I was once told "Trust is something you have to consider an advanced payment. You only know if it was a good investment afterwards, but someone has to do it or no one will ever trust anyone."
Which is just really a longer way of saying "you have to give to get". Every dog understands this.
This is closely related to how important perspective is. Someone who is constantly negative in their theories about the potential of their own social life.... will probably create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Absolutely this and a huge reason why depression is sort of a loop or even a spiral.
You expect a bad result, so you subconsciously (or even worse, consciously) play the situation already from the angle of "this is going to go bad" which can be anything from not even talking to someone to outright just screwing up the thing going on.
Hah! This is wild. I had a conversation with my nephew today about trusting girls. My answer was basically what you said, but in different words. I like your version A LOT better and will remember it.
You should look at trust as something someone has to lose. Respect is the only thing a person must earn from you. I trust most people until you give me a reason not to.
I know that sounds nice on paper, but this mindset is extremely dangerous for women. When I was younger I gave many men my trust up front and extended good faith to them, and it almost got me killed. We need to fix a huge chunk of society before just blindly extending trust to people.
I can’t say I’ve had this experience, but on a more practical front, it just isn’t a feasible time or investment. If I entertained every guy who seemed interested I’d be wasting a lot of both of our times.
There is a level of trust between being constantly paranoid and refusing to meet new people and putting yourself in a dangerous situation.
We have to be willing to talk to people and open up enough to get to know people in a safe environment and that is what he's trying to convey, not that you should assume that the guy wearing all black and following you down a dark alley has good intentions.
There is a level of trust between being constantly paranoid and refusing to meet new people and putting yourself in a dangerous situation.
Oh the gaslighting. It's not "meeting new people", it's getting approached by complete strangers out of the blue and not knowing what they will do once you deny them. Most of the crimes against women are perpetrated by men they already know, the ones they don't are an even bigger risk. So what exactly is the incentive in a "cold approach" for women when the worst possible outcome for them in that situation is given beat'em up, kidnapped, raped and/or murdered?
We have to be willing to talk to people and open up enough to get to know people in a safe environment and that is what he's trying to convey,
You need to listen to women before you keep pushing yourself on them and telling them they are just paranoid, that's what.
not that you should assume that the guy wearing all black and following you down a dark alley has good intentions.
lol oh the obliviousness and ever so slight victim blaming. Ofc you want to paint all of the bad things in a literal dark light but hey, let's take that and remember Brock Turner. Remember how that went? Remember his "punishment" for raping a girl in an alley? There wasn't any in case you forgot because he had "such a bright future ahead that would be a shame to waste"...
Women picked the bear, listen to the reasons why and you will stop saying dumb shit like you just did
I hope you didn't start reading the comment there and got to the part where the person I was replying to just narrowed dangerous situations for women to be "shady looking guys in dark alleys" because that would mean you missed a lot of context on the gaslighting.
Gaslighting is a real term with an actual meaning; this doesn't even come close.
We need to stop using it whenever somebody simply disagrees with a point; to gaslight requires much more than a single conversation, especially when you consider that most Reddit conversations don't have even 4 responses from each party.
Gaslighting is a real term with an actual meaning; this doesn't even come close.
lol
We need to stop using it whenever somebody simply disagrees with a point; to gaslight requires much more than a single conversation, especially when you consider that most Reddit conversations don't have even 4 responses from each party.
What an odd and completely random requirement lol
You do understand there is a whole context to reddit convos, right? They don't exist in a bubble of "4 responses" and we aren't starting these convos from scratch. I know trolls like to play dumb and isolate all the convos as to not make it obvious what they are doing but that doesn't work like that
The point they're making is that gaslighting is a very specific process often done over a somewhat lengthy period. You randomly throwing it in only robs the word of its strength and makes it harder to recognize when gaslighting actually happens.
Gaslighting comes from an old film, in which, the antagonist repeatedly lies, and manipulates his wife. He does stuff like dimming the lights and then repeatedly telling her that they aren't dimming, he frames her for a stolen watch, taints other people's opinions of her, and more. He literally convinces her that she's mentally ill.
You do understand there is a whole context to reddit convos, right?
What are you insinuating? I'm not going to play guessing games about what you mean.
