Ever since SBG wrote about “How I Met Your Mother” recently, I’ve been thinking about this character I see on screen everywhere. He’s mean to women. The women know they’re being mistreated. And yet they can’t get enough of being used and abused by him.
He doesn’t exist.
Let’s just dispel that myth right away. As presented in TV and film, he doesn’t correlate to anyone in reality. He’s actually a fantasy concocted most likely by male screenwriters who have issues with women.
You know you want him, oh, yes.
Here’s how it probably works: a heterosexual male screenwriter finds he cannot just go out to bars and “pick up chicks.” He notices other guys can. He is jealous of those guys. He needs to rationalize in his head how the women really should be putting out for him and not the other guy. He concocts (unconsciously, perhaps) the delusion that he is a super nice guy, and the guy who can get women into bed is a jerk, and there’s something wrong with those women that they prefer a jerk to a nice guy. Bitches! I know – I’ll write this into my screenplays and teach ‘em good.
That’s probably how it started. Now it’s been handed down from hack to hack for so long, even female writers don’t realize it’s based on a male fantasy. Now people really believe there are women out there who realize “I am being treated like garbage” and decide “I like it – I want me some more of that, oh, yes.”
Those women don’t exist either.
In reality, women sometimes go to bed casually with men they find attractive or entertaining. Women do not like being treated like crap, but they will even sleep with a sexist pig if they haven’t known him long enough to know he’s a sexist pig or don’t care at the moment. They may even ignore some icky traits in order to have a sexual adventure. The main points here are:
- Most of the men who “score” at bars are at least as kind and decent as the guys who don’t. In addition to being decent, they’re also attractive in some way – good-looking, funny, interesting, etc.
- Those men who are jerks but can “score” at bars are hiding their jerk nature in order to appeal to women. Jerks, like people who rob liquor stores and kids who bully other kids, know how to hide their true nature from people who would deprive them of something if they knew better. That’s why whenever a serial killer is caught, all his neighbors are all like, “Wow, he was always so nice, went to church, smelled good.”
- If a woman sees that a man is a jerk but decides to go to bed with him anyway because he’s just so cute or she’s just that bored or whatever, this is a case of her deciding how she wants to spend her time, not of him tricking the naive flower (who couldn’t possibly want casual sex, being female).
The thing about this writing trope is that it puts the men exclusively in the position of power. It depicts women as helpless things that need the constancy of relationships but sometimes get tricked into casual sex. It assumes women who have their own reasons for having casual sex are damaged goods. It assumes men are by nature sex seekers and women are by nature sex awarders, thereby stripping women of any power in the scenario… other than the power to award sex to the dull and/or obnoxious who are being framed as the “right” choice.
There’s another interesting shade to the evolution of the Sexist Jerk Who Scores character: he serves as a punishment and warning to all those great-looking girls who turn down dull, boring and ugly guys in favor of attractive guys. It warns women that sexy men are wolves in sheep’s clothing, so women should settle for the sheep right off the bat. It reminds women that men are allowed to be incredibly shallow about women’s looks and personality traits, but if we start to think like that, we’ll be punished.
{ 58 comments… read them below or add one }
Next Comments →
I think you’re right, but I also think there’s another myth at play. The idea that all men are boorish, but will magically change with the love of the right woman. This Monday’s episode of How I Met Your Mother seemed to focus on that myth more than usual. Perpetuating the myth works in men’s best interests because it keeps women squandering their attention on men who really have no desire to change.
Ramblin Rabbit(Quote) (Reply)
I found myself nodding at your words, especially the “Those men who are jerks but can “score” at bars are hiding their jerk nature in order to appeal to women.” This fits my brother to his core. He pretends to be charming, nice and even likable. In reality, he’s a condescending sexist jerk. Trying to tell the women dating him the truth doesn’t always work because he’s developed a method which adds to the behavior of deceiving jerks.
It’s rather simple. The jerk’s family knows the reality of who he is. They can reveal it and destroy the illusion of him being a good guy. Rather than allow that, the jerk attacks first. He creates a negative impression for the women he dates. His family is horrible and vicious. They are all hateful liars. He tells his girlfriends that she shouldn’t believe his family. Because he’s tricked her into thinking he’s a nice guy, the warning are dismissed as malicious gossip. We only find after they stop dating about all the things he’s said or implied.
