A criminal lack of Game?

From the University of Waterloo student newspaper:  Two incidents involving suspicious persons on campus reported (updated)

Update: UW Police Services (UWPS) confirmed that the two incidents involving a tall, Asian, male suspect who approached two female students on campus were cases of an individual being “socially awkward.”

According to the UWPS spokesman, the police coached the man on how to improve his cold approaches:

“We’ve given him suggestions on how to properly and appropriately start those interactions [with women].”

While the man’s lack of Game didn’t rise to a criminal level of creepiness, he may yet be disciplined:

“I’m sure some of them were very concerned about how this guy approached, but we still had to deal with university policies and laws, and we’re not seeing he’s breached any of those,” Anderson said.

Anderson could not confidently say whether or not the student will face further disciplinary action.

This entry was posted in Game. Bookmark the permalink.

264 Responses to A criminal lack of Game?

  1. Coming to a campus near you, Game Sensitivity Courses…….to be labeled: ‘The Evils of the Male Gaze’.

  2. Anchorman says:

    Be attractive.

    Don’t be unattractive.

  3. greyghost says:

    Looks like red pill courses will soon be apart of the college experience. The tingle is every thing. Talk about coming full circle

  4. wtf is “socially awkward?” How about she just says “ummm, I have a boyfriend.” There you go.

  5. You couldn’t make this stuff up.

  6. Pingback: A criminal lack of Game? | Manosphere.com

  7. GregMan says:

    “…we still had to deal with university policies and laws, and we’re not seeing he’s breached any of those”

    Yet.

  8. thedeti says:

    From the article:

    “In both incidents the suspect approached the female students and blocked their path. In the first reported situation, the male “grabbed her hand” and said something suggesting he thought she was good looking and that he wanted to talk to her.

    “During the following days’ incident, the other female student backed away when the suspect attempted to grab her, a similar conversation followed, however, the female student also reported the suspect tried to block her from walking away, and she was forced to run.”

    The police said: “in cases like this one sometimes the suspect involved is “socially awkward and this is their way of trying to meet someone” and other times it is more concerning.”

    It’s now a crime to be a little weird. It’s now a crime to be socially awkward. It’s now a crime to not have Game.

    Under the new “yes means yes” regime, this man would clearly be subject to discipline in the likely event he is a student. Plainly, any attempt at touching is “sexual activity” particularly when coupled with a statement that the subject thought the woman was good looking. He obviously didn’t ask for permission first, so he didn’t have “affirmative consent” from her, defined as “conscious, knowing and voluntary agreement” to being touched.

  9. thedeti says:

    A failure to learn Game will mean legal trouble. This is evidence of what I predicted over at J4G: That the only men who can afford to approach women will be men with good Game.

    Your choice, men: Game, celibacy, or prison.

  10. MV says:

    Perhaps he was socially awkward because intoxicated with alcohol? Is that greater or lesser offense than “natural social awkwardness”, according to feminist standards?

  11. El Bastardo says:

    And here i comes. A feminist video criminalizing male approaching YNLs Young Nubile lovelies) is now making brainless, feckless, and spineless academics to further breach constitutional protection in order to earn brownie points b staying ahead of the feminist curve.

    Fools never understand that they cannot be peased. At least try to show some sine before you cave in. If not, pretty soon I will get to laugh sooner than later when male professors get falsely accused.

  12. BradA says:

    I bet it is irrelevant. Attractiveness is the on or off switch. Don’t be unattractive!

  13. earl says:

    Actually a lot of this does sound like game advice to me.

    “In both incidents the suspect approached the female students and blocked their path. In the first reported situation, the male “grabbed her hand” and said something suggesting he thought she was good looking and that he wanted to talk to her.

    What was socially awkward there…he was only establishing kino and escalating quickly. Perhaps if this occurred in a bar or club instead of in the light of day public and sober this would have been ok.

    “During the following days’ incident, the other female student backed away when the suspect attempted to grab her, a similar conversation followed, however, the female student also reported the suspect tried to block her from walking away, and she was forced to run.”

    Sounds like his problem was he did this out in the public, in the light of day (around noon) and the gals were not intoxicated.

  14. I learned in 1990, that girls/women ONLY wanted to be approached by guys that they would be willing to f-ck. Women have no use for any other guys (other than having them work and pay taxes to fund their government entitlements.) And that if boys/men approached them that they did NOT want to f-ck, they thought that was creepy and sought some kind of “authority” (be it a bouncer at a bar or a policeman in a city) to make sure that whoever he was, he did not repeat that behavior (and was hopefully PUNISHED for making her feel awkward.) I learned that in 1990.

