DEAR DR. NERDLOVE:I love your column, and the advice you’ve given has helped me identify some genuine issues I have in myself. I’ve learned the concept of cognitive bias from you and that has allowed me to read more about, and discover fixes to, a lot of self-esteem issues I’ve had my whole life.

But that’s not why I’m writing you today. My problem is kind of a weird one in that I’m not looking to fix anything, but more seeking perhaps validation and putting out there an issue that maybe some of your other readers might be having and to get your take on it.

My wife and I have been together for 11 years, married for 2, and our relationship has been criticized by a lot of people as being not “normal” or “typical” of so many people. In all that time together, we’ve never said “I love you” to one another and it is very unlikely that we will ever say it. It is a weird culmination of our past relationships that just sort of manifested into this refusal to say it. For her it is because she said it to her abusive ex-boyfriend and it quickly lost any meaning as it was often his way of apologizing to her. For me it is similar, I said it to every girl I ever dated who eventually left me, including a woman I almost married who would literally get pissed about everything I did. I’d say it, they’d say it, and yet they still left. We say it to our friends and family, we just don’t say it to each other. We would rather use that time to show how we care than to just say it. We’ve been told by friends and family that this is a sign that we “don’t care for each other”.

By that note, we also don’t fight or argue. Like at all. I can count on three fingers all the heated disagreements we’ve ever had, and all three of those were simple miscommunications and misunderstandings that were sorted out and devolved into laughter more than anything. If there is an issue, we sit down and talk about it, or we learn to adjust to it being our problem and something we need to sort out ourselves. We’ve been told because we don’t fight, it is a sign that we “lack passion”.

And we’ve also been told that we are more friends and roommates than a married couple. We live around each other well, we share a lot of common interests especially in games and television but enough differences in what we read, eat, and the genres we love to keep it fun, and the only problem in the bedroom is that I’m a high school teacher and adjunct professor and I’m just exhausted most days (especially this year of hybrid learning). It isn’t a lack of desire, but a genuine lack of energy, that often leads to no-heat-in-the-sheets as they say. But she is super understanding about this, and we take time to make sure we keep that area of our marriage very happy and healthy, if not as frequent as either of us would like. But because our relationship is considered to be so easy, we’ve been told that somehow ours it not as worthy as theirs. “Nothing of value comes easy in this life” as the saying goes, and yet I’ve always looked at relationships as something we shouldn’t have to work at. I get why some people want that work and that struggle, but I’ve never wanted it and neither has she. We very much like that our marriage is the last thing we have to worry about, and we are happy to be each other’s best friends.

And it isn’t to say we haven’t had hardships. We both met when we were living with our parents as I was finishing up my bachelors, she supported me on my crazy decision to become a teacher and get my masters degree, she stood by me when my first three years as a teacher was at an awful title 1 school that spiraled me into a depression where I very much wanted to die (to be clear it was not the kids, it was the admin and school board), and we survived long distance as I moved to another city to take a job opportunity and to buy a house before she moved in with me. That period of long distance was also criticized as something a “healthy” couple wouldn’t be able to do, and yet we did. We both survived family drama, sickness, and even her citizenship woes so we could get married. We took it all in stride and rose above. When we find obstacles, we take them together and work through them without complaint.

It almost feels like they are challenged by the way our relationship works as… opposite maybe… to what they have, and so they seek to tear it down as something lesser to justify their own struggles and unhappiness that they are dealing with. And please note, this is coming from family and friends, but not all of them. Her mom loves me, and my parents love her. We do have single friends that love when we are around because we don’t “feel” like a couple; we come together but are separate individuals. It’s our married friends and family that seems to tear into us and we really don’t get why. And it’s those jabs and barbs of criticisms that are shared in these offhand compliments. We really don’t get why they do that and we talk about it often.

I don’t know, but I’d love to get your take on it and maybe help out any of your audience that might be experiencing something similar.

Truly,

Married Best Friends

DEAR MARRIED BEST FRIENDS: This isn’t a “you” problem, it’s a “them” problem.

