As an avid user of social media, I pretty much read every BuzzFeed and Elite Daily article that pops up on my Facebook news feed (#procrastination). Some of them are pretty insightful, others are inspiring, a handful are unoriginal but still hilarious, and a few are, in my eyes, just... not good. 

The article that I am currently calling into question states that good guys only exist after college. Now, in no way is my intention to belittle the credibility or the work of the author, as all opinions should be valued, but I simply found a lot of what she had to say problematic.  

The author acknowledges that not every guy is an a**hole. I agree with this and also believe that with age TYPICALLY comes maturity and wisdom, though they're not necessarily correlated. However, I don't support this idea that women have to wait the college period out in order to find someone worthwhile. If it happens to work out this way, so be it. Nevertheless, this should happen on its own, naturally, just like a relationship should. 

What I'm addressing though is that good guys do exist in college, and I don't think it's ever fair to generalize an entire population of individuals. 

People who say that "There are no good ones left" or "No one has any respect anymore" just have yet to meet the right person, or perhaps they haven't set themselves up to meet these kinds of people. Other times, luck just has it that they have only encountered people with poor character, through no fault of their own. The author argues, "[y]ou just can't allow the current culture make you settle for less." I agree with that statement and believe others do too. However, she then goes on to say that she admits she did this very thing throughout college.

Now I don't think we need to have ourselves all figured out by the time we're in college. That's absolutely not the case, as college is a time of personal growth and development. In this way, it's okay if we don't have our standards rigidly set yet. We're still deciding on what character traits we like and dislike in people. However, by that very principle of settling for less, the author wasn't setting herself up with "good guys." So she can't say that "good guys do exist-- just not until after college."  It's unfair.

Personally, I don't believe in settling for anything less than I deserve. If something or someone is no longer up to my standards or toxic to my existence, I no longer want it/he/she in my life-- that's the bottom line. I am not afraid to cut people out of my life, as harsh as that sounds, but I'd also say I'm one of the more forgiving people I know. I try not to dwell on things, but I realize when there is no value in a relationship.  

The author also goes on to compare these guys from college who didn't meet her standards to "good guys" who were in a later stage in their lives. "They buy me drinks without looking at their bank accounts until the weekend is over. They hold doors for me on the way out, too. They text me first if they are interested and commit to me quickly if it is, in fact, right. Good guys do exist."  

I'm sorry to be the one to break the news, but those qualities do not equate to being a good guy. Likewise, expecting a guy to do all of those things in order to be considered a good guy is, for lack of a better word, garbage. 

My question is: does this author fail to realize that a college student most likely doesn't have a very stable source of income yet and therefore has to monitor their bank activity? I know I do, albeit mentally, when I make purchases. I track my money like a responsible person, and I have respect for someone who is conscious of his money. Even if my date is receiving an allowance from his parents, it would still mean he isn't a frivolous spender and understands that money isn't something to throw around, even if he is trying to impress his date.  

Regarding the chivalrous act of holding a door open for a woman, I think it's a sweet gesture. However, it's not something that I expect or demand. And no, this has nothing to do with feminism, which I do support. I hold the door open for random people if I get there first. It's just being a good human, and that's that. It has nothing to do with gender. 

Yikes. My rant is nearly over, I promise! The last things I want to say are that guys shouldn't be expected to text first...That only fosters a sense of entitlement and breeds problems. Playing games just isn't ever productive to building relationships. 

Committing quickly shouldn't be an expectation either. My current boyfriend and I "talked" for 2 months before we went on our first legitimate date and then it took an additional 4 months before he asked me to be his girlfriend. It's called not rushing into things. I wouldn't ever fault a guy for not committing to me quickly because I echo the same sentiment for taking one's time. He was patient with me, but if it were the other way around (where he wasn't ready-- mind you, this guy was my first boyfriend), shouldn't I be just as patient with him?  

Just some food for thought.