also, how big of a problem is an extreme lack of confidence going to be for a man? For example, would you be repulsed by a guy who clearly did not have faith in himself? (I for one do not agree with the so called 'looksists' who insist that all that women really care about is a man's physical appearance. In my opinion confidence is a much bigger issue, but I wanted to hear (or more accurately read) what your thoughts on this matter were.)

I would only be "repulsed" by a man who did something repulsive, such as eating his bogeys in front of me, or spit in his food. "Repulsive" is an epithet I would very rarely use with a human being. The only time I remember thinking someone was repulsive was when watching a pedophile on TV in court and hearing of what he had done.

However, lack of confidence in a man would indeed put me off. I do prefer confident people, as I am confident myself and I have had bad experiences with one particular partner that was not confident (I described him in my 2009 thread, if I remember that right). Confidence and self-esteem are two very highly regarded traits for me. And yes, for me that is more important than physical appearance.

Hello Coolwoman,

I do have a weird sense of humor that most people don't get, but when I slip into my 'goofy-mode' as a means of dealing with social discomfort and distrust of other people I greatly exaggerate my humor. Sorry, I just assumed that everybody knew about noogies and wet-willies. A noogie is a prank where you make a fist and rub your knuckles into the other person's head. Typically, you put the other person in a headlock first. A wet willy is a prank where you lick your finger and then stick it in somebody else's ear.

Here is an example of a noogie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YRYxaJ6Usw&NR=1

Again, a more natural part of my personality would only maybe do these things once in a great while. However, the front personality does this type of immature behavior all the time as a defense mechanism.

I just tend to assume that people will not be able to understand me anyway or will try to hurt me to make themselves feel better, so with the fake personality they can't get at me to the same extent. It's something that I've done since I was a little kid. The biggest issue is that I flat out don't trust people and I tend to me convinced that I have to either hide or semi-hide myself until I have known them for a while first, then gradually I can let them know the real me.

Thechak, I think you're misrepresenting what I said. I never professed a belief that people who are suffering and have a negative attitude are somehow bad, you're the one who said that. If I did say that, I really would be an uncaring, asshole bullshitter, or one of the other nasty names you just used to describe me. I'm also not trying to to dismiss anyone's pain or suffering. I know things can get hard, life gets that way and I really really wish I could change it for you. What I'm trying to do is explain a way of thinking that might be more constructive.

Everyone suffers from hard times in life. It's different for everyone, but nearly every person has to deal with some kind of trauma whether it's large or small. The constructive way to deal with these sorts of problems would be to realistically assess your situation and try not to get bogged down in hopelessness. For example, say you needed to get to work one day but your car won't start. One option would be to throw up your hands and proclaim that the world has come to an end and there is no hope. Another way might be to realize that the situation is really crappy, but not hopeless. There are things which can be done and the sky isn't falling. I'm not talking about deluding yourself with positivity. It's one thing to realize that there are legitimate avenues for improvement, and a whole other to pretend that your life is absolutely wonderful all the time when it obviously isn't. I'm talking about trying to change the way your perceive setbacks.

Let me be very clear. People who are suffering are not bad. Feeling bad in a challenging situation is not bad. In no way am I saying that the unfortunate should just cheer up and all their problems will disappear. That sort of attitude is callous. I'm also not trying to dismiss your problems. If that were the case I would have left a long time ago. What I'm trying to do is provide you with a way of thinking about and understanding difficulty that will hopefully serve you well.

Please keep in mind that I respect your opinion and don't want to start a conflict with you.

Thank you for trying to discuss this more reasonably, Lemonlime, without the personal attacks. I respect that, and you for opening this dialog here. That's very admirable as I know things have gone poorly so far.

However, I think where we still might not be seeing eye to eye, is that while I can recognize some attitudes might be more outwardly "successful" in certain situations, and my attitudes may not be the most "successful" in other people's eyes.... I truly do not believe it is another person's place to make assumptions and hold them against me that I am a "negative thinker." And even more so that my thinking is faulty and would be preferably fixed by something they personally consider more positive. The problem with making that kind of value judgment, is it's extremely subjective, judgmental and and likely inaccurate.

What's positive to me, and what's positive to you, are likely going to be very different things, because it's very relative.

I've had some people in my life tell me I'm one of the most positive people they have ever met in their entire life. I've had other people tell me I'm so negative I'm unbearable, that I'm whiney, pathetic and annoying and no one would want me (Cool Woman seems to have implied that in this thread which didn't surprise me too much). Who is right?

Well, I honestly believe I am right about whether my thinking is a positive thing for me. I see other people as bystanders, who do not live my life, do not have any full comprehension of me, what I've been through, why I believe what I believe and act the way I do. Personally, I view myself as an extremely positive person on many levels, in that I value things like truth, compassion, kindness, intelligence, artistic expression, science, philosophy, and a struggle to be the best person I can be immensely.

I may not have the "same" beliefs, life circumstances, attitudes, or behaviors as other people do, but I follow my own unique positive beliefs, that differ greatly from others.

People can and do look at the outside of my situation and claim I'm negative (and they often do relentlessly, even cruelly) and that I should try being more positive, but who's to say they are right? I honestly don't think they have any credibility in saying so.

Some people would say I'm a worthless negative person for even considering suicide seriously with my best intentions, other people can recognize in certain circumstances that suicide might be a positive option to consider carefully (especially with long term suffering seeming inevitable).

My problem, is with people going around, promoting whatever brand of "positivity" they believe in as the true positivity, and brandishing anyone else as negative, I think it is very abusive to well intentioned people who have unique belief systems.

Now if rather than label me negative, someone wanted to discuss potentially "inefficient beliefs" at obtaining a specific goal? I'd be much more likely to listen carefully and consider what they say more seriously. But those that would automatically assume their beliefs are more positive than mine, I am highly skeptical of as I think they are full of shit, as they really don't know what makes me tick.

To clarify, I am not saying anyone else's views of what is "positive" are inferior to mine, or that they shouldn't live their own lives by their own interpretations. I just take issue when people automatically assume their perception of what is positive is superior to mine, or other people's, just because we what we value is different.

That's why I don't like blind positivity. Because it's not a one size fits all is positive solution. It's completely dependent on the individual, and trying to force your view as "the way" ends up abusing other people who would choose the right to their own interpretation.

Quitforlife:

"Sorry, I just assumed that everybody knew about noogies and wet-willies" --> not people whose first language is not English , but now I know and won't forget!

I'm a little confused. When did I attack you personally? I don't want to upset you in the future.



See, I'm not quite sure. I think that realistically evaluating the positive components of any situation tends to be objective. An assessment of high fidelity about the positives of a situation should, by definition, be a process which appreciates objectivity.



To a point. There are always going to be things that most people can agree on as being generally positive/negative belief and attitudes



That's awful. I'm sorry that people have made such unpleasant comments. Who said these things?



It is totally possible to value wonderful qualities and pursuits, but still have a troubled mindset.



If someone were being cruel, then you're right, that would be wrong. However, sometimes people disagree in order to offer constructive criticism. You might be surprised how well other people can understand your problems. Even those who are not in your position can be useful by providing an outside analysis, thereby revealing a new perspective that you would otherwise never see.



That's awful and simply untrue. I sort of know this territory, so if you ever want to message me and talk about it, go ahead.



Maybe now is a good time to elucidate your beliefs and we can try to work out what might constitutes positive and negative thought processes? ^_^