|
I was absolutely horrified when I read about this
http://www.dosomething.org/petition/kickstarter
Sign the petition. Get this @#$% and his trashy project banned.
Reebo
Holy crap. That's just...I'm at a loss for words.
Signed.
The project is already funded. While there can be a delay between a project's completion and delivery of funds, it may have already occurred. This presents a conundrum for Kickstarter, if it is the case: keep the project up so that the creator has access to fulfillment tools, or take the project off the site and prevent the creator from fulfilling his pledges (which could potentially open the company up to liability from pledgers who are prevented from receiving their rewards by the company's refusal to allow the creator to fulfill them, and cannot receive refunds because the creator has already received the money and is under no legal obligation to refund anything).
It's obviously a scumbag project, but the creators of this petition apparently waited until the last minute.
Kickstarter has posted the following update:
This morning, material that a project creator posted on Reddit earlier this year was brought to our and the public’s attention just hours before the project’s deadline. Some of this material is abhorrent and inconsistent with our values as people and as an organization. Based on our current guidelines, however, the material on Reddit did not warrant the irreversible action of canceling the project.
It appears that the most offensive material was on reddit, not Kickstarter, and that they feel their Terms of Use do not cover content posted elsewhere (with good reason - this could lead to a situation where users opposed to a particular project hunt down potentially offensive statements the creator has made in the past, elsewhere on the internet, to justify killing a project).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know, I tried following the links to find the actual sources of the quotes and I couldn't find much.
'Cuz, you know, sometimes context matters:
Is this supposed to be at the bar? On the subway station? On the couch once you've gotten her home?
Context matters.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some people are too stupid to realize this is obvious trollery and when I looked at it closer it looks like its meant to be a satire on "improving your game"-type books.
I don't believe I'm stupid, and I think that it doesn't *matter* what the intent was. It presents like an exaggerated version of game/PUA theory, and I don't think Kickstarter should have permitted it. Goodness knows they've removed other projects for being offensive that didn't actually go so far as to encourage readers to commit crimes.
What the actual #$@#$.
|
|
Some people are too stupid to realize this is obvious trollery and when I looked at it closer it looks like its meant to be a satire on "improving your game"-type books.
Just so I'm clear are you saying Dosomething has just set up a petition to waste people's time?
And this guy here "http://caseymalone.com/post/53339539674/this-is-not-f$+~ing-harmless" is just joking and this book is harmless?
If it is indeed all fake, then sure ignore it.
I call bullshiznit.
Most of the choiciest bits seem to come from this page.
The stuff about always be touching her is for when you're out on a date with a woman. The stuff about whipping out your penis and placing her hand on it is for when you've gotten to third base with a woman and are making the turn towards home.
There's tons of issues one could take with statements like "You're the man, it's your job to lead," and the dating style it advocates might not be to everybody's taste, but this isn't promoting sexual assault.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really thought this thread was going to be about CoC 7th ed and its horrible rewards...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's tons of issues one could take with statements like "You're the man, it's your job to lead," and the dating style it advocates might not be to everybody's taste, but this isn't promoting sexual assault.
I'm unclear how you can fail to recognize what this is advocating as assault.
Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don't ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.
Assault.
(Lest you say this is taken out of context, it is from the section on escalating -- basically, how to interact with strangers -- that tells you not to wait for signs of interest/acceptance, not the part that is for when you've succeeded in getting her to your place.)
IMPORTANT NOTE ON RESISTANCE:
If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says "STOP," or "GET AWAY FROM ME," or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately and say this line:
"No problem. I don't want you to do anything you aren't comfortable with."
Memorize that line. It is your go-to when faced with resistance. Say it genuinely, without presumption. All master seducers are also masters at making women feel comfortable. You'll be no different. If a woman isn't comfortable, take a break and try again later.
All that matters is that you continue to try to escalate physically until she makes it genuinely clear that it's not happening.
The onus should not be on me to be vehement enough in my disinterest. If I say politely and quietly, "please leave me alone," that is it. Full stop. If you continue to touch me, you are assaulting me. I shouldn't have to shout "STOP" or "GET AWAY FROM ME" or physically shove you away to get you to stop touching me. The way in which I tell you to stop touching me is irrelevant.