Here’s what’s going on MBF: people are mistaking conflict for passion and not recognizing the difference between communication and conflict resolution styles. Now in fairness, this isn’t unusual or uncommon; a lot of times, our ideas “how relationships SHOULD work” are shaped by relationship role models. For the children of Boomers, this often means that our parents’ relationships were not the best models to follow; the cultural expectations of parents, the roles of gender and so on mean that a lot of issues in relationships were handled  in counterproductive ways. The idea of couples counseling was unusual at best and often seen as the mark of a failed or failing relationship. Similarly, pop culture tends to play up conflict in relationships. Again, this isn’t unusual; conflict means drama, and drama is part of what makes those relationships compelling. While a couple who sits down and discusses their issues calmly and reaffirms their affection for one another may be healthier, it makes for pretty boring storytelling.

(This is why coffeeshop alternate-universe fanfic tends to be just that: fanfic. It’s comforting as a cozy sweater and old jeans, but it doesn’t work as well for serial media.)

The same goes for equating passion with conflict. Passion isn’t automatically loud or showy; it’s just easier to convey passion that way in media. Ironically enough,  you want a great example of passion that’s quiet and understated, look at Oz in Buffy The Vampire Slayer; he’s a quiet, fairly reserved character who still has a deep reservoir of passion and intensity. Still waters run deep, after all.

The problem is that because a lot of these less-than-positive dynamics are so common, it’s easy to mistake them as examples of how relationships should work. We look at conflict in relationships — whether in relationships we’ve seen in our lives, or via pop culture — and assume that because we see it so often, this is how it should be. And so, when we see relationships that don’t follow that dynamic, it’s easy to feel like something is off or wrong.

Case in point: the fact that you and your wife don’t say “I love you”. To give an example, this was a character moment in the movie Ghost; Patrick Swayze’s character was notorious for saying “ditto”, rather than “I love you too” to Demi Moore’s character. In the movie, this is portrayed as a character flaw of sorts; an indication that maybe he’s afraid of expressing himself or sharing his true feelings. But in practice… this is about communication, not feelings. He may not be saying the words, but it’s clear through his actions that he loves his partner. The conflict — as seen through the filter of 21st-century-dating-coaches-who-spend-too-goddamn-much-time-thinking-about-these-things — is they’re not speaking the same language. He’s saying “I love you,” but not in a way that she can hear.

This is one of the reasons why there’s a lot of focus on love languages — both expressing and receiving. For some people, showing that they care is about doing things for other people; they show their love by being of service to them. For others, showing affection is about spending time together, regardless of the activity, or about giving gifts. Part of what makes a relationship work is understanding and being able to speak your partner’s “language”, as it were. You and your wife clearly speak the same language. Saying the words “I love you” isn’t part of how you share affection, it’s in the ways you behave with one another. It may not look like you’re being affectionate with one another to an outside observer… but they’re not you. They don’t have the context or information you have — including how your wife’s ex used “I love you” and made it meaningless to her.

The same goes for conflict styles and conflict resolution styles. Some folks’ conflict styles are like summer thunderstorms — loud, flashy, come on out of nowhere and pass just as quickly. They can be scary or frightening to someone who doesn’t have that conflict style… but for folks who are used to it, it’s what works for them. There’s drama, there’s yelling, there’s flailing hands… and then there’s resolution and it passes. It’s not inherently better or worse than your conflict style and resolution style; it’s just different. Two people who do a lot of yelling and venting and then let everything go aren’t automatically Doing It Wrong, any more than calm, serious discussions are Doing It Right. It’s about what works for the couple, that doesn’t leave one party or the other feeling shut down or ignored and actually resolves the issue causing the conflict. It’s just as easy for  those calm discussions to not actually resolve the core problem or be used to intimidate or silence the other person.

You and your wife have your way of handling conflicts. It works for you. It isn’t as flashy or performative as some others’… but that’s fine. That’s what works for you and it’s kept your relationship happy and healthy.

And really, that’s ultimately the thing for you to keep in mind. “Works for us” is the standard you want to follow, regardless of how it looks to others. Other people don’t have the context of your relationship or full access to all the information about the two of you. They have, at best, a highly edited version. At worst, they have glimpses into your relationship and they’re filling in all the extraneous details based on their concept of How Relationships Work and What This All Means. But the great thing about relationships is that they’re not democracies. Other people don’t get a vote in how you and your wife run your relationship, what rules you follow or what methods work for you. If you two want to have a Gor-style 24/7 power exchange relationship that you both consent to and that you worked out in advance… well, it ain’t my taste, but if everyone’s happy and satisfied, it’s also not my business. If a couple wants a one-sided open relationship, where only one partner has sex outside the relationship and everyone’s cool with it… well, that’s all that matters. People can have opinions about how it should work… but they can keep those opinions to themselves unless specifically asked.