    As a result of learning that, it affected my whole life in how I interact with women. I’ll give an example, when I was single I would go to a nightclub, I never approach women to dance, ever. I would dress up, stand by the dance floor, and WAIT to be approached. I might wait all night (or I might start dancing by myself and get approached ON the dance floor.) It was then (when she approached me) that I knew that she wanted to f-ck me which gave me the confidence I needed to know that she would NOT seek “authority” to correct my behavior with her. Now I am comfortable. Now I am in control. That said, if she was fat and/or ugly, I would just say “…I’m here with my girlfriend.” And she would go away, feelings unhurt.

    I think ideally, women who don’t want to feel “socially awkward” want the above world. Problem is, when they take the lead, they take the role of the man and they start to feel resentment toward whoever they approached. Something instinctively does not set well with them later (sometimes much later.) They start to feel like they weren’t chosen (which they weren’t.)

    There is another problem. What if you are a short, fat, ugly male? You will probably NEVER be approached, ever. I have friends of mine who never wanted to go with me to social clubs because it just made them feel awful because women never approached them the way they approached me. It created conflict in our friendship as they would be jealous that I had the power that they did not have. Living in a world where women are free NOT to ever feel “socially awkward” condemns short, fat, ugly men, to a life of silent, resentful, bitter loneliness. And that sucks.

  15. Brian says:

    How do leftist and feminist beliefs in the wonders of multiculturalism and diversity square with the fact that in some cultures, this is perfectly normal?

  16. And comments there have to get “Approval”

  17. Boxer says:

    Wimminz are panicking due to losing progressively greater control over society. These laws are being hyped at the same time that twitter is being pressured to censor, etc. This is not really a coincidence.

    As V.I. Lenin said, “worse is better”. The more frantically autocratic our masters become, the fewer of its subjects will be inclined to loyalty in the long run, and the more that will come over to our side.

  18. “In both incidents the suspect approached the female students and blocked their path. In the first reported situation, the male “grabbed her hand” and said something suggesting he thought she was good looking and that he wanted to talk to her.

    This guy is an idiot.

    Never ever try to block a woman’s path (certainly not one you don’t know) and if you don’t know her, DON’T try and take her hand (or touch her in anyway.) If he did this then yes, that is assault. It is not welcome behavior (it almost criminal) and he should know better.

  19. thedeti says:

    The myth and non-issue of “street harassment” is really just awkward Day Game.

    The HUSsies are clucking now about the (apparently fake) video of guys trying to “help” a drunk but still conscious and coherent girl. Even if this is real, it’s not depicting rape. It might depict guys being weird, even creepy. But that’s not rape, and it’s not attempted rape.

    What the most extreme women want in this instance is to criminalize male unattractiveness; to throw awkward men in prison.

  20. Opus says:

    I see this is Canada (and not Belgium – no Prussians arriving late to save the day) so calling the police is surely predictable. Mark will enlighten us further. My advice (if I were the unfortunate or awkward Asian) would be to the play the race card but perhaps that only works in England. The photo on the site fails to reveal anything but a vast amount of unimpeded space for the women to make their escape from the rapist.

    Reminds me of the old Max Miller joke ‘I was on a mountain pass and there was a beautiful blonde with not a stitch on coming towards me but there was not enough room for us to pass. I did not know what to do. Should I block her passage or toss myself off?’

  21. earl says:

    “The line between consensual sex and sexual assault is not always comfortably clear. Especially when alcohol is involved. Especially in the context of the college hookup culture.”

    Welcome to the Brave New World.

    At least back in the old days there was boundaries, rules, structure, order, and the proper shunning of degenerates. If only there was something out there to navigate through all the confusing muck. Something like the truth.

    Game won’t save you if she changes her mind.

  22. earl says:

    “I never approach women to dance, ever. I would dress up, stand by the dance floor, and WAIT to be approached.”

    Good advice. Women aren’t as shy as a lot of men think they are.

  23. thedeti,

    What the most extreme women want in this instance is to criminalize male unattractiveness; to throw awkward men in prison.

    Very close, not quite.

    They want to criminalize unattractive males approaching them. But they don’t want them incarcerated because they are ugly. Extreme women want unattractive males as “genderless mules” working and producing and contributing taxes to government to pay for her entitlements. They want unattractive males to go to work, work hard, and die of a heart attack at 65 (alone) and shut up about it. Prisoners could never contribute financially to a woman’s hypergamy.

  24. IBB’s wife says:

    “This guy is an idiot.

    Never ever try to block a woman’s path (certainly not one you don’t know) and if you don’t know her, DON’T try and take her hand (or touch her in anyway.) If he did this then yes, that is assault. It is not welcome behavior (it almost criminal) and he should know better.”