And if I tell you to stop touching me, especially if I've shouted "STOP" or "GET AWAY FROM ME", "waiting and trying again later" doesn't make it okay.
Assault.
And for that matter, a lot of the stuff in the "Sex" section is questionable. Just because someone consents to sex doesn't mean they can't revoke that consent. If someone tells you to stop, it doesn't matter if they're naked. You stop. If you're forcing someone's hand onto your genitals, and they're resisting and telling you no, you are assaulting them, even if they were okay with making out with you.
So much for 'no such thing as wrongbadfun' eh?
I'll admit this guy is basically saying 'give me money to write a book that tells you to go after what you want with no apologies and no regrets...
There's definitely a target market of both men who would pay for that and of women who fall for a guy who takes the lead...
To use our gaming metaphors its a 'valid playstyle'. No wierder than the 50 shades of craziness that has been published over the last year or so. And that stuff is definitely wierd. What will happen when you use these strategies is you will almost immediately separate the women from your life who think this makes your a piece of crap from the women who think 'where have you been all my life you confident, take no prisoners, Dom to my sub.
Its high stakes human interraction that most folks dont have a stomach for and it says 'be committed to crossing some of other people's personal boundaries in order to quickly find the kind of girl that this mindset finds attractive.
Sure the guy is a first class deutchbaeg, and its a shame that he's found $16000 worth of dudes who are so lonely that they're willing to ludicrously ask and pay for instruction on how to be a 'superalpha'. At best he's just the result of an entrepreneurial spirit in a down economy making 'dbag superalpha' choices on ways to get ahead, at worst he's asking for money to give dangerously bad advice to men who probably are single for a reason... Its lame. Dont feed the troll. These kinds of people wouldnt exist if there werent enough other people like him to get him $14000 over his goal in the first place... Thats $16000 worth of people who said they could use a high level character to help them retrain some points in their 'deutchbaeg' skill. And this guy clearly has the levels.
Next on sick sad world....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don't ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.Assault.
(Lest you say this is taken out of context, it is from the section on escalating -- basically, how to interact with strangers -- that tells you not to wait for signs of interest/acceptance, not the part that is for when you've succeeded in getting her to your place.)
Well, it's definitely not assault if it's not objected to. I've watched the drinking classes interact and flirt with strangers for year now. I've seen them touch each other and place each other on their laps and sometimes it results in slapped faces and sometimes it results in sexual congress. I'm not saying sexual assaulters don't do these things, but, no, I don't think these things by themselves are inherently sexual assault.
IMPORTANT NOTE ON RESISTANCE:
If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says "STOP," or "GET AWAY FROM ME," or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately and say this line:
"No problem. I don't want you to do anything you aren't comfortable with."
Memorize that line. It is your go-to when faced with resistance. Say it genuinely, without presumption. All master seducers are also masters at making women feel comfortable. You'll be no different. If a woman isn't comfortable, take a break and try again later.
All that matters is that you continue to try to escalate physically until she makes it genuinely clear that it's not happening.The onus should not be on me to be vehement enough in my disinterest. If I say politely and quietly, "please leave me alone," that is it. Full stop. If you continue to touch me, you are assaulting me. I shouldn't have to shout "STOP" or "GET AWAY FROM ME" or physically shove you away to get you to stop touching me. The way in which I tell you to stop touching me is irrelevant.
And if I tell you to stop touching me, especially if I've shouted "STOP" or "GET AWAY FROM ME", "waiting and trying again later" doesn't make it okay.
Assault.
"If I say politely and quietly, please leave me alone, that is it. Full stop."
"If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says 'STOP,' or 'GET AWAY FROM ME,' or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately and say this line:
'No problem. I don't want you to do anything you aren't comfortable with.'"
These are functionally the same. Is it creepy that Mr. Bad Dating Advice is now planning on how to get you to relax and get in the mood? Yes. Is it advocating sexual assault? No. "Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry."