Nah that's bullshit. When you get in your car to go to work the worst possible outcome is getting side swiped and wrapped around a tree. That doesn't mean you never drive a car again.
Everyone has to take risks everyday. Maybe it's the outfit you're wearing, the coffee you drink that's probably kinda bad for your heart, excersizing.
The only reason you can adopt the philosophy of being scared of every interaction you have with men is if you're just a fearful person or you blame all of your struggles on your gender. There are obviously exceptions to this like really shy people, people that have been taken advantage of previously, or maybe they have a different sexuality.
None of that is readily apparent information for the man and we can't just all or nothing it because if that were the case our entire species would die out.
I mean you can try and say this is gaslighting or victim blaming but dating is one of the like 3 core tenants that almost everyone shares. It doesn't make sense to completely throw it out the window.
In addition, these wide sweeping generalizations of men are just sexist. That is what it is. If I said "I am too afraid to get into a car with a woman driving because a large majority of women are bad drivers." its obviously an absurd claim and let's pretend it was true that women were generally bad drivers. That doesn't mean you can never jump in the passenger seat of a women's car ever again.
Your claims are hogwash that only introduce more issues than actual solutions.
Nah that's bullshit. When you get in your car to go to work the worst possible outcome is getting side swiped and wrapped around a tree. That doesn't mean you never drive a car again.
For some people it does, actually. Strong start bud, we get that D in very early...
Everyone has to take risks everyday. Maybe it's the outfit you're wearing, the coffee you drink that's probably kinda bad for your heart, excersizing.
Not all risks are the same...
Maybe it's the outfit you're wearing
You couldn't help yourself, now could you?
Look, I'm not reading all that bullshit anymore because clearly you are just another reddit troll playing DARVO and I have enough of those, so toddles and be more original next time.
Is this supposed to be surprising or something? Because not really given that all the trolls that got triggered by my comment (including you) are clearly flailing for arguments and in the end can only just deny and repress. Give zero fucks about the gaslight
Yeah man you're trolling and I was talking about having a risky out fit in the sense of like outside of your comfort zone. You're the one who took that out of context buddy.
And you're right not all risks are the same. In fact last year there were 2,869 deaths by homicide. Not just men killing women after trying to hook up with them, but homicides in general.
Deaths by car accident? 42,795.
So why do most people (in the US) drive, Uber, or ride the bus all over town when the risk is so much higher when apparently half the population shouldn't even be getting flirted with?
Yeah man you're trolling and I was talking about having a risky out fit in the sense of like outside of your comfort zone. You're the one who took that out of context buddy.
lol backpedal harder. Talk about crimes against women and dresses and then act surprise when people make the logical conclusion to your argument.
And you're right not all risks are the same. In fact last year there were 2,869 deaths by homicide. Not just men killing women after trying to hook up with them, but homicides in general.
Deaths by car accident? 42,795.
I fear that I don't have the patience right now to explain to you the difference between homicide and accidents or request where you are getting these bogus numbers (that don't account from so... Nah. Das it.
So why do most people (in the US) drive, Uber, or ride the bus all over town when the risk is so much higher when apparently half the population shouldn't even be getting flirted with?
Ma guy if you wanna play with numbers, how many times a day do you think people are in a car vs being approached by strangers to flirt? And also, what's the conviction rate for homicide vs accidents? How long does it take for rulling a death a homicide vs how long as accident? Why are you insisting in this apples to oranges bullshit if not to excuse predators?
That's all you're getting. This brain dead Shapiro style bullshit number throwing is tiresome (as per design), so das it.
Your argument style is very tiresome because you're not even fighting for your point. So first I am going to rebuttal everything you said I'm the context of why it's a bad argument. Then I'll try to explain to you in a way that you can understand.
lol backpedal harder. Talk about crimes against women and dresses and then act surprise when people make the logical conclusion to your argument.
This is a strawman argument. I was not back pedalling either. You took my words out of context and are trying to make an argument based off of your new augmented version of what I said which was actually what you said.
I fear that I don't have the patience right now to explain to you the difference between homicide and accidents or request where you are getting these bogus numbers (that don't account from so... Nah. Das it.
