I went through a really interesting thread on NL (why do ‘nice’ ladies get dumped easily) and it got me thinking; who are these ‘nice girls’ or ‘nice guys’? Why do they always get the short end of the stick? Are they underappreciated? Shouldn’t they be number one on everyone’s list?

Straight out the gate, let me just say that I have problems with this word, ‘nice.’ My dictionary defines it as:

1.) Amiably pleasant; kind
2.) Refined in manners, language, etc.
3.) Virtuous; respectable; decorous
4.) Carefully neat in dress, habits, etc.
5.) Having fastidious, finicky, or fussy tastes.

There are more definitions, but these are the ones that can be applied to people. So far, so good.

Interestingly, the origins of the word are far more exciting: ‘Nice’ was originally a word used to describe something “foolish, stupid or senseless”! This was in the 13th century. Then it was used to denote something “dainty or delicate”, then “precise or careful” and there were various stops along the way before it reached its final destination as the word we know today. Crazy, huh? Foolish, stupid or senseless: it kinda makes one think...

Anyway, words are only tags or signs – let’s deal with what we know the word to mean today. The Nice Person. “Oh, she’s so nice!!!”; “That was nice of you!”; “But, I’m a nice guy!!” And so on.

I know two nice people. One of them is generous to a fault; he will give the shirt off his back if necessary. I have never seen anyone give more to others than this guy. The other dude is the most polite person you’ll ever meet. He is thoughtful, always remembering the little things about people that make them smile. He is also very helpful and caring.

Are these two people just the same guy? Nope. The former is polite in formal settings (i.e., when meeting new friends, speaking to elders, that kind of stuff), but really doesn’t see the need to be as polite in his day-to-day informal life. He’s not that sensitive or empathetic. The latter might cook you a meal if you look like you haven’t eaten in days, or if he has enough food in his cupboard, but sharing out of his food directly is a NO-NO. He is not good at sharing his possessions and he’s rarely the type to be generous materially.

Are these two people ‘nice’ people? Yep? Oh, Nah? Possibly? It depends. On what? Or who?

Me. You. Them. Whomever has an opinion about them.

What am I getting at? Neither of these two is perfect – no one is. But if they are indeed nice people, what does that have to do with the price of dried fish?

When I read comments from men or women who call themselves ‘nice’ and wonder out aloud why “nice men finish last” or “men prefer the bad/crazy girls”, I wonder why these people think they should be the preferred choice. Obviously, ‘nice’ in this context (and in most contexts of this kind) is meant to have some sort of a moral undertone, i.e., Nice=Good=Right. But before we go questioning whether there should be an objectively (objective signifying ‘agreed by all’, like how nobody sees infanticide as ‘right’) ‘right’ way to pick partners, my question is, are these men or women ‘nice’ anyway? Are they partially nice, fully nice, objectively nice or subjectively nice? What makes the man who “would never hurt a woman”, who always seems to be cheated on or abandoned for the ‘village DMX’ even though he’s a ‘nice guy’, what makes his pity party justified?

Can a person be a thoroughly ‘nice person’ if they have one or two characteristics that fall under the jurisdiction of ‘nice’, but none of the others? If I don’t recognise a person as having any qualities that I, the writer, would consider as being ‘nice’, what happens then, can the person still be nice? Could that person be subjectively nice, nice to himself/herself and others, or could that person be objectively nice, but I’m just too ignorant to see it (maybe because I myself might not be a nice person)?

Let me get more specific:

‘Good girls like bad boys’

What makes these good girls ‘good’? Good grades? Because they don’t sleep with many boys, or they might even be virgins? Maybe they are always smiling? They don’t go out at night? They always say their prayers? They are polite people? Submissive? Shy? Quiet? They don’t gossip? They don’t flirt? They’ve never cheated? They always listen to their parents? They don’t wear revealing clothes? They don’t abuse others? They never lie? They respect the ‘golden rule’?

Do ‘good girls’ have all of these traits or some of these traits? Or is it even possible that a good girl can have none of these traits and still be good? What is so hot and desirable about being ‘good/nice’ anyway?

But let’s analyse further: should I, as a man, respect the ‘niceness’ or the ‘goodness’ of these traits because they are morally ‘right’ - these morals either coming from a religious viewpoint or a more personal place – or because am I attracted to these traits?

Are all good girls equal in value? Does that matter?

