[Roosh]

Here's the latest attack:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/annanorth/do-pic...al-assault

Quote:

Thorn adds that individual PUA techniques aren't really the biggest issue. Rather, the broader "attitudes about sex, relationships, and women within the PUA subculture" could encourage assault: "When relationships are framed as an adversarial conflict, and you become entirely focused on 'winning' (i.e. getting laid), then you may indeed do 'whatever it takes' to get what you want."

Game really is a thorn in the feminist side, especially since it actually works and gives men more sexual options at their expense.

We've already seen them label approaching as "harassment" so now they want to say that breaking down resistance is pseudo sexual assault, that a girl has to say, "Yes I would like to have sex with you" as you enter her apartment.

They may succeed in criminalizing street approaches in the next ten years or so in some cities. We shall see.

[Architekt]

I don't understand how humanity is going to continue to exist in the western world. Humans are literally breeding themselves out..

[soup]

Letting feminists take control is like letting a drunk person drive. They don't realize how drunk they are. They are capable of inflicting great damage to the lives of other people as well as their own.

[Samseau]

(08-08-2012 09:36 AM)Architekt Wrote:  

I don't understand how humanity is going to continue to exist in the western world. Humans are literally breeding themselves out..

It's just the fucked up societies that will pass and enforce laws like these. Other ones, that are interested in their survival, won't.

[vinman]

(08-08-2012 10:40 AM)soup Wrote:  

Letting feminists take control is like letting a drunk person drive. They don't realize how drunk they are. They are capable of inflicting great damage to the lives of other people as well as their own.

Wow. I've never seen that point written so succinctly. Thanks Soup, that's going into the arsenal.

[Tuthmosis]

This is some of the dumbest logic yet. Some replies:

1. Sexual frustration (of not knowing how to interact with women and then overreacting when the one chance comes up) can doubly lead to "sexual assault." Game, in large part, teaches ease and calm around women and sexual situations.

2. Call it "game" or not, techniques for talking to and bedding women have existed for millenia.

3. Women also "[frame] relationships as adversarial conflicts"--perhaps even more so--completely absent game culture. Popular magazines and talk shows that cater exclusively to women are just one example. Others are terms of abuse like "creepy," or manipulative extraction of food, drinks, and gifts from less-than-savvy-daters; these are leveled on men every night, all over the world. The false promise of sex or disingenuous flattery is par for the course for a sizable subsection of not just American, indeed International, women.

Bitch, please.

[delicioustacos]

This article is just a comment farm for complainy girls. Look at the headline:

"Do Pickup Artist Techniques Lead To Sexual Assault?"

Of course it has to have a question mark, because when you read the article, the answer is basically "no." But you can't ever have an article saying something doesn't cause rape. Of course it has to cause rape. Or "sexual assault," which she means for her audience to read as "rape" even though she can't substantiate her claim enough to come out and say "rape."

So she leads with a bogus anecdote, presumably the most horrifying one she could find: a 17 year old who had read things on the internet fingerfucked a girl who wasn't into it. He wants to remain anonymous and the story can't be verified.

Then she interviews a couple experts. The first guy, staying within his area of expertise, says "no, sexual assault is usually done by serial sex offenders." Then she presses him, and he says "well, in theory, I guess some of these ideas could give men already contemplating sexual assault some moral cover in their own minds...."

You can almost hear her saying "well, is there ANY circumstance under which this could EVER contribute to sexual assault?" And he still basically says no. But she's able to frame his hedgey answer so it sounds a little like a guy in platforms and goggles is gonna hold a box cutter to your neck.

Then she interviews a feminist sex author, who also says "no. Millions of guys do this stuff and don't rape people." However, she adds (doubtless after goading) "maybe some of these tools are prone to misuse." And the writer then has to dig into Thorn's book to find an example of sex where "it's not clear if the woman consented."

The accurate headline for this story would have been "Experts Find No Evidence that PUA Tactics Contribute to Sexual Assault." But the author's job was: write a story about how PUA's are rapists; get a Jezebel link and get the girls all scared and angry. No matter what her research told her, the headline and story had to communicate that PUA's might rape you. Just like the local news has to have "could tap water be causing brain damage in YOUR child? Details at 11," these sites need to keep cranking out rape scares to get views and comments.

[j r]

This is heartening. In the comments, there seems to be just as many dudes calling the author out for her faulty logic as there are manginas. All the women are throwing out feminist nonsense, but that's to be expected cause only feminist women spend any time complaining on the internet anyway. The rest are too busy trading muffin recipes on Pinterest and trying to find husbands.

[Ramon Zarate]

Quote:

However, she added, some "tools" of pickup artistry are especially prone to misuse: she specifically cited "Last Minute Resistance" tactics designed to convince a woman to have sex after she's already said no.

She conveniently leaves out the fact that the most common advice to overcoming last minute resistance is freeze-outs, which are hardly forcing yourself on the girl, the exact opposite in fact! And North seems to be implying that if a woman changes her mind and decides that she want to have sex it doesn't count because she originally said no. Retarded!

She doesn't seem to know what "coercion" means either... it means to force someone to do something by physical force or through threats and intimidation. I'd like to know if there are any PUAs who advocate that, because I don't know of any.

Conclusion: usual shaming by feminists, designed to discourage men from going out and using game to have sex and form relationships with younger and hotter women than themselves.

[Gmac]

Why do you think I'm fucking one of the most "hardcore" (yet hot) and soon to be influential feminists in DC?