    As an unattractive male, I’ve had plenty of unattractive women touching me or ‘blocking my path’ when they want to talk to me, I did not want it or invite it. Yea, it’s ‘assault’ but only due to a definition, it’s not actually assault at all and you know it. Hardly worth destroying female and male interaction for..

  25. Casey says:

    It does sound like this guy in the article is pushy; but that is not a crime……….yet!

    There is something unsettling I’m sure about someone preventing you from walking away. In some states/provinces that may even amount to forcible confinement.

    How many women have stood in front of a doorway during an argument to prevent a man from escaping from an asinine argument? Plenty.
    Should the police be called when that happens? Only if you (the male) wish to go to jail.

    No doubt if these girls found him attractive that all would be A-OK in their books.

    The fact that an article is being written about this (benign) incident in the school newspaper just lends credence to the probability that the editors are feminist ass-hats.

  26. Has it actually occurred to anyone that these two women could have blown this out of proportion? That this was in fact merely a socially awkward attempt at a pass. Why do people always believe exactly what women say? Even IBB’s wife over here seems to think that what happened is exactly what the women say, which isn’t even really overboard at all.

  27. earl,

    “I never approach women to dance, ever. I would dress up, stand by the dance floor, and WAIT to be approached.”

    Good advice. Women aren’t as shy as a lot of men think they are.

    No they are not that shy.

    This world kind of sucks for unattractive men.

  28. Bob Wallace says:

    Part of “Game” is NOWAG – No One Wants Asian Guys. Not even Asian women.

  29. This guy is an idiot.

    Never ever try to block a woman’s path (certainly not one you don’t know) and if you don’t know her, DON’T try and take her hand (or touch her in anyway.) If he did this then yes, that is assault. It is not welcome behavior (it almost criminal) and he should know better.

    Hence his being “Socially awkward”

    Social people really don’t understand how hard it is for non-social people to be social. Should I get to go to police because every time strangers talk to me it makes me uncomfortable? And it does make me uncomfortable. But since I’m a man I have to get over it (which is the reasonable response)

  30. Drew says:

    People who fail to understand women are in good company.

    Proverbs 30:18-19
    There be three things which are too wonderful for me,
    yea, four which I know not:
    the way of an eagle in the air;
    the way of a serpent upon a rock;
    the way of a ship in the midst of the sea;
    and the way of a man with a maid.

  31. fh,

    Has it actually occurred to anyone that these two women could have blown this out of proportion? That this was in fact merely a socially awkward attempt at a pass.

    If it is not exactly, PRECISELY as they say it is (he blocked my bath and grabbed my hand) then these two women are lunatics.

    Why do people always believe exactly what women say? Even IBB’s wife over here seems to think that what happened is exactly what the women say, which isn’t even really overboard at all.

    I don’t believe it because if it had happened that way, I think the police would have been more proactive to take action. I think this might be “he-said, she-said.” That said, that doesn’t take away what I said earlier, if you don’t know her do NOT try to touch her. Even if this happened to you with women you don’t know, it doesn’t make it right.

  32. The thing I do like about these types of articles is that it proves one thing. You don’t need to approach women, at all. Don’t do it. Let them do all the work, let them make all the passes. If you don’t get women approaching you, you know the answer and don’t need to fret anymore. Just live your life free of women. Let others deal with their shit.

  33. This guy is an idiot.

    Never ever try to block a woman’s path (certainly not one you don’t know) and if you don’t know her, DON’T try and take her hand (or touch her in anyway.) If he did this then yes, that is assault. It is not welcome behavior (it almost criminal) and he should know better.

    Hence his being “Socially awkward”

    Social people really don’t understand how hard it is for non-social people to be social.

    I know. Hence my telling everyone here (who might be socially awkward, whatever that is) never ever try to block a woman’s path (certainly not one you don’t know) and if you don’t know her, DON’T try and take her hand (or touch her in anyway.)

    I’m trying to help the “socially awkward.”

  34. fh,

    The thing I do like about these types of articles is that it proves one thing. You don’t need to approach women, at all. Don’t do it. Let them do all the work, let them make all the passes. If you don’t get women approaching you, you know the answer and don’t need to fret anymore. Just live your life free of women. Let others deal with their shit.

    Yes to all of this.

    Don’t approach. Its not worth it. Let them come to you. If all you get are ugly fat ones coming to you, you have the ultimate power of refusal. Use it.

  35. earl says:

    Meh…I still approach. I know some positive indicators to look for. The ‘gung ho’ approach every female even with no sign mentality some guys suggest creates more socially awkward situations.

  36. Casey says:

    From the article link…..

    “According to Anderson, Waterloo Regional Police Services (WRPS) said they were surprised by the sheer number of tips they received in such a short period of time.”