It’s certainly possible that other people feel challenged by your relationship. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that people pathologize things in others that make them uncomfortable. But I think it’s as likely that your relationship and the way you conduct it is just different from what they think is the norm. That can feel unusual, or even wrong, just because it’s unfamiliar. But then, it’s also not their relationship; it’s yours, and if you and your wife are happy, then that’s what matters.

The only thing you need to say to the folks who tell you that you’re Relationshipping Wrong is very simple: “This works for us and we’re happy.” You don’t need to justify your feelings for each other or your reasons, because there’s nothing to justify. Justifying it just implies that you need their approval or to prove something; it carries the framing that they’re right and your relationship is unusual and possibly wrong. So, don’t justify. You can inform if they have questions or want more details… but all that needs to be said is “This works for us and makes us happy.” If they insist on telling you that there must be something wrong, then take it a step further: “This works for us, we’re happy and you can step off. I’m not interested in your unsolicited advice or opinions and I don’t appreciate your telling me that we don’t feel the way we feel. So feel free to keep it to yourself. And if you can’t, then feel free to go the f--k away.” 

I completely understand why this weighs on you; when folks tell you over and over again that you’re doing something that “doesn’t” or “shouldn’t” work, it’s hard not to worry that they might be right. But at the same time, the important thing is to hold onto the fact that this is what you’ve been doing and it’s been working out for you. You and your wife are happy, and your relationship — like all relationships — is a complex system of choices based around your shared experiences and your histories, both separately and together. You’ve found a system that works for you based on the full context of everything you and your wife have gone through, for good and for ill. Are you happy? Yes. Does it work well for you? Yes. Does anything else matter? Nope.

It may look different to folks who don’t have your insider’s perspective… but that’s fine. Like I said: relationships aren’t democracies. Other people can have opinions, but they don’t get a vote. There isn’t a public comment period about how your relationships work. And you are well within your rights to tell them that you do not want to and will not have these discussions with them. You’re happy, your relationship works and that’s what matters. Everyone who doesn’t like the way you make it work can go screw.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: I wanted to ask you for advice. I know this question was already answered, but I’m really having a hard time with dating boys who just want me for sex. Ever since I broke up with my ex a few years ago, I haven’t really been dating, and I’m a virgin.

I don’t want sex. How do I tell boys I don’t want sex and get the respect I deserve?

Not Interested

DEAR NOT INTERESTED: The answer to this is going to very much depend on an important — yet missing — clause. You say you don’t want sex. Is it the case that you don’t want sex yet? Or is it that you don’t want sex ever? That’s going to make a significant difference.

Now, in general, this is going to come down to using your words and establishing and maintaining strong boundaries. There’s been far, far too much ink spilled over “guys only want girls for sex” that treats this as a matter of “well if you do X correctly, then they’ll respect your wishes.” I’ve lost track of all the books, from The Rules to Think Like a Man, Act Like A Lady to whatever the hell it was Dr. Phil wrote up that treat this as some sort of magical spell that will change people’s minds… and the fact of the matter is that it won’t. A--holes are gonna ass, and no amount of “wait until X date to have sex” or “no sex before commitment” or any other arbitrary rule is going to change a dude looking for a low-effort lay into a committed boyfriend. As many a person has discovered, plenty of guys have hung around until they convinced their girlfriends to “finally” sleep with them and became profound a--holes afterwards because hey, that’s all they ever wanted. Unfortunately, people will say whatever it takes if they think it’ll get them laid; the only difference is how much work they’re willing to put into any one person.

This is why my philosophy to this isn’t “don’t try to change the a--hole into a boyfriend”, it’s “exclude the a--holes as early and as thoroughly as possible”. There are no words that will “make” someone respect you. Nobody, especially horny teens and twenty-somethings, have ever said “woah, I was just trying to get into your pants, but your ‘no sex before three months in’ changed my mind and now I want commitment”. It’s about chasing off the a--holes and finding the guys who are on the same page as you and who will respect your boundaries and wishes.