"And for that matter, a lot of the stuff in the "Sex" section is questionable. Just because someone consents to sex doesn't mean they can't revoke that consent. If someone tells you to stop, it doesn't matter if they're naked. You stop. If you're forcing someone's hand onto your genitals, and they're resisting and telling you no, you are assaulting them, even if they were okay with making out with you.
Nothing in that section even hints at claiming that once your potential partner is naked they can't revoke consent.
I don't know about reversing a project once its been funded (I think that potentially raises more issues than it solves), but I hope they review their approval process - that's where I think they fell down.
The world will be a better place if they don't make it easier to produce rubbish.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, it's definitely not assault if it's not objected to. I've watched the drinking classes interact and flirt with strangers for year now. I've seen them touch each other and place each other on their laps and sometimes it results in slapped faces and sometimes it results in sexual congress. I'm not saying sexual assaulters don't do these things, but, no, I don't think these things by themselves are inherently sexual assault.Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don't ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.Assault.
(Lest you say this is taken out of context, it is from the section on escalating -- basically, how to interact with strangers -- that tells you not to wait for signs of interest/acceptance, not the part that is for when you've succeeded in getting her to your place.)
as·sault
/əˈsôlt/Verb
Make a physical attack on.
Noun
A physical attack: "his imprisonment for an assault on the film director"; "sexual assaults".
Synonyms
verb. attack - assail - charge - storm - rush
noun. attack - onset - aggression - offense - raid - offence
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No wierder than the 50 shades of craziness that has been published over the last year or so.
The BDSM crowd actually found that book to be dangerously irresponsible, in that it gave a lot of folks some very wrongheaded ideas on how to D/s. That and it sold an abusive relationship as a romantic D/s one.
When people started flooding the internet announcing that they were "totally into bondage now" because of that book, folks that had worked hard to make SSC a thing must have flipped their @#$%.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, it's definitely not assault if it's not objected to. I've watched the drinking classes interact and flirt with strangers for year now. I've seen them touch each other and place each other on their laps and sometimes it results in slapped faces and sometimes it results in sexual congress. I'm not saying sexual assaulters don't do these things, but, no, I don't think these things by themselves are inherently sexual assault.Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don't ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.Assault.
(Lest you say this is taken out of context, it is from the section on escalating -- basically, how to interact with strangers -- that tells you not to wait for signs of interest/acceptance, not the part that is for when you've succeeded in getting her to your place.)
If a stranger picks me up and attempts to force me into a sexual position, it's assault. You are trapping and restraining someone.
That's not something you do to a stranger without first getting their consent.
These are functionally the same. Is it creepy that Mr. Bad Dating Advice is now planning on how to get you to relax and get in the mood? Yes. Is it advocating sexual assault? No. "Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry."
They're not functionally the same. They should be, but they're not, as anyone who's ever had to deal with an aggressor can tell you. Some of them will continue until you shout loud enough to draw attention.
He tells you that no doesn't always mean no.
"With some experience, you will learn to differentiate the "No, we can't... my parents are in the next room... OMG [yes]" from the "SERIOUSLY GET THE **** OFF OF ME, YOU CREEP" variety of resistance."
Wrong. Unless you're engaging in predefined sexual play where protestation is explicitly called out as part of the activity (and hopefully there's a safe word), no means no.
"No, we can't," is sufficient refusal. If she's said that, then unless she explicitly reverses it, you have been denied consent.
And if I tell someone not to touch me, I consider any sexually-oriented touch after that point to be assault. Waiting a bit and trying again doesn't negate my first "no."
"Nothing in that section even hints at claiming that once your potential partner is naked they can't revoke consent.
No, because it doesn't talk about obtaining consent at all, let alone what to do if it's revoked. Which, if you're going to tell someone to "be dominant" and not wait for their partner to give consent, is a pretty bloody important thing to clarify.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No wierder than the 50 shades of craziness that has been published over the last year or so.The BDSM crowd actually found that book to be dangerously irresponsible, in that it gave a lot of folks some very wrongheaded ideas on how to D/s. That and it sold an abusive relationship as a romantic D/s one.