    Colour me surprised!
    Yes, women will rally and rat out men in record time.

    On another note……….I attended a retirement send off for a work colleague (female) recently and there was the standard ‘feminist nod’ during the speeches.

    The usual stuff, how she rose through the ranks when women weren’t a significant part of the workforce (yada, yada, yada)

    What pissed me off was her own speech, her (2nd) husband was present at this event, where she stated aloud to all attendees via her podium the following (disrespectful) sign-off:

    “Peter, if you’re hoping that I’ll be home every night to cook you dinner now that I’m retired, you can forget about it. Because it’s NEVER going to happen”.

    Couldn’t thank him for all his support, or anything. Nope…..she HAD to be disrespectful towards him.

    What an Ass-hat.

    All attendees thought this was just fine (at least on the surface, hard to say what the guys were really thinking).

    Imagine a guy retiring and referencing his wife with the following send-off:

    “Patty, if you’re hoping that I’ll be home to cut the grass, maintain the cars, and shovel the walk now that I’m retired, you can forget about it. Because it’s NEVER going to happen”.

    A GASP of disbelief rolls over the crowd.

    What a disrespectful prick he is towards his wife.

  37. zodak says:

    & people thought we were over-reacting when we said girls were going to make it a crime to hit on them. someone should expose this man to the red pill so he learns game

  38. Dave says:

    Game or no game, American women are crazy. Honestly, as much as 25% of young American adult women are on medications for depression, bipolar disorder, personality disorders, or psychotic conditions. Chances are, some of them do miss their medications from time to time, and they end up acting out their craziness. Foreign women are far better by every parameter.

  39. thedeti says:

    I don’t think men should have to accept “just don’t do anything”.

    It’s not a crime to try to get laid by approaching women in broad daylight. It is NOT a crime to try to get laid by talking to a drunk yet conscious and minimally coherent woman. It’s not a crime to be weird or socially awkward.

    Um, the way guys meet girls is by…. meeting girls. By talking to them. By going up to them. Now, people are telling men they can’t even do THAT. Now, people are telling men that they will become subjects of criminal investigations if they do it poorly, or misread a situation, or say something a bit untoward.

    Hell, they’re being told if they don’t do it EXACTLY RIGHT, or get rejected, then they’ll have cops hassling them.

    So, now we live in a society in which it’s a crime to screw up trying to talk to a woman. If that truly is the case, every single man around, including the R’s and every other man who’s had success with women, is guilty.

    SMH.

  40. earl says:

    “Game or no game, American women are crazy.”

    Amen to that. 90% of the present day issues come from their brand of crazy. If you want to talk socially awkward…watch and listen how these hens interact with people.

  41. Dave says:

    “Peter, if you’re hoping that I’ll be home every night to cook you dinner now that I’m retired, you can forget about it. Because it’s NEVER going to happen”.

    If you think it’s all her fault for being so evil, you haven’t dug deep enough. No one—man or woman—can treat you shabbily unless you allow it. If you really dig deep enough, you’d probably find out that the man handed his balls to her before she agreed to marry him. That was many years ago. Nothing makes the heart of a woman quiver with respect and awe like a naked display of masculinity.

  42. earl says:

    I can’t believe 2 men fell into marrying that woman.

  43. Anchorman says:

    If Brad Pitt had grabbed their hands, he would be “bold and daring” and they would swoon at his boyish “aw shucks” verbiage that followed.

    But it wasn’t Brad.

    It was some guy who was completely invisible until he suddenly appeared from nowhere to “creep” her.

    Don’t be unattractive.

    And study “Day Game.” Roosh has a good book on it.

  44. Novaseeker says:

    There is another problem. What if you are a short, fat, ugly male? You will probably NEVER be approached, ever. I have friends of mine who never wanted to go with me to social clubs because it just made them feel awful because women never approached them the way they approached me. It created conflict in our friendship as they would be jealous that I had the power that they did not have. Living in a world where women are free NOT to ever feel “socially awkward” condemns short, fat, ugly men, to a life of silent, resentful, bitter loneliness. And that sucks.

    This doesn’t matter too much, does it? I mean at least their genes are cleaned from the pool so that in a couple of generations there will be far fewer of these guys. Somebody has to take it on the chin at some stage, and why should it not be the unattractive people?

    They want to criminalize unattractive males approaching them. But they don’t want them incarcerated because they are ugly. Extreme women want unattractive males as “genderless mules” working and producing and contributing taxes to government to pay for her entitlements. They want unattractive males to go to work, work hard, and die of a heart attack at 65 (alone) and shut up about it. Prisoners could never contribute financially to a woman’s hypergamy.