You don’t want sex; whether that’s for now or for good, that’s something that you should be up front about. The majority of folks who are looking for a relationship are looking for a relationship that includes sex; if sex isn’t on the table, then that’s something that they should know. This helps make sure that you’re dating the people who want the same things you are. Yes, it means that folks will peace out upon hearing this. That’s good. That’s how it should be. It doesn’t mean that they’re jerks, it just means that they weren’t right for you and you weren’t right for them. If they want a sexual relationship, then pursuing something with you is only going to waste their time and yours.

Now how you roll this out… well, that’s gonna vary, and a lot goes back to that missing clause; whether it’s a “yet” vs. an “ever”. My general thought on disclosing information, particularly stigmatizing or polarizing information, is that if it’s not immediately relevant, you can give it up to three dates. This gives someone the chance to get to know you for you, rather than whatever stereotype may exist in their head — whether that’s about someone who has genital herpes, ethically non-monogamous or who would want to wait for sex until marriage. Other folks disagree, but they’re also not writing this column.

However, the more relevant that information is, the sooner it should be brought up… and it should be brought up before it’s going to impact things. If it’s an issue surrounding sex — whether it’s STI status or not wanting to have sex until X time — then it needs to happen before sex is imminent and preferably before things go from kissing to “making out that’s going to potentially involve genitals in some way, shape or form.”

In this case, if the clause that’s missing from “I don’t want sex” is “ever”, then that’s information that should probably be included right from the jump. As I said, the majority of people you might date are going to want a sexual relationship. If that’s simply not on the table, ever, then that’s something they should know in advance so that they can make an informed decision. And you should be clear — bluntly so — that it is “not ever” if that’s the case; the last thing you want are folks who think that it might happen and getting increasingly frustrated when it doesn’t.

(Now, to be clear: asexuality is wide and varied and there’re some ace folks who do have sex because their partners like it and they like pleasing their partners. This is why I’m fairly firm that defining the relationship discussions should include talking about the frequency and type of sex you both want or don’t want. It helps make sure that everybody is on the same page.)

Regardless of whether it’s “yet” or “ever”, what you don’t do is roll out this information like you’re informing them of a curse on your bloodline or that this is some horrible flaw. You don’t want sex; that’s just a fact about you and not something to apologize for. You want to treat this information as something matter-of-fact and straight forward, not something you feel ashamed of. It’s relevant info about who you are, but it’s only one thing about you. How guys respond to this, however, will tell you everything you need to know about them. Guys who say “ah, ok, not what I’m looking for, best of luck to you?” These are good guys who just weren’t compatible with you. Guys who say “wait, what? Why the hell not? What about….?” or “Well, I bet I can change your mind” are guys to cut loose with a quickness; they’ve just displayed their a--holery like the tail of a particularly s--tty peacock.

Once you’ve established what you are and aren’t up for, you need to be willing to stick to it. You’ve laid down your boundaries surrounding sex, but having boundaries means that you have to enforce them as well. This means that you don’t want to tolerate guys who think that “never” means “wait and I’ll change my mind” and “yet” means “convince me”. Getting the respect you deserve means that you don’t put up with people who disrespect you. Guys who push at your boundaries and try to get you to do things you don’t want or aren’t ready for yet are guys who are demonstrating that they don’t respect you.

It’s one thing if they brush up on your boundary around sex and then, after you remind then that no, this isn’t a thing you’re up for, recognize and respect your decision. A guy who hears “I said I’m not interested in X, remember?” and says “Oh, right, my bad” and drops it? They’re showing that they do respect you; they hit up on your boundary and have said “whoops, sorry” and stepped back. Those are guys worth dating.

On the other hand, guys who constantly push at your boundaries even after being reminded that they’re there, or who argue with you about having those boundaries at all, are dudes to kick to the curb like the week’s compost. These are men who don’t respect you or your wishes and are trying to get you to give into what they want, regardless of your feelings on the matter. These are the dudes to bounce out of your life so hard that they enter geosynchronous orbit, sooner, rather than later.

And in fairness: it can be tough to do this. It can be hard, especially for women, to stand up for themselves when a guy is making a fuss. It feels rude and uncomfortable to be that direct and straightforward. But it’s also important that you do so. Gently hinting or reminding someone is ok… the first time. The second time, it’s time for the clue-by-four, followed by The Chair Leg of Truth. And that truth is that they are now on the train to DUMPED, population: Them.