Most women eventually discover his deception, causing him to move onto the next woman. Due the number of girlfriends he’s had and the two he married, my brother has perfected his method of character assassination. I don’t think he sees anything wrong with it.
Miss Ree(Quote) (Reply)
The ‘Male Fantasy Character’ subject reminds me of a couple of similar examples from British Comedy – Flashheart from Blackadder and Ace Rimmer from Red Dwarf.
Flashheart is obviously, obviously constructed to be the ultimate antithesis to Blackadder: hyper-masculine, gregarious, and extremely popular with everyone – for no apparent reason, since everyone in the audience is just as annoyed with him as Blackadder is. The fact that he is inexplicably and immediately attractive to every woman in the scene is mystifying from a female point of view. But if you think of him as a male fantasy of ‘that guy I hate’, it all becomes clear – and women become just another way of keeping score.
Ace Rimmer is a bit softer around the edges, since the show decided to devote some time to building his character as a genuinely friendly person, and also made of point of having men inexplicably immediately attracted to him as well. But he’s still out of the same mold as Flashheart – he’s that ‘guy men hate’ character, framed with jealousy.
I find that character off-putting, because he immediately assumes I’m not in the audience – or maybe that I’m part of an audience I’m not.
Hayclearing(Quote) (Reply)
I can’t speak to Flasheart, but I don’t see Ace Rimmer as quite fitting the mold Beta set up — he doesn’t exist as a warning or punishment for women; he exits specifically to juxtapose Rimmer’s neuroses and selfishness. He’s very much a parody of the James Bond/Indiana Jones hyper-masculine action-adventure hero character type, but everyone’s instant adoration of him is also in parody of that. If anything, I’d think he points out the ways such characters are actually ridiculous.
British comedy-wise, I’d compare Beta’s post more to Patrick from Coupling. (A show I really enjoy, despite its terrible, terrible gender politics.) Patrick can pick up any woman he wants; he literally doesn’t see women as existing for the purposes of having sex with him. While he’s much more endearing than Barney on How I Met Your Mother, he’s of the same, non-existent-in-real-life mold.
Reb(Quote) (Reply)
I agree that Patrick is a much better example than Ace Rimmer. Ace is introduced as what Arnold could have been, if he had worked hard and appreciated other people instead of expecting things to magically go his way. And in the only episode I can think of featuring Ace and an actual woman, she’s someone he’s known for a while, so it’s not an instant, mysterious attraction. The only new people we see him meet are the Red Dwarf crew and they like him cause he’s nice to them.
If anything, Ace shows that the Nice Guy (TM) idea of popular guys as jerks is often jealous nonsense. Rimmer can’t figure out why everyone likes Ace, but that’s because of his own issues with people.
harlemjd(Quote) (Reply)
@Ramblin Rabbit, I hadn’t thought to connect that myth, but you’re right. It also puts the responsibility for fixing misogyny in women’s laps. In fact, you could connect this whole mess to the “if only some hot babes woulda loved him, he never woulda killed all those people” trope you get in a lot of horror and suspense stories in all psychotic male behavior gets attributed to sexual frustration.
@Miss Ree, you said it. Nasty people can play nice when it suits them, and many of them are very good at it. Now that character, I would believe.
(I have nothing to add to the Red Dwarf, Black Adder, Coupling discussion, but carry on!)
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
I’ve started thinking lately that Nice Guys are really the low self-esteem whiners – because non-whiners rarely blame their romantic failures on jerks, LOL. In any case, I ran across this post http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/niceguys.shtml
They agree with me! LOL Anyhoo, just thought I would mention it.
Firebird(Quote) (Reply)
That’s awesome, Firebird! I like this bit:
I’ve never exactly thought of it that way, but this rings true to me. With the caveat that some Nice Guys are actually obsessed with being liked by other guys, and the women they date are just a tool to impress the boys rather than a human being. Newsflash: women sense that. While a misogynist who knows he’s a misogynist can grasp that he has to pretend not to hate women for long enough to get one into bed, the Nice Guys for whom women aren’t even actual people aren’t self-aware enough to know they need to be better actors.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
I know that HBI is intended largely as a venting site, but I have SERIOUS issues with their “Red Flags list.” It claims to be warning women away from manipulators, but mixed in amongst valid warning are lost of criteria that reject men as “manipulators” simply for not meeting a writer’s standards of maturity, some of which really make me see red.
Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Call me crazy, but how is an utter lack of maturity or responsibility NOT a red flag? Oh, wait… The “right woman” will be more than happy to “mommy all over” him and grow him right up, since his behavior and immaturity are obviously not his responsibility to begin with…
LostExpatriate(Quote) (Reply)
Hmm, Patrick. Yeah, I can see why some of the Red Flag items are troubling. Like “sleeps constantly” – there could be a lot of reasons other than maturity for that. And “no other hobbies than watching TV” is true of a lot of mature people who don’t have time for hobbies that involve more than them collapsing into chairs at the end of the day. And the refusal to hear about past sex experiences – that CAN be a mature choice if the person realizes he SHOULD be able to hear that without feeling inadequate, but can’t, and is in other ways a good partner. Calling Mom isn’t necessarily immature, either – depends.
I think if you take the list as a whole, you begin to build up a workable profile that sounds like the Nice Guys I’ve wished it was legal to shoot. I can see however why some of the individual items are troubling.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
I’m only half way through that list, and there are several I have issues with. Yeah I get that it’s meant to be a rant, but the part that’s actually the most troubling is the header at top that ends with:
I’m all for ranty and pissed off in its place, but prefacing it with a message that says that it should be taken as a hard and fast line is just irresponsible.
Note: this is not my being defensive for the one or two items I’ve seen that I fit. I happen to hate talking on the phone, and am awful about returning calls. I warn people about this. And yes I will leave the room to talk on the phone if I simply must when there’s someone else present because I have trouble not paying attention to everything being said everywhere and think it’s rude when no one‘s getting my full attention. It also bugs me when people gaily chirp on for half an hour on the phone while I’m sitting right there, so at least I’m consistent.
MaggieCat(Quote) (Reply)
Lost Expatriate:
Certainly, someone with an utter lack of maturity or responsibility is someone to stay away from. But the problem is that many of these Red Flags reflect anything that one person perceives as a lack of maturity. And, as MaggieCat pointed out, the Red Flags are presented as dealbreakers – women are explicitly warned to stay way from men who meet any ONE of the Red Flags.
Some of the specific Red Flags that I’m referring to are:
There are any number of great men who have trouble socializing outside of their comfort zone, which generally involves whatever their big interests are. This hardly makes them immature men-children or manipilators (and remember, this is a list of Red Flags warning women of manipulators).
According to HBI, a recovered alchoholic has a character flaw, not a medical condition. WTF?
What the hell? So cars and sports are “grown up” but comics aren’t? This is just judgemental bullshit. Declaring that anyone with a “juvenile hobby” must be a manipulator to stay away from pisses me off.
That’s right, folks! Geeks with no fashion sense are manipulators. Stay far away.
What the hell?!? This is HEALTHY. I’d be more worried about someone who doesn’t call their mother when they have to make a major life decision. But apparently, in order for someone to be mature (and therefore not a manipulator?) they have to have cut off all ties with their parents.
So anyone who made a youthful mistake and rushed into things is a manipulator?
And the worst:
This makes me see red so much that I have no words.
Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
I think there’s a wish fulfillment element to this trope as well – the wish being that you can treat women as crap as you want and they’ll come running – or that you can be rewarded for not thinking about other people.
SunlessNick(Quote) (Reply)
Oh, absolutely. The “NIce Guy” can convince himself that he is a martyr for putting so much effort into being nice to women that he wants to sleep with, and fantasize about how the day will come when he finally decides to treat the “bitches” the way they obviously want to be treated.
Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Well, I’m glad you guys read around the site. I only read that one particular post (that is, until it became redundant about half way through).