    I think, ideally, from women’s perspective, the unattractive guys would “go gay” – removing them from the heterosexual mating pool (ewww, good riddance!), but keeping them engaged in the productive aspects of society more than “man boys” and MGTOWs. I think this is also in part why women are generally pro-gay, in a subconscious way — if being gay becomes normal, perhaps more men will embrace it, thereby removing them from the heterosexual pool. It’s obviously a projective way of thinking — kind of parallel to the “ugly woman opts for lesbianism” trope, but the problem is that male sexuality isn’t as flexible as female sexuality is, and pretty much no guy who isn’t already day is going to investigate being gay or acting gay because he isn’t getting traction with women. These guys will do porn, hookers and x-box, but they won’t go gay for this reason (unlike some women, who will go lesbian under similar conditions).

  45. jeers1215 says:

    ‘I don’t think men should have to accept “just don’t do anything”.’
    Exactly. This is the women’s problem. Otherwise, you’ve surrendered the male frame:
    Women are the moral authorities, and men are the degenerate creeps, until stated otherwise… by women.
    http://www.societyofphineas.wordpress.com/2014/11/09/you-didnt-build-that/

  46. Nova,

    This doesn’t matter too much, does it?

    Well to me it does because I have entirely too many close friends who have never had a woman and never will simply because they are unattractive and short. Basically, by a fluke of birth, they are condemed to a life of bitter loneliness.

    I mean at least their genes are cleaned from the pool so that in a couple of generations there will be far fewer of these guys.

    No. Even beautiful tall intelligent people occassionally breed short, fat, ugly, stupid people. As Christ said, the “poor” will always be with us.

    I think, ideally, from women’s perspective, the unattractive guys would “go gay” – removing them from the heterosexual mating pool (ewww, good riddance!), but keeping them engaged in the productive aspects of society more than “man boys” and MGTOWs. I think this is also in part why women are generally pro-gay, in a subconscious way — if being gay becomes normal, perhaps more men will embrace it, thereby removing them from the heterosexual pool. It’s obviously a projective way of thinking — kind of parallel to the “ugly woman opts for lesbianism” trope, but the problem is that male sexuality isn’t as flexible as female sexuality is, and pretty much no guy who isn’t already day is going to investigate being gay or acting gay because he isn’t getting traction with women. These guys will do porn, hookers and x-box, but they won’t go gay for this reason (unlike some women, who will go lesbian under similar conditions).

    This is why I don’t believe in the concept of sexuality. I love my friends, doesn’t mean I would have ever laid with them. The fact that ugly women can “go lesbian” (and yes I have known too many ugly women who have done this very thing) proves that there is no such thing as being born lesbian. What you are really doing ladies is admitting you are ugly, that if men refuse to stimulate your crotch area that other women will have to do, and that now you can be attracted to other women because she can touch you.

    Saying that you are gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, whatever, its all just bullshit. Everything below the waist is mechanical. For the man, all he needs is friction (penis or anus) to get sexual gratification. For the woman all she needs is stimulation of the old g-spot (deep inside vaginally or anally) or light touch on the clit on the outside and she gets sexual gratification. It’s machinery. Love is in your heart and in your head, not your crotch.

  47. Casey says:

    @ Dave
    “If you really dig deep enough, you’d probably find out that the man handed his balls to her before she agreed to marry him.”

    Of that I have NO doubt whatsoever.

    My discontent came from the sheer unmitigated GALL this woman had in saying something like that overtly & publicly.

    Women feel no shame whatsoever in behaving like bratty little kids. In fact, they are routinely applauded for same.

    They feel no risk of consequences, so they keep acting like bitches.

  48. earl says:

    “Women feel no shame whatsoever in behaving like bratty little kids. In fact, they are routinely applauded for same.

    They feel no risk of consequences, so they keep acting like bitches.”

    Hence why I think women overall (especially in the West) are more socially awkward than most gentlemen. After a couple times of odd behavior most guys will get some consequence. Women will go through life acting awkward with no consequences.

  49. MRA-X Rmax says:

    Ironically, this socially awkward guy, probably gets laid more then most of the commentators on this blog …. lmao

    The ultimate alpha male uses his social awkwardness, to strike terror deep in the heart of bitchy entitled women everywhere…

    Also known as the comedian …

    Men have to realise their social awkwardness serves a purpose

    To reinforce their intelligence

    Your social awkwardness is a symptom of your intelligence, ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT
    Remember your negatives always come from a place of strength
    NEVER allow a woman to remake you in her image
    Dont be an alpha for women
    Take the advantages of who you are,& use it to slay pussy
    Being beta is a luxury, wield your beta like an alpha & slay poon

  50. Ceer says:

    From women’s point of view, lack of social mastery or charisma is a moral crime. They view it the same as a christian would a lack of faith in Jesus as the son of God. Any time a woman complains about men, keep this in mind and you will start to find examples.