Will being up front, especially in the early stages, mean that you’ll have more rejections and fewer dates? Yeah… there’s not really any getting around that. But it also means that those were folks who weren’t right for you in the first place; all that’s happened is that you’ve saved yourself time and energy and now you’re free to go find men you are compatible with. This isn’t a bug, it’s a feature, and one that helps ensure that the guys you do date? Are the guys who you should be dating.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: So I was wondering how does an ugly guy navigate things like wanting casual sex or a friends with benefits kind of arrangement? A lot of these interactions tend to prioritize looks, but what if you don’t have the looks? I don’t know any examples of ugly guys getting anything casual, it seems like one of those things where if you don’t have the looks, then you’re kind of out of luck.

I am trying to lose weight and gain muscle, but you can’t exactly change your face as much as you can your body. What if, even after that, I’m still unattractive? How would I communicate and vocalize wanting something more casual or a friend with benefits arrangement without it being creepy? How would someone like me be able to find someone who wants me sexually when there are probably more handsome men out there who also want the same thing. There are probably more men who want something casual than women, so wouldn’t that make it even more likely that ugly guys won’t be able to have something casual if there is a better looking guy willing to provide the same thing?

It feels like women would rather only have me if I commit rather than be casual with me when there are possibly better looking men wanting the same thing? Same for women who are “in my league” so to speak.

You can’t exactly “f--k” a personality as they say.

Also in general, it looks like it’s mostly guys who have trouble getting laid, so wouldn’t that also lend credence to the fact that maybe there are some guys out there too ugly to be wanted sexually?

It just feels like I won’t be able to experience casual sex or FWBs and will only be able to sleep with women if I commit to them or if I hire a sex worker. I don’t wanna lead women on or lie to them, but I also don’t wanna sleep with someone who’d only sleep with me cause they need the money.

Any advice?

Thing From Another World

DEAR THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD: I think I’m going to have to implement a macro of Idris Elba yelling “reset the clock”, because this is quickly becoming the most common genre of letter I get from guys. And as I’ve said pretty much every time, if I got a nickel for every dude who insists to me that he’s the mutant spawn of Quasimodo and Deadpool, having being raised by the Toxic Avenger, but turns out to be perfectly average, I’d have to move to another state just so I’d have enough room to build my second money bin.

There are a lot of things that all of these letters have in common — most of them assume that their weight (whether over- or underweight) is a disqualifier in and of themselves. Several bring up their ethnicity. Many assume that because they don’t have the right brow-to-jaw ratio, the right chin, the right cheekbones or nose-to-temple ratio, they are screwed by genetics. Many complain that women only want one particular body type — usually one of the Marvel Chris’ — and many,  many of them insist that they’re too short. Hell, in one memorable instance, I got a dude who insisted that his index-to-ring-finger ratio meant that no woman would ever love him.

But the one thing that all of these dudes have in common is very, very simple: they have never, ever actually talked to women about this. And I don’t mean “random usernames on the dodgy subreddit where you’ve been doom-scrolling for emotional masochism,” I mean actual women, in the flesh and in their lives. A lot of guys don’t actually know what women find attractive and make a lot of assumptions based on what either they think or some random a--hole on a MGTOW subreddit tells them. Because, my dude, I can tell you from decades of personal experience: ask five women about what they find attractive in a dude and you’re gonna get six answers.

The folks who insist that women only want 6′ tall white dudes carved out of marble and abs tend to have never encountered the Dev Patel thirst club. The ones who insist that you need whatever weird-ass phrenology the incels have come up with this month have never seen how many people go bugf--k for Benedict Cumberbatch. The ones who worry that they’re not sufficiently masculine don’t seem to understand why women lost their goddamn minds over Harry Stiles in a dress. Hell, Peter Dinklage — already a popular guy before Game of Thrones, not to mention already married with children — got catapulted into the stratosphere as a sex-symbol after playing Tyrion Lannister. Vincent Cassell looks like a pencil topper with a crippling addiction to Gitanes and can most charitably be described as “very French” has his own wide swath of conquests. Michael Berryman literally has a face for radio and uses to play monsters and serial killers with minimal make-up but has been married for decades. Henry Kissinger is the human equivalent of the carpet at the dollar cinema, but he got more strange ass than a farmer at a Pripyat donkey auction.