I just thought they said that particular issue better than I could. It does sound like maybe they are a bit bombastic (and perhaps trying to be a bit humorous with their exaggerations) in their advice. Of course, sometimes it is necessary to exaggerate to get people’s attention. They are talking to – I think – the kind of girl who wouldn’t notice that “nice guy” they are describing in that list until it’s too late, and so sometimes you have to over exaggerate to get that person’s attention.
In any case, I did find the tone rather caustic, which is always prone to making enemies.
Firebird(Quote) (Reply)
“It does sound like maybe they are a bit bombastic (and perhaps trying to be a bit humorous with their exaggerations)”
I think the problem is that, in trying to be funny, they turn to perpetuating stereotypes about men. A lot of the stuff that Patrick was rightly complaining about is the sort of stuff that more experienced women tell younger women on stereotypical TV shows. (What kind of job does he have? Is he too attached to his mother?) That sort of thing.
Which might have actually been sensible advice in the 1950′s when people married young and women didn’t have a whole lot of options for leaving a bad marriage. But now? The potential problems that these particular questions are trying to tease out are not the kind that make leaving a relationship dangerous, so they really shouldn’t be mixed in with comments about men who insist on ordering for you or begin stalking you.
Mickle(Quote) (Reply)
Exactly, thank you. It’s one thing to vent about people’s faults. It’s another to mix peevish things in with warning signs of abuse and manipulation with nothing to distinguish them.
The abuse victim-blaming, though, is absolutely inexcusable.
Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Patrick,
The first time you mentioned the Red Flags list I looked and didn’t find it; now I’m glad I didn’t. I was getting annoyed at the anti-geek prejudice you were calling them on (but thinking it was a bit off topic), then I got to that last entry … sheesh. That is, as you say, inexcusable.
Legible Susan(Quote) (Reply)
Administrators,
I’m not sure where to put this, as the “Advertise on THL”page has no comment box, but this is the first page I noticed it on.
The “BlogHer Ad Network” ads (at least, the ones I’m seeing – I hate moving ads with extreme prejudice, so I use FlashBlocker) are for eDiets. They’re all about losing weight, with very-small-print saying exercise is also necessary. I don’t think this is the sort of thing you want to be advertising.
(Btw, the site menu link to the opinion register also says “Advertise on THL”.)
Legible Susan(Quote) (Reply)
Susan,
I haven’t seen those particular ads, and don’t have granular control over every ad BlogHer puts up. I took a quick look at eDiets’ site, and I’m not seeing anything that suggests I need to reach a size zero to be loved, or that I’m disgusting if I don’t use their service, or anything else that strikes me as particularly anti-woman. I don’t consider weight loss services to be evil by default, because there will always be legit reasons for individuals to lose weight amongst all the bullshit reasons. Did the ad specifically invoke any of the bullshit reasons, or did it just invite women who are interested in losing weight to try out their services?
I fixed the link to the Opinion Register – thanks! I was looking for it the other day and could’ve sworn I’d put it on. I didn’t even notice the Advertise link appeared twice. This is what happens when you work 80 hours a week for a few months without a break.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
One of the most honest, emotionally stable people I know is a recovering addict. (Food addiction, which pisses me off all on its own that so many people don’t grasp adddiction can extend to non-chemical things.) Part of it is because she knows she has to recognise her triggers so she doesnt slide into a destructive binge, and identifying the indulgent personality that helped the addiction along in the first place. I’m yet to meet a non-addict who can say ‘I’m only doing this because I’m upset over something so I’m going to call someone rather than indulge in destructive behaviour’ to the degree she can.
For the most part, I think HBI has some interesting things to say (and I have a very sarcastic, OTT sense of humour so I get the feeling a lot is meant tongue-in-cheek) but that comment made me lose a whole lot of respect for the writer and the site.
Scarlett(Quote) (Reply)
I have to add that I’ve known several people with chemical abuse issues in their past who are mature, responsible and concerned about not hurting their friends and lovers.
I would venture a guess that the only people you need to worry about for having prior dependencies are those who have merely swapped one addiction for another, rather than actually grappling with the dependency issues themselves. So, really, what you should be looking for are signs of CURRENT dependencies, some of which can be hard to recognize.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
BetaCandy,
I didn’t look that closely at the ads – I just reacted to “diet site” and thought you might not know, since I assumed you don’t get to preview the ads. Now of course, they’re not turning up again so I can check! If the site looks OK to you, fine.