When people started flooding the internet announcing that they were "totally into bondage now" because of that book, folks that had worked hard to make SSC a thing must have flipped their @#$%.
Beaten to the punch by Mikaze. This is incredibly true though.
My city has a pretty astonishingly large BDSM community (and interestingly enough, 90% of them seem to be public servants, though I'm not sure what significance that may hold), and everyone I've spoken to in that community is disgusted by the misinformation that series put into the heads of the population at large. Honestly, some of it is just outright dangerous.
My problems with the series were more related to the fact that it was poorly written trash. I'll admit, I have a guilty pleasure of reading paranormal romance novels (though a better way to put it would be that I read urban fantasy with a strong romantic subplot, as I find that they have better stories than the outright paranormal romance novels), but I only bother with them if they're well written. Fifty Shades started as Twilight fan fiction, and while fan fiction can be very well written, I don't feel that this is at all. Funnily enough though, I have the same issues with the Twilight series. Again, it's poorly written, and it provides a terrible role model for young women, with the final message seeming to be "If you meet a man you care about, you need to give up your friends and family to be with him."
Back onto the actual topic though. I can't pretend to know the motivations behind the guy who set this project up. None of us can. All we can do is go on what we're being shown, and no matter what his intentions were (be they satire, general trolling, or actual sincerity), what we are being shown is in fact disgusting, incredibly wrong headed views on how to deal with the opposite sex. This should never have been approved, and if the author was intending it as satire, then he needs to learn how to frame it properly so that it appears as such. There's nothing wrong with comedy that pushes boundaries, but it has to actually be identifiable as comedy, and not just sick/twisted/disgusting for the sake of it. Look at Frankie Boyle and Jimmy Carr, two of my favourite comedians. Both of them push the boundaries significantly, and on occasion say things that have even me thinking "Oh bloody hell, that's a bit much", but they do it within the context of their comedy. People go to their shows and buy their DVDs because they know what to expect, and it's what they want to see at that time. This guy has just started a kickstarter campaign for a book that seems to be specifically marketed at guys who don't know better when it comes to dealing with women, and is going to result in a lot of trouble for both them and the women that they decide to try these techniques on.
Sadly wether the kickstarter is based off a poor example of the breed or simply is a person who knows better but wants to take financial advantage of the poor examples of the breed anyway, the important point for this particular kickstarter is that, like twilight and 50 shades... Even if its wrong... Even if its crap. It'll sell.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wrong. Unless you're engaging in predefined sexual play where protestation is explicitly called out as part of the activity (and hopefully there's a safe word), no means no."No, we can't," is sufficient refusal. If she's said that, then unless she explicitly reverses it, you have been denied consent.
And if I tell someone not to touch me, I consider any sexually-oriented touch after that point to be assault. Waiting a bit and trying again doesn't negate my first "no."
Actually, what you describe is your personal experience (which is fine) - girls I know (some good friends of mine) explicitly told me that they prefer to carry the act of "resisiting just a little" even with new sexual partners. So pretending that there is no such thing as a girl saying "no" but actually meaning "convince me more a bit" or just flat out "ignore me" will just make the rest of your arguments look bad.
I mean, take this out of the sexual context for a moment - didn't you ever had this phone conversation with a friend?YOU: hey, wanna hang out tonight? maybe go watch that new movie everyone is excited about now?
RIEND: nah, Iv'e got all this work to do, I can't really spare the time...
YOU: come on, dude, you know you feel like it, and besides, you need to relax
FRIEND: I really don't think this is a good idea...
YOU: Great! I'll pick you up at 7PM
FRIEND: You don't quite, ha? yeah, sure, let's have fun
Or even,
YOU: fine, I'll just find somebody else to hang out with. Have luck with your work!
FRIEND: Ah, actually, screw work, let's go!
This happens in every aspect of human interaction - reluctance CAN be feigned reluctance. Pretending it can't does not lead to a convincing argument against the abhorrent behavior of sex offenders.
