In Praise of "Nice Guys" and Honesty

You can read about it, you can hear about it, you can even get caught in the middle of some heated discussions about it: "why women prefer 'bad boys;'" "why many of us do not;" and, what is most distressing about this subject, "why some do not see it as a matter of personal preference, but a challenge to one's honesty and motives." As preferences in such characteristics as hair color or physical build do not generally "invite" attacks from those with a different point of view, what is it about the good guy/bad guy debate that causes such foam-at-the-mouth negativity in people with an opposing viewpoint?

A male friend recently stated that "all men are dogs." He added that this is what "women prefer." Comments to the effect of neither being the case with "all," and not even the "majority," eventually led to the end of what had been a good friendship-- in short, one was not supposed to oppose that point of view. As one who has had a father, and has two brothers and a son, I found my "friend's" remark to be offensive; almost as offensive was the insistence that it is what "women prefer." Perhaps some, not all.

What are the dynamics behind the "heat" in this subject? I have seen males who happily put themselves in this category who loudly proclaim that they are what "women want." I've also seen women of various ages and backgrounds who do have such a preference-- and it's often a matter of having a bit of that "way" themselves, or, in some cases, low self-esteem. "Bad boys" range the spectrum from those who actually mistreat and use women, to those who embrace the "rebel without a cause" attitude toward life; but even on this more benevolent end of the spectrum, personal preference is personal preference, and there are plenty of women who do not consider "attitude" to be a virtue. I do not think I'm anywhere near unique in my preference-- "brain" is better than "attitude."

In my background, the highest compliment someone can state about a person is that the person is "nice." From all the heated debates, one might conclude that "nice" does not exist anymore-- or that it's laughable. I disagree. While the Rebel Without a Cause attitude and lifestyle was a claim to stardom for such movie greats as James Dean and Marlon Brando, their modern-day real-life counterparts most definately leave something to be desired. I personally find it difficult to comprehend how or why a "devil-may-care" approach to life and people could be considered attractive-- but not only is this what many guys wish people to believe, it is a fact that many women do prefer it, even to the point of being drawn to womanizers, hell-raisers, and those to whom life means "live fast- you only die once."

Personally, I prefer those who have quality and character-- given a choice between "rebel" and "nice," there is no contest. I simply find nothing appealing about the "bad boy image"-- it is something I have never been attracted to, and these days, as well as twenty years ago, consider it immature and pointless. But it is not a case of preference-- it is the disturbing trend of insisting that people must be lumped into one category-- "all men are that way," "all women prefer it." Perhaps those who use the universal tag "all," and proclaim that the opposite viewpoint is dishonest or suspect, are saying something very clear about their own lack of self-esteem-- that one dare not disagree, or it puts them in a very negative light. If "bad boys" and the "women who prefer them" were so assured that who they are is o.k., they would not find it necessary to put those of us who disagree on the defensive, and instead simply accept that what some of us prefer "isn't them."