And of course, there is my eternal go-to of Serge Gainsbourg, a man who radiates sex like a janitor at Three Mile Porn Island, despite having spent his life trying to hide the fact that he was clearly at least half-Deep One, and had moved away from Innsmouth as a child.

(And to forestall the inevitable “yes but these are all celebrities, so that doesn’t count”: I reference celebrities because you know who they are. I could tell you about the sex-gettingest man I know who was short and fat, but seeing as you don’t know him, it’s far easier to assume that I’m making him up.)

I mean, it’s almost like women aren’t a monolith and that they have a wide variety of tastes. Most even find multiple types of men attractive at the same time, being perfectly capable of having a thing for Joe Taslim AND Jay Baruchel. Go figure.

Alright, with all that in mind, it’s time for some tough, even harsh truths.

The biggest issue you’re having, TFAW, is two-fold. The first is that you have invented an imaginary woman in your head and you’re getting upset by having been imaginary-rejected by her. This isn’t even about actual lived experience, it’s about what you think is going to happen based primarily on your assumptions and your anxieties. And while yes, the pain caused by those anxieties is very real… it’s still mostly you hurting your own feelings. You have created these scenarios — ones you haven’t encountered but anticipate encountering — and you’re reacting to those. And moreover, these aren’t anticipated encounters based on experience and knowledge but more assumptions.

Despite what you’re assuming, it’s not true that there are more men than women looking for no-strings sex; it’s just that it’s more acceptable for men to openly look for no-strings hook-ups. There are a lot of women — far more than you think — who would be down for something casual, if it weren’t for the fact that society has stacked the deck against them to the point that it’s not worth it to try. After all, why would a woman want to go home with someone who is likely to treat “casual” as  meaning “disposable”, not bother bringing his a-game because it’s not like she “counts” and then call her a slut because she did the thing he was trying to get her to do? 

The theoretical more-handsome-man you’re worried about is not only not real but that’s not how the vast majority of women looking for casual sex choose their partners. It’s not about holding out for the top shelf guy, it’s about finding someone who they think would

a) be good enough in bed that

b) it would be worth facing the risks of pregnancy, STIs and assault and

c) isn’t going to treat her like s--t afterwards.

So, yes, you very much do “f--k a personality” — that personality dictates literally everything about how enjoyable the sex is going to be — before, during and afterwards.

And believe me: the fact that a dude looks hot doesn’t automatically clear any of these just by existing. It doesn’t take much at all for a dude to render himself instantly unf--kable, no matter how hot he is. Consider, for example, Rufus Sewell in The Knight’s Tale. Yes, he’s very classically good looking… but literally everything about the way he acts to the way he treats people in general and women in particular puts him on the list of “not even with a borrowed vagina and Michael B. Jordan doing the pushing.”

Mark Addy, on the other hand, has quite the number of people who want to roll him in butter and stick him on a bun.

Just as importantly, yes, women have a hard time getting laid. There is an entire industry devoted to helping women find sex and boyfriends. Hell, women regularly write in to this column to ask for help! You’re basing definitional, existential determinations about sex and sexuality the s--t going on in your own head, not facts on the ground.

Do women get more offers than men do? Yes — that’s because it’s socially acceptable for men to be up front about looking for sex, even if they do so by being complete a--holes about it. But having dick thrown at you doesn’t mean it’s dick anyone would want, any more than the green bologna at the bottom of the dumpster is something people would want to eat. Yes, it’s technically food, but it’s still food that even the roaches passed on in order to find something more upscale. And, if you’re wondering what that looks like for men… look at the way you talk about women “in your league”.

The second issue is that you don’t get what makes somebody attractive, never mind sexually desirable. It’s not about being “good looking”. Most “good looks” aren’t about bone-structure or fat distribution, it’s about presentation, style, hygiene and posture. Being good looking is almost always a decent set of clothes, a hair cut and really rudimentary skin-care away. Hell, if you want to go the extra mile, a little tinted moisturizer, even a smidge of eyeliner can make a dude go from nice to “niiiiiiiice”. I mean, if you want to see the transformative power of presentation, just google “celebrities without makeup”.