(80 hours a week – whoa! I wouldn’t last a month.)
Legible Susan(Quote) (Reply)
Betacandy, that’s what I WOULD have tried to say if I wasn’t so pissed off about the sweeping statement about addicts replacing one addiction for another :p There are definitely plenty of addicts who do swap one for another butr it’s incredibly dismissive to imply they all do and it’s something that gets myback up very quickly.
Scarlett(Quote) (Reply)
But you have to admit it is fun to roleplay/act the misogynist and/or misanthropic male.
And the FICTIONAL ones can be very attractive (*not* appearance wise). eg. Depp’s Sweeney Todd
AND there are some women (and men) that like been treated badly. Just look at the Goreans, for one. (I know, I know. They’re “actually” equal… <_<)
But male script writers piss me off in general. “Oh! Only a guy could be intelligent, cunning, etc. What roles shall we give the women? Oh, I know! The girlfriends.” Y’know. Piss off.
Saiyne(Quote) (Reply)
Being female, I wouldn’t know. I do enjoy being a misanthropic woman, though.
Anyone who likes to be mistreated is not quite right in the head. That said, throughout this discussion I’ve been toying with bringing up one additional point, which is:
You know who likes to be mistreated by the opposite sex? Heterosexual men. We have thousands of years of men complaining about marriage and how wives and girlfriends treat them, as if monogamy and marriage evolved under a matriarchy. Men created this system, then they claim to hate it, but with all the power they have they won’t change it. Why not? Because they created it for the express purpose of having something to complain about. Which is, if you think about it, not particularly sane or healthy.
Of course I’m not talking about each and every man in the world when I say this. But clearly, there’s a very big element in patriarchy that likes to indulge in a sort of bondage fantasy, in which the big strong man who really can (and often does) abandon his wife and kids or girlfriend the second he gets bored imagines himself bound to them by a force stronger than himself. I guess that’s a lot of fun when it’s not real. I wouldn’t know; for women, it’s historically been a reality, and often a hellish one.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Susan, I finally saw an eDiets ad. Not sure it’s the one you saw because there was no mention of exercise. It felt to me like it’s merely putting out a weight loss offer to those who want to lose weight for whatever reason. To my eye, it doesn’t use scare tactics, shame tactics or invoke a beauty standard. It’s just saying if you want to lose weight, try us.
I totally get where you’re coming from, with the whole diet industry targeting women more than men. I just feel that rather than boycott all of them, I’m okay with running ads for the ones that DON’T yap like NutriSystem about how your husband will think you’re hot again if you get skinny or use underweight models as examples of who should be dieting. Maybe even that’ll show the ones who DO use those tactics that they’ll have a bigger market share if they try something else.
ETA: I submitted this and then saw another ad asking if you’re healthy or heavy. It had a chart of heights, ages and weights, and according to it my weight is at the top end of “healthy”. Visually, most people would call me “fat” but I am in fact in good health. This also tends to make me want to keep their ads because it reinforces a more realistic view of what we should weigh – a huge range, depending on build and muscle mass.
Thanks for your input.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Beta, I AM female.
I just roleplay males to so all the… well, nerds, don’t go.
OMG, you’re FEMALE!!! *drool*
Saiyne(Quote) (Reply)
Also, males have more freedom plot wise. You can have a powerful male character without been seen as it being something sexual. (What IS it with men and wanting to be dominated, anyway? Just look at the “Drow” in WoW, I mean I like the idea of female been in charge once in awhile (fictionally, in reality is should be EQUAL) but they made them all overtly sexual, and no wearing ANYTHING. That’s not clothes, it a piece of cloth.) And you don’t have all these coments on your *pixualated* breasts. While were at it. Why don’t women get proper armour in video games. I don’t want someone with half a brain decided, “Hey all this body exposed, I’ll stab there” y’know. It’s not logical damn it! XD
Also, it *is* fun to PRETEND (the whole, bondage etc) but when it crosses over to reality, just, no.
Saiyne(Quote) (Reply)
Next Comments →
{ 5 trackbacks }