  51. MRA-X Rmax says:

    Also note nobody pointed out, just how socially awkward these women behaved

    Running away for no unseen reason is pretty socially incompetent …

  52. earl,

    After a couple times of odd behavior most guys will get some consequence. Women will go through life acting awkward with no consequences.

    No matter how much we want to Bullsh-t ourselves, we know that deep down, men are women are not the same. If the same fat ugly girl gets drunk at parties and constantly falls all over herself, unwelcomingly sitting on your lap whenever she sees you (embarassing you) its not likely that you would ever say something to someone (anyone) in a postion of “authority” to correct her behavior (or punish her in someway) because you’re a man and you can deal with it. You would not feel violated. You are accountable. Because women aren’t moral agents, largely they CAN’T deal with this type of unwelcome behavior when it happens to them. Women do feel violated because they are NOT accountable. It is never water off a duck’s back with them the way it is with you. That is the difference.

  53. That “drunk girl” video is definitely a fake. The woman is an actress and the filmmakers admitted to staging it.

    “In both incidents the suspect approached the female students and blocked their path. In the first reported situation, the male “grabbed her hand” and said something suggesting he thought she was good looking and that he wanted to talk to her.”

    Is that maybe normal behaviour in parts of Asia?

  54. davidvs says:

    When social norms are tests, not rules…
    http://davidvs.net/hobbies/masculinity-norms.shtml

  55. “Even beautiful tall intelligent people occassionally breed short, fat, ugly, stupid people”

    For instance, the gene for baldness is carried by women. So eugenics doesn’t work.

  56. Gunner Q says:

    My own experience with Game is not far from this guy’s. I tried using Night Game in church with unhappy results. What can I say, the PUAs kept referring to church as “Sunday Morning Nightclub” and I’d already exhausted alternatives like “Hi”. Police never got involved but clergy aren’t much better and every girl I tried Game on at the gym stopping coming to the gym. I can’t shit where I sleep, pardon my language, and I’m not interested in living a double life… so what’s a guy to do?

    There’s a learning curve to Game and women are ruthless about it. It’s like women try to destroy every man they come across and if he survives then they want to mate with him. Immediately. And then repeat the whole process tomorrow.

    And for the record, I’m a tall, athletic, handsome guy who was completely shunned by women. The guy in the OP was trying to work the problem and that’s more than a lot of men are doing.

    feministhater @ 12:05 pm:
    “If you don’t get women approaching you, you know the answer and don’t need to fret anymore. Just live your life free of women. Let others deal with their shit.”

    What about sex? The male sex drive can’t be turned off… and society should not force a man to turn it off anyway.

  57. “It’s not a crime to try to get laid by approaching women in broad daylight”

    Coercive rape!!!

  58. Novaseeker says:

    Saying that you are gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, whatever, its all just bullshit. Everything below the waist is mechanical. For the man, all he needs is friction (penis or anus) to get sexual gratification. For the woman all she needs is stimulation of the old g-spot (deep inside vaginally or anally) or light touch on the clit on the outside and she gets sexual gratification. It’s machinery. Love is in your heart and in your head, not your crotch.

    Hmm. So you think that the reason why men don’t “go gay” like women “go lesbian” has to do with social pressure, and not the fact that they are not wired to be attracted to another man? I mean outside of places like prisons. The difference in behavior between men and women is striking.

  59. “My own experience with Game is not far from this guy’s”

    Well, no one has ever proved it works, after all. That Mystery guy could only get one chick interested in him and when she left he almost killed.himself.

  60. Ras Al Ghul says:

    Dave:

    “Game or no game, American women are crazy. Honestly, as much as 25% of young American adult women are on medications for depression, bipolar disorder, personality disorders, or psychotic conditions. Chances are, some of them do miss their medications from time to time, and they end up acting out their craziness. Foreign women are far better by every parameter.”

    There is no medication for personality disorders, other than anti-anxiety medication because of their constant anxiety over being found out. And the depression medication can often by a product of the amount of mental energy it takes for a personality disordered person to hide themselves.

    and you are underestimating the size of the problem:

    “more than 25 percent of women took at least one drug to treat psychiatric conditions in 2010, most prominently for depression and anxiety. The use of drugs to treat psychiatric and behavioral disorders has risen by 22 percent since 2001, and today roughly 20 percent of all Americans hold such prescriptions. In the 20-44 age bracket, the use of ADHD antipsychotic drugs and treatments has more than tripled, and the use of anti-anxiety medications such as Xanax and Valium has risen by 30 percent. The most common users of antipsychotic drugs today are women aged 45 or older.