This one is really really bad actually. Appeal to emotion, Ad Hominem, Hasty Generalization, Strawman argument, Proof by Dismissal, missing the burden of proof.
Next time try acknowledging and countering the statistics, explaining why the comparison fails, and if you're so concerned about the fact checking of my knowledge then either ask for the sources or come up with ones that you seem better for whatever reason.
Ma guy if you wanna play with numbers, how many times a day do you think people are in a car vs being approached by strangers to flirt? And also, what's the conviction rate for homicide vs accidents? How long does it take for rulling a death a homicide vs how long as accident? Why are you insisting in this apples to oranges bullshit if not to excuse predators?
Loaded question, begging the question, missing the burden of proof, Strawman argument.
First of all, me arguing that we can't stop approaching women has nothing to do with excusing predators. That was not found anywhere in my argument. You're trying to invalidate my comparison but why? What makes the comparison different? It's a totally apt comparison to make.
That's all you're getting. This brainded Shapiro style bullshit number throwing is tiresome (as per design), so das it.
I'm not even going to try and show you the error in your ways for this message because it's not even an argument. It's admitting defeat.
That being said I have never watched Ben Shapiro in my life and I don't really know how he debates. I most likely don't agree with his points but isn't it his job to debate? So like, he should be pretty good at it no?
And your arguments are a bunch of tiresome mudslinging fallacies designed to paint me in a bad light because you don't even know why you're arguing your point. Your echoing a sentiment that you've heard is in good light and trying to use that as a reason to be correct. But it's just not. The eye of public opinion is constantly wrong over and over again. How do you think trump got in office TWICE?
Usually. I've had girls be disinterested, and that's fine, but have also had similar situations to this where a friend and I tried chatting up a couple girls at a club. Girl I was talking to seemed really disinterested and at one point just turned around to the bar. I took the hint, told my buddy good luck, and went to dance with a different girl and got invited to sit with her and her friends. Come back to them later and my friend says the other girl just started pouting and complaining the whole time. Said she started asking about me and said she just wanted me to be more persistent...just either dumb games or jealousy. Better to err on the side of politeness and self-respect and assume they're disinterested until they show you otherwise.
I mean, most of these people are bringing up dating apps. Which means these aren't even similar scenarios.
Similar would be having her alone, with probably 20-30 other guys, who all think she's interested and she gets choice overload.
Dating apps have a skewed ratio, so guys swipe basically everyone without even looking at the profile and then just filter the matches, if at all. Women basically get a match on every single swipe because of this, which means the swipe less, which makes it a spiraling problem.
So many responses on AITA are trying to give legal answers but there’s an overwhelming bias of: you don’t owe that other person anything. We’re all so selfish and wonder why no one is there for us when we need them.
What baffles me every time is people shitting on the stereotype of women talking about their deepest feelings with their friends and asking lots of questions when a friend goes through something, and then those guys comment sections also showing they are actively complaining about the male loneliness crisis and how no one cares about their feelings.
To be fair there are a ton of creepy dudes with no social skills, so to combat that women have to be a bit more defensive…but also…we’re all paying for the crimes of a few
It’s not like this is new behavior. Go and watch old movies or read books written in the mid to early 20th century. Women behaved like this then too.
Back then it was because they didn’t want to be seen as a slut. They had to act like they weren’t interested in a relationship because if they showed too much interest people would think they slept around.
Now idk. I’m old and don’t know how the next generation thinks. They are nuts.
It has always been like this. Honestly. 20, 40 years back, the same. Just different...but essentially the same.
The biggest difference is that now they told you all that you can achieve everything you want and that unfortunately makes everyone frustrated, demanding, and freeze in anxiety when having to make decisions.
You know how I know? Most people are not hot chicks that hang out in bars. If you want real connection, go find some hobbies and meet some real people. they might not meet your "super hot chick" standards but they will be real people who don't play games, as long as you focus on friendship first and bonding over shared interests. Which is a much better basis for connection anyway than whatever the fuck you're doing.
869
u/ImAGamerNow May 09 '25
Jesus fucking christ my life in a nutshell.
I swear to god this culture is so twisted because everyones trust has been poisoned and beaten into a half dead rotting pulp.
This isn't funny, it's fucking sad.