Let’s turn to the boys (Btw, I’ve got my sexist-alert hat on here; since ‘girls’ looks good to my eyes, I’m gonna stick with ‘boys’ for the males):
Who are these nice boys that finish last? Again, what traits do they have? They buy flowers? They never go’ Dutch’ on a meal or *horror!!!!*, have the girl pay for both meals? They vehemently refuse to ‘hit it’ on the first night/week/month/year? Born-again? They love hugs and poetry? They have good jobs, a mortgage, savings and a reliable pension plan? They consume literature (fiction and non-fiction) like us modern folk consume reality TV? They love mummy and daddy?

Should they finish first? Why? Do they even really finish last?

But, really – WHO ARE THEY?

Should good guys ally-up with the good girls? Shouldn’t both sets be fighting side by side for the sake of their adjective?

Actually, wait: this is complicated, because – as we are meant to believe – good boys like good girls, who like bad boys, who like good girls and bad girls, and the bad girls like bad boys but can’t stand good boys, who either haven’t thought of where they stand on the whole ‘liking bad girls’ thing, or have a mutual dislike for them.

Phew.

I’ve also come across the hackneyed sentence (uttered by males and females), “good girls are boring!”

“You need a wild girl, good girls are boring!”

“Good girls just lie there, they don’t even pull moves!”

“Good girls just smile like maalus, they will finish their MTN credit texting and buzzing you, and when they see you, the first thing they do is handcuff your arm to theirs and then it’s to pour saliva and lipstick over your face!”

These statements (not the last one – I made that up. I’m creative like that) make me laugh whenever I see or hear them. It is meant to be a standard, objective statement that males need acrobats in bed. Not all men, though: good males might favour missionary. But they’re boring too!

Another 'fact': good girls aren’t freaky in bed.

No sir.

No way, no how. Impossible!

Can’t you see that ‘freaky’ is as close to ‘good/nice’ as the north is to the south? Learner.

It’s at this point that I start to visualise all the problems with these words: ‘good’ and ‘bad’. ‘Nice’ and ‘bad’. There are numerous, numerous problems.

But here’s the poignant problem:

In a planet with over 7 billion people, we only seem to have two types of people; ‘nice’ and ‘not-nice’.

Really?

And don’t even get me started on the chameleon ones, the boys and girls that are ‘good’, oft-maligned and long-suffering with one person, and with another person, selfish, hypocritical and generally eager to do what they can’t stand others doing to them . That’s definitely going to have to be for another day.

Okay?
Nice.




A LAYMAN’s CONCLUSION: I’m almost too embarrassed to make this conclusion. It’s my pure opinion and as such, I feel naked sharing it. But here it is:

There are no ‘nice’ or ‘good’ people. Just people. Who have things you like about them. Most might only have a few things you like about them. A decent amount have many things to like about them. A few don’t have anything for you to like about them – these people are not bad people, they are just ‘people -who -don’t- have- anything –for- you- to- like- about -them’ people. And no matter what the annoyingly pessimistic people say, you will see (at some point in your life, if you are prepared to look in your heart and with your heart) that some people are FULL of the things you like, to the extent that even if they had a few teeny-weeny foul traits, those traits would only smell foul to others. Not to you (btw, I’m not talking about the ‘art’ (more like ‘fart’) of compromise. I won’t expand on this here, but I’m not talking about that). Maybe these ‘some people’ will only be one people. One person. Whatever, you get my point.


I should define ‘like’ ?

.....
.....
.....

“Bros, please hand me my cutlass.”


THE END.


NO INVERTED COMMAS WERE HARMED IN THE MAKING OF THIS ARTICLE.


What is A?

Guy! Are you paying me to read all these? What are you trying to say? I can't imagine myself finishing this open epistle.

What is A, what is this super story about?
You must be a good story teller
Can't imagine myself reading this long article of urs
I wan do exam?

*yawns*

Lol, You guys are funny. Thanks for visiting my thread. The most important thing to remember is that information comes in different lengths. If you are only ready to read stuff that is 2 sentences long, then that's cool. But remember, what you don't find interesting, someone else will.

Thank you, come again!

What is A?:
Lol, You guys are funny. Thanks for visiting my thread. The most important thing to remember is that information comes in different lengths. If you are only ready to read stuff that is 2 sentences long, then that's cool. But remember, what you don't find interesting, someone else will.

Thank you, come again!

We'll def come again

see yarnsssss