If women are looking for a loyal man, why don’t they get together with a socially awkward guy who doesn’t know how to relate to women?

Instead of choosing a man who “knows how to deal with women” (in other words, a guy who’s smooth and knows what he’s doing)?

A socially awkward man has the advantage of being like a piece of furniture: you leave him somewhere, and he’s still there. He “doesn’t know how to play the game,” so the chances that he’ll cheat are extremely low compared to someone who’s charismatic, outgoing, and highly skilled socially.

So why don’t women, instead of complaining about the men they themselves choose because they’re exciting and emotionally engaging, go for someone who doesn’t have those traits—thereby guaranteeing themselves the loyalty and emotional stability they say they want?

It’s too easy to get involved with the equivalent of Casanova or a flashy entertainer type—and then expect that he won’t have success with other women, that he’ll somehow contain his overflowing nature.