    That last bit I suspect is a product of NPD and borderline women burning through their “masks” and unable to hide the crazy any more.

    Sociopathic men, like all men, tend to mellow and slow down with age.

    Sociopathic women tend to get more obviously crazy.

    We are literally living in the crazy times.

  61. Bango Tango says:

    They want to criminalize unattractive males approaching them. But they don’t want them incarcerated because they are ugly. Extreme women want unattractive males as “genderless mules” working and producing and contributing taxes to government to pay for her entitlements. They want unattractive males to go to work, work hard, and die of a heart attack at 65 (alone) and shut up about it. Prisoners could never contribute financially to a woman’s hypergamy.

    Wait 65? You can technically take SS at 62 so that would give those disgusting unattractive males a good 3 years of not contributing to women’s hypergamy and even consuming those funds that could! No way, they must die at 62 no later, but possibly earlier if they have somehow saved enough on their own despite all the taxes to retire early.

  62. Nova,

    Hmm. So you think that the reason why men don’t “go gay” like women “go lesbian” has to do with social pressure, and not the fact that they are not wired to be attracted to another man?

    When the two angels were with Lot in Sodom and they looked upon the entire city “sodomizing” any and everything that moved (and certainly, the residented of Sodom wanted to “KNOW THEM” angels) it was not because the residents were gay or straight or whatever. Simply put there was NO social pressure (in Sodom, for either gender, male or female) NOT to engage in this behavior. All they knew was carnal lust. Any appendage could enter any opening on any body. And everything below the waist worked no matter who (or what) they were doing it with. And worrying about the gender of who they were doing it with was the least of their concerns. Their only concern was sexual gratification.

    That was then. Now we have God’s Law. This is now.

    Men don’t “go gay” because there is a huge amount of social pressure that men put on other men to “remain straight.” There is NO such pressure women put upon other women to “remain straight.” Again, this is because women are free (even encouraged) to rebel against God. This is because women have NO MORAL AGENCY. (I keep repeating this red pill absolute on this blog, maybe someday everyone will get there.)

    I mean outside of places like prisons. The difference in behavior between men and women is striking.

    That IS the whole point. Prison IS Sodom. There is very little (perhaps no) social pressure there for men to “remain straight.” As the warden said to Andy Dufraine in Shawshank Redempion, just after Andy (one month in solitary) found out his friend was murdered and told the warden that he was “done” that he would no longer help the warden launder the money he was getting through using the prisoners as labor…

    Nothing stops. Nothing. Or you will do the hardest time there is. No more protection from the guards. I’ll pull you out of that one room bungalow and toss you down with the sodomites….

    Yes, the difference in behavior most certainly IS striking.

  63. Casey says:

    Look lads, this thing ends badly for everyone.

    There will be no reconciliation, no about-face in marching orders, no relenting by the feminist movement.

    Feminists are coming for it ALL!
    This gets resolved by REVOLUTION rather than EVOLUTION.

    Only through really terrible, turbulent times will women get the education they deserve. Even then their learning will be temporary, unless those turbulent times become a fixed landscape.

  64. feeriker says:

    How do leftist and feminist beliefs in the wonders of multiculturalism and diversity square with the fact that in some cultures, this is perfectly normal?

    That’s an excellent question. To judge from responses by the feministas to situations like this one, I’d say that the answer is that ensuring that women remain unmolested by men who “creep them out,” even if such men are from cultures to which said feministas claim to be sensitive and sympathetic (and demand that everyone be the same way) trumps sensitivity to other “oppressed” (i.e., non-western) cultures.

  65. Cane Caldo says:

    1. Strange men are intimidating to women, and should be. The problem is not that most women felt threatened by an unattractive man, but that they will act foolishly when threatened by attractive men.

    2. He was described as tall. If I (who am 6’4″) came up to a man of average height, acted familiar with him, and then blocked his path when he tried to walk away, then that man would feel threatened. These, again, were just women.

    3. There was a pattern of escalation before the campus authorities got involved. He’s approaching, then touching, then blocking/controlling movement. There was also an escalation during his preparation phases between the approaches. He went from (presumably) steeling his mind to approach a pretty stranger to (apparently) taking some liquid courage or similar.

    4. They received 20 to 30 tips about this guy–from two approaches! A man could go to the grocery store in his underwear and it wouldn’t be reported 20-30 times. It seems very likely to me that his behavior must have been quite odd to attract so much attention. However; there is always the possibility that some activists, white knights, and police (but I repeat myself) inflated the actual number of helpful calls. But even five calls would be an extraordinarily high number for an approach that even slightly resembled normal behavior.