What DOES lead to a convincing argument is the "better safe than sorry" argument. let's examine the options:
1) girl says "no" to guy, and doesn't actually mean it - if the guy goes ahead and keeps trying, great! both sides got what they wanted. If he stops trying, than either sex will not happen or the girl will just have to find the least embarrassing way to say, "Err, did i say no? I meant yes, of course!"
2) Girl says "no" to guy, and actually means it - if the guy goes ahead and keeps trying, he is now a FEAKING SEX OFFENDER. If he backs off than no sex will happen, which is fine, because one of the people involved didn't want it to.
It could rather easily be seen that none of these options is terrible, except of course for the case where there was miscommunication and the guy continued despite the girl wanting him to stop - so just don't Don't ever do it, because the chance you have of that leading to sex is not worth the risk of harming another human, and commiting a crime while your'e at it.
Yes, feigned reluctance exists, but just as your'e not going to be driving your car around with your eyes closed ("What? sometime people survive it when their car crushes into a wall! chill out!"), don't ever "risk it" and keep on going when a girl tells you to stop. Just don't, because if it goes wrong it goes horribly wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Something about this doesn't seem kosher on either end.
Thank you for mansplaining that for us, Lord Snow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a stranger picks me up and attempts to force me into a sexual position, it's assault. You are trapping and restraining someone.
That's not something you do to a stranger without first getting their consent.
Chapter 7: Physical Escalation and Sex: "OK, you've made it this far. You are with a beautiful woman whose company you truly enjoy. You desire her. She longs to be desired. It's time to harness all that passion." Skip down a few sections and then we get to picking people up and putting them on your lap. Doesn't sound like he's advocating "picking up" strangers to me.
They're not functionally the same. They should be, but they're not, as anyone who's ever had to deal with an aggressor can tell you. Some of them will continue until you shout loud enough to draw attention.
And some sexual assaulters take your polite decline, lurk in the back of the alley and, given the opportunity, get you on the way home. If someone puts in a " Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry" it's pretty disingenuous to say that they're promoting sexual assault.
He tells you that no doesn't always mean no.
"With some experience, you will learn to differentiate the "No, we can't... my parents are in the next room... OMG [yes]" from the "SERIOUSLY GET THE **** OFF OF ME, YOU CREEP" variety of resistance."
Wrong. Unless you're engaging in predefined sexual play where protestation is explicitly called out as part of the activity (and hopefully there's a safe word), no means no."No, we can't," is sufficient refusal. If she's said that, then unless she explicitly reverses it, you have been denied consent.
And how does a suitor usually get the suitee to explicitly reverse a denial of consent without becoming a rapist? Usually by continued persuasion. Which is what, according to my reading, is what's being advocated here.
"Nothing in that section even hints at claiming that once your potential partner is naked they can't revoke consent.
No, because it doesn't talk about obtaining consent at all, let alone what to do if it's revoked. Which, if you're going to tell someone to "be dominant" and not wait for their partner to give consent, is a pretty bloody important thing to clarify.
Yes, because that whole "Important Note on Resistance" where he says "Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry" isn't included in the text, not anywhere before the advice on kissing, fondling and sex. Nope, not there at all.
Rape advocacy or handbook on seduction? I don't recall how the feminist movement concluded that particular debate.
If it isn't clear, let me state forthrightly that I have never employed any of these methods, nor do I endorse them.
That being said, physically shoving a woman away from you sounds even less like sexual assault.
I am deeply disappointed that this hasn't been removed. Not only is this going to cause problem for the women on the receiving end as they get touched, there person space invaded and other fun things.
To quote Rob Judge, “Personal space is for pussies.” I already told you that the most successful seducers are those who can’t keep their hands off of women. Well you’re not gonna be able to do that if you aren’t in close! ”
“All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They began touching them immediately, kept great body language and eye contact, and were shameless in their physicality. Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That’s hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.”
Because the rights of a hundred women you upset and make uncomfortable and upset mean nothing if you get laid by the hundredth.
Pull out your c*** and put her hand on it. Remember, she is letting you do this because you have established yourself as a LEADER. Don’t ask for permission, GRAB HER HAND, and put it right on your d***.
