if you are not her type, she is not your type

[espanish]

have you guys had this realization?
if a girl rejects you, obviously you are not her type.
but did you know, she is also not your type?
in other words, if she is your type, she is going to give you a chance.
to put it another way, if you reject a girl, not only is she not your type, but also you are not her type.
does that sound right?

 

[devilkingx2]

I think this is true because even if she was the girl of your dreams on paper, if she's not actually into you then you wouldn't get the experience you're seeking even if you somehow convinced her to give you a chance (and that process would sour you on her most likely).

 

[Velasco]

does that sound right?

Sounds like cope

 

[2Rocky]

That is something that a man with abundance will realize.

Guys, be true to yourself. Don't go after a woman because she seems unattainable. Focus that energy on women who appreciate you.

Loggers shouldn't try to get Treehuggers
Religious Fundamentalists shouldn't try to convert an atheist into a girlfriend
Blue collar guys shouldn't try to pursue Rich snobby socialites....

UNLESS she shows interest.....

sometimes it's just a matter of timing and interest. Maybe that rich chick wants to go slumming...

 

[espanish]

That is something that a man with abundance will realize.

Guys, be true to yourself. Don't go after a woman because she seems unattainable. Focus that energy on women who appreciate you.

Loggers shouldn't try to get Treehuggers
Religious Fundamentalists shouldn't try to convert an atheist into a girlfriend
Blue collar guys shouldn't try to pursue Rich snobby socialites....

UNLESS she shows interest.....

sometimes it's just a matter of timing and interest. Maybe that rich chick wants to go slumming...

I think you get what I mean.
if a girl likes a guy with tattoos and I don't have tattoos, she is going to reject me. But that worked out perfectly because she wasn't my type because I don't like girls who like guys who have tattoos.

 

[Velasco]

Like you think a girl is hot but she does not think you are hot. And because of this she is actually not your type?

 

[Mike32ct]

It might seem “cope-y” on the surface, but I think it’s still arguably true.

Maybe she is YOUR LOOKS type, but that says nothing about the compatibility between you too.

If you aren’t her type for ANY reason (including, but not limited to, looks), then the compatibility for dating isn’t there. Then you could argue that she’s not your type to date.

 

[Robert28]

If Chad won’t commit does that mean she isn’t Chads type? Of course it does, but you’ll never get her to admit it.

 

[SargeMaximus]

OP nailed it

 

[Zimbabwe]

The only type of women i attract are SJWs and Slvts with major daddy issues. Does that mean it's my type?

 

[MatureDJ]

This is an example of reductio ad absurdum.

 

[Velasco]

Then you could argue that she’s not your type to date.

Nah. I've slept with girls that were very much my type looks wise but with kind of annoying personalities. After we went out separate ways. You can be sure I would say yes to another hookup because they were hot. However if I hooked up with a chick that just barely passed my looks threshold but absolutely loved me. attentive to my needs etc If I didn't want to bang anymore cause "meh" looks wise, then I would still ghost.

If I got rejected by the hot chicks with the meh personality, then I'd cope with "well we wouldn't have been compatible date wise anyway" for her rejecting me on not being her type looks wise

 

[espanish]

Like you think a girl is hot but she does not think you are hot. And because of this she is actually not your type?

by type I am not talking about looks. there are a lot of hot girls that I cannot stand because I can't find any signs of human intelligence in them. I need to see some signs of human intelligence to find someone attractive. No I am not saying she should understand the theory of relativity. Just some signs of human intelligence, anything. I will often test girls. for example the other day I was in line at a grocery store this girl told me are you in line? I said yes. she said "I will just use self-checkout" I said "ok that's fine by me". the intelligent type would either laugh or act in a way that tells me they understand this was a weird statement, and they understand it's a joke. dumb ones will just go about their day.

 

[espanish]

This is an example of reductio ad absurdum.

I tried to look this up but wikipedia sucks I don't understand it

 

[MatureDJ]

I tried to look this up but wikipedia sucks I don't understand it

It's an absurd conclusion (actually, I think there is better Latin logic term, but I couldn't think of it). Think of it like this: let's say that you want a fit chick, but only fat chicks are interested in you - would that make fat chicks "your type"?

EDIT: I think this might be a better description of the logical fallacy here:

Affirming the consequent - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

Like you think a girl is hot but she does not think you are hot. And because of this she is actually not your type?

Yes. Your type is a women who a) you like and b) is into you

If she's not into you, it means you haven't developed yourself to the point of being attractive enough to a certain quality of woman. If a certain quality of woman does not find you desirable, there's no point in thirsting after her in that moment.

I'm at the point where I am not interested in a woman unless she is also into me (finding her objectively attractive is one thing but actual interest is another). It sounds like a double-bind validation-based thing but it's really not. It is utterly pointless and outright counter-productive to pursue a women unless she displays high interest right away. That's literally what all thirsty simps do, they obsesss over any attractive women who they come across.

I tried to look this up but wikipedia sucks I don't understand it

It's in the name. It just means it's reductionistic to the point of absurdity. It's an intellectually lazy way of coming to a conclusion because it throws out all nuance. However, I do not think it applies to your argument at all. There's a huge difference between a simple argument and a reductionist argument.

 

[Velasco]

Yes. Your type is a women who a) you like and b) is into you

Man It's fvcking awesome when a chick I think is hot as fvck likes me too. But there also exists chicks that I think are hot as fvck that simply do not like me. That doesn't mean those chicks aren't my type too.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

Man It's fvcking awesome when a chick I think is hot as fvck likes me too. But there also exists chicks that I think are hot as fvck that simply do not like me. That doesn't mean those chicks aren't my type too.

I get what you're saying but my point is that you shouldn't be lusting after woman who aren't into you in the first place.

 

[Billtx49]

I get what you're saying but my point is that you shouldn't be lusting after woman who aren't into you in the first place.

Yep, initial attraction and compatibility shouldn’t be subconsciously joined beforehand in a man’s mind…

 

[BackInTheGame78]

have you guys had this realization?
if a girl rejects you, obviously you are not her type.
but did you know, she is also not your type?
in other words, if she is your type, she is going to give you a chance.
to put it another way, if you reject a girl, not only is she not your type, but also you are not her type.
does that sound right?

That is not logical at all. Doesn't even make sense.