No, what makes a man attractive is about attitude, personality and connection. A good looking guy can be incredibly creepy and unf--kable; all you need to do is look at, say, Kalifornia, Red Eye or Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile. A guy who knows how to make a woman feel good, on the other hand, is incredibly attractive. A guy who makes women feel safe is even more so. And a guy who can do all of these things and radiate sexuality and sensuality without being weird about it? That’s a guy who’s going to get laid like cheap linoleum. If you ever spend time in,  say, a salsa club or other latin dance venues, the most popular men there are rarely the young strapping lads, it’s the older gentlemen. The young men may have youth on their side, but the older men who’ve been dancing for decades can do things with their hips that make women’s eyes bug out at the thought of it.

I bring this up because, quite frankly, your letter reeks of a crappy attitude like a spilled bottle of designer-clone perfume. There’s that clear resentment of the imaginary Handsome Man stealing your imaginary Hot Girl, and the bitterness that she’s letting him get away with it. There’s denigration of women who might want you to commit or the ones “in your league”. And of course, there’s the s--tty way you think of yourself. I mean, setting aside the way you seem to feel about others… if you feel this way about yourself, why should anyone else want to get close to you? You’re poisoning the metaphorical well long before you talk anyone because you’ve convinced yourself that being with you would be unbearably awful, and that affects literally everything you do, from the way you stand to the way you talk to people. That whole “I don’t want to join any club that would have me as a member” creates a no-win situation for you, my dude. It means that even under the best of circumstances, you would never be able to accept that someone would want to hook-up with you. So either you will miss the people who clearly would give you a chance if you didn’t pre-reject yourself, or you’ll assume that anyone who would give you the time of day must be trying to trick you somehow.

I mean, come on, chief. The way you refer to commitment like it’s awful is kind of the give-away here. A woman wanting commitment isn’t a trick, it’s her telling you that she thinks you’re f--king awesome and wants a relationship with you, not a one-night stand she may well barely remember a week later. Acting like that’s a bad thing is the strongest example of “it’s ok, I wouldn’t f--k me either” I can think of in your letter.

Now, I’ve written a lot about casual sex and how to find it, and you can read all of it in the archives or check out my videos and podcasts on the subject. But all the technique in the world isn’t going to help you with the way you are now, even if you magically turned into Tom Cruise tomorrow. The issue isn’t your face, it’s about your attitude — towards yourself and towards women. Until that changes, that’s going to constantly knee-cap you, no matter what you look like.

You need two things.

First: you need to worry less about your face, and more about cultivating those qualities that make a man desirable. Getting comfortable with your body and knowing how to move it, cultivating passions and hobbies — especially ones that convey positive qualities like nurturing and connection — and learning to actually love yourself is going to be vital. If you don’t believe in your own value and desirability, other people won’t either. And trust me: people can tell when you’re faking it to try to get into their pants. Honesty and sincerity are gonna count for a hell of a lot more than any technique I learned from the Pansexual Nuns of Our Lady Of Gutta-Percha.

Second: you need more women in your life. Not as potential dates or sexual conquests but as friends. Real, sincere and platonic friends, not would-be friends-with-benefits.

The biggest sticking point you have is that you’re dealing with your idea of women, rather than the reality of them. Reacting to the women you’ve made up in your head is going to make it next to impossible to connect with actual women because they’re going to stubbornly refuse to follow the script you wrote for them. Making friends — and again, real, genuine friends — with women will do many things for you.

First: it’ll demystify them. By having a genuine friendship with them, you’ll get to know women as people, rather than these semi-mythical beings who just float through life with no problems whatsoever. They’re human as you and even the most classically beautiful fart, scratch their pits, pick at bits and scabs and otherwise act like literally everyone else does. Next: it’ll make it easier for you to actually talk to them. That whole “women as people thing” means that you understand that hey, talking to women and making friends with them isn’t different from talking to men or making friends with them. The more comfortable you become with women, the easier it is to talk to the ones you want to bang. And finally: it’ll change your perspective. The best and most successful lovers out there — whether they’re married or have strings of partners — aren’t successful because they’re handsome or have the gift of gab or the right car. They’re successful because they genuinely like the people they sleep with. That genuineness, that ability to connect and that desire for everyone to have a good time is why they never lack for company. Women want to be with them because those men make them feel good — not just physically but emotionally. And that requires an attitude and personality that can’t be faked; it can only be developed organically.

If you want to find more eager casual sex partners, you don’t want to be a better looking man. You want to be a better man over all.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com