...I'm sure there are going to be people explaining that this is somehow OK, that trying to force someone to do a sexual act if they've agreed to have sex is A-OK. And I will stick each of you on ignore, because you're disgusting. Trying to force someone to do a sexual act, even if they've agreed to have sex, is sexual assault. You wouldn't randomly ram your wang up a ladies butt just because she said, 'Sure, I'll come to your place'. This is exactly the same thing, if less physically traumatizing.
I don't care if this guy is genuine and thinks he's helping guys (he sure as hell doesn't care about women, except as a walking fleshlight) or a troll or a cynical sod trying to make money off desperate people who want to have sex. But this book is pretty vile. It's one step away from, 'And if she isn't impressed by you invading he space, physically groping her and manhandling her and telling her, 'Baby, I have a wang you need to do stuff with' then she's frigid, so slip her some ruffies. She'll be impressed by how you've taken control of the situation and be totally fine with being drugged.'
|
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a chapter on how to deal with dislodged teeth and broken noses? Because that seems like critical information for anyone actually using this book.
One hopes.
Hell I'd take satisfaction in that if it weren't for the misery they'd be heaping on others on their way to the floor.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is stuff like this that exists for why I have to sit through training hours on end about common sense things of what not to do with women. Seriously, have any of you been through training on Sexual Assault and/or Harassment? It's good information but it makes you feel ashamed for being a man sometimes.
Most relationship encounters are about power and control and this book advocates for the wrong end of it. It doesn't matter if "it's not that bad", it is specifically advocating for reducing a women's choice in regards to her body. That alone is enough for me to be against it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So pretending that there is no such thing as a girl saying "no" but actually meaning "convince me more a bit" or just flat out "ignore me" will just make the rest of your arguments look bad.
I'm the kind of person who takes no for a no. If you say no, I'm not going to ask you again, you already made your stance clear. If you didn't mean it, tough.
In entirely unrelated news, I also haven't been on a date since 1997. :p
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe some girls do say 'no' with the intent of making you work for it. Frankly, I'd rather take them on there word simply because of those rare, special women who say no, mean it and don't need the hassle of some guy whose sure she really means, 'maybe, you just need to convince me.' 'Cos, honesty, I kinda like that in a relationship rather than playing guess the meaning.
Rape advocacy or handbook on seduction? I don't recall how the feminist movement concluded that particular debate.
Please tell me you're not comparing Marvell to this guy. Please. My head will explode.
|
Some advice is almost comically bad. As a form of practice he suggests making eye contact with yourself in a mirror so you can see how you look at people and tweak your facial expressions. Which, by itself, is good advice. Knowing what you look like when you look at people is a good thing. But then as a confidence building exercise he suggests talking to yourself while holding eye contact in a mirror ... which is ok advice except that one of his examples is "Yeah, I'd f**k me" ... which is what the serial killer in Silence of the Lambs says while wearing his human skin cape....
Honestly I'm not certain if this guy is serious or if this is some meta-joke about self-help books, because there are a lot of side comments like that where it seems like he's having fun at his reader's expense.
It's a mixture of Zig Ziggler and The Game ... with a bit of the D.E.N.N.I.S system thrown in.
Still, I've been skimming through the reddit posts the book is based on and I don't think this is deserving of the level of hate it's been getting. The more aggressive stuff is pretty much all in the later chapters, which assume you've already gone on several dates, made your intentions perfectly clear, and you've both gone back to your place for some after hours alone time. So it doesn't seem quite as ... rapey ... as it seemed reading the out of context quotes elsewhere. It definitely equates being a "real man" with being an "alpha male" ... which definitely deserves a few eye rolls, and all the gradual escalation rules are assuming the person on the other end is receptive. Definitely could use a chapter or two on reading body language and choosing appropriate times to flirt with someone.
I guess I can see why Kickstarter didn't pull it, but I also don't think there's anything particularly inspired about it. It's just a rehashing of every single self-help book you've ever seen written as a book on seduction. I've seen worse advice in Cosmo.
[EDIT] Nevermind, hate away. I missed this on my first skim-through:
Leading with your body
The concept of "waiting for signs" or "Indicators of Interest" was commonplace in older pickup theory. It is 100% garbage and needs to be erased from the face of the planet.Never, ever, ever, wait for a SIGN before you escalate! You will miss out on the vast majority of chances if you sit around waiting for SIGNS. Men are notoriously bad at reading women's minds and body language. Don't think that you're any different. From now on you must ASSUME that she is attracted to you and wants to be ravished. It's a difference in mindset that makes champs champs and chumps chumps.
I'm still not 100% he's serious, based on the number of Silence of the Lambs references he dropped in there but ... yeah.
"Dear men, you are stupid and will never understand women. So don't bother ever trying to pay attention to non-verbal cues. Assume total strangers want you until they undeniably prove otherwise."
Sincerely, someone giving you horrible dating advice.
If I wrote fight club and people take it literally
Fight Club is fiction, not a how-to guide. How-to guides are specifically meant to be taken literally.
Rape advocacy or handbook on seduction? I don't recall how the feminist movement concluded that particular debate.
Poetry. Not a how-to guide. Like kmal2t's comment about Fight Club, this is irrelevant.
Please tell me you're not comparing Marvell to this guy. Please. My head will explode.Rape advocacy or handbook on seduction? I don't recall how the feminist movement concluded that particular debate.
The Tofu man doesn't have Marvell's sense of meter, no.
But yes, back in the early nineties there was a flap in literary and feminist circles that Marvell's poem, by using verbal coercion to woo his "mistress," was guilty of contributing to rape culture.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So if I wrote a how-to guide that said you should go in a bank and try to rob it with a banana there's going to be an outbreak of banana robberies? And I'm responsible if some idiot doesn't realize the book is a joke and does it?
Straw man. No one's saying we should ban these books from being published.
Yes, if someone writes a book on how to rob a bank, Kickstarter should refuse to allow it on their platform. As they should for any project advocating illegal activity.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Chapter 7: Physical Escalation and Sex: "OK, you've made it this far. You are with a beautiful woman whose company you truly enjoy. You desire her. She longs to be desired. It's time to harness all that passion." Skip down a few sections and then we get to picking people up and putting them on your lap. Doesn't sound like he's advocating "picking up" strangers to me.If a stranger picks me up and attempts to force me into a sexual position, it's assault. You are trapping and restraining someone.
That's not something you do to a stranger without first getting their consent.
Apparently you ignored the part of my post where I called out that this was not from the section about after you get the woman back to your place/in private/whatever.
He advises starting "physical escalation" as soon as you are interested in a woman, regardless of her interest or lack of it.
They're not functionally the same. They should be, but they're not, as anyone who's ever had to deal with an aggressor can tell you. Some of them will continue until you shout loud enough to draw attention.And some sexual assaulters take your polite decline, lurk in the back of the alley and, given the opportunity, get you on the way home. If someone puts in a " Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry" it's pretty disingenuous to say that they're promoting sexual assault.
No, it's not disingenuous when it's paired with instructions not to take no as no.
Ugh. I'm done.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I re-read the whole of Above the Game Part 7: Physical Escalation & Sex where most, if not all, of the passages quoted on the petition and the other blog post are sourced from.
I haven't read anything else by Mr. Tofu, nor do I plan to. But reading Chapter 7, it seems pretty clear to me that all of the activities he is advocating are for when you are out on a date. There is a clear warning that you should do nothing without her consent. It then goes on to give advice of questionable quality on how to get her consent.
Not once do I read, at least in the documents that have been presented in this thread so far, him advising his readers to force the woman to do anything.
Apparently you ignored the part of my post where I called out that this was not from the section about after you get the woman back to your place/in private/whatever.
He advises starting "physical escalation" as soon as you are interested in a woman, regardless of her interest or lack of it.
Well, if you're done, you're done, but I didn't ignore that part of your post, I went back and read the section on Physical Escalation in Chapter 7 and didn't find your interpretation there at all. If it is somewhere else in his "writings," then I wouldn't have seen it.