    5. If the man is from some weird-ass culture that encourages strangers to just walk up, put their hands on each other and block their path then we absolutely want the authorities to let them know, “Hey, you’re Western Civilization now: That’s not how we do things here.” The problem in the West is that this is not done enough. I wonder how many of commenters who are deriding the women in this thread are–right now–complaining in another thread about how multiculturalism and diversity are ruining the West.

    An analysis of the article should lead one to the conclusion that dating (marriage-arrangement rituals) by happenstance as one walks across the quad are perilous endeavors for all involved and this was something of a close call. It’s been less than six months since a socially-hapless Asian Beta collegian lost his shit and killed six men and women–including other Betas. (Guess everyone only likes attractive men.) Without a return to to introductions, family (and friend-of-the-family) involvement, (and sexual self-control) then dating will continue to range from awkward to dangerous.

    The comments in this thread are good examples of why others see the Men’s Sphere as misogynistic. The women here didn’t do anything wrong, and the authorities who responded treated the guy fairly. They didn’t arrest him. They didn’t hassle him. In fact they publicly defended and exonerated him; saying he broke no laws, and intended no harm.

  66. feeriker,

    How do leftist and feminist beliefs in the wonders of multiculturalism and diversity square with the fact that in some cultures, this is perfectly normal?

    They don’t. Its perfectly normal (for feminists) because even feminists know that without 1st world government authority and government punishment (for those men who violate the feminist imperative) there simply is no reason why men who are so savage to keep them from violating women. Women understand that without strict government control over men, they can’t be feminist. They get this.

    Feminism is a luxury given to ugly women (at the expense of men) only in the most secure, the most prosperous and civilized societies that can afford such luxuries. Otherwise, women are left in mud huts.

  67. Drew says:

    @Cane

    You said that we absolutely want the authorities to confront awkward men. I don’t want the “authorities” to do any such thing. And the women absolutely did do something wrong by trying to get a guy arrested over nothing. They are proposing a police state to cater to their whims.

  68. Gunner,

    feministhater @ 12:05 pm:
    “If you don’t get women approaching you, you know the answer and don’t need to fret anymore. Just live your life free of women. Let others deal with their shit.”

    What about sex? The male sex drive can’t be turned off… and society should not force a man to turn it off anyway.

    Masturbate. That hasn’t been criminalized (yet.)

  69. Gunner,

    And for the record, I’m a tall, athletic, handsome guy who was completely shunned by women. The guy in the OP was trying to work the problem and that’s more than a lot of men are doing.

    You have no problems then. You just aren’t “cool.” Stop trying to pick up girls at church or at the gym, they already know you aren’t “cool.” They see you as a wallflower, a beta. It’s over for you.

    You need to go where the single women are horny, plentiful (they outnumber the horny guys), and they DON’T already know you. Get a passport if you don’t already have one. Schedule a vacation and book a cruise. Right now. Do it. Find the cheapest Caribbean cruise that offers passage to singles and get a cheapie single cabin. Go get a couple suits tailored. Go on vacation, fly to Miami. Go on the ship. The moment you get on the ship head directly to the dining room you are booked to use. Ask the Matre-D to seat you with the singles. Go back to your cabin and jerk off (don’t ever go to meet women with a “loaded gun”, very important.) Dinner time. If it is 6PM dining show up at 6:10. If it is 8PM seating, show up at 8:10. Sit at your table. Relax. have one drink. Wait for the women to show up. Do dress nice but don’t smile if you can only smile goofy. When they show up and sit down, stand up, extend your hand to handshake, introduce yourself, and then, shut the f-ck up. Do NOT talk about yourself. You can ask them questions about them, do not volunteer anything about you unless they ask about it. And fly below the radar. Make yourself seem ordinary, not special, just the average guy. Never tell them how much money you make. Never tell them if you rent or own. Just chill, relax. Find out about them. They will talk their heads off about themselves because they are crazy and horny and on vacation. They just want you to shut up and listen….. you will NOT be shunned. I promise you, they will be all over you like stink on shit.

  70. Cane Caldo says:

    @Drew

    You said that we absolutely want the authorities to confront awkward men.

    That is not what I said. What I wrote was: “If the man is from some weird-ass culture that encourages strangers to just walk up, put their hands on each other and block their path then we absolutely want the authorities to let them know, “Hey, you’re Western Civilization now: That’s not how we do things here.”

    Enough about how right I am and how wrong you are: Why in the world did you choose that sad-ass caricature for your profile avatar? Smile, smirk, grimace…show something, man.

  71. Bee says:

    @Casey,

    ““Peter, if you’re hoping that I’ll be home every night to cook you dinner now that I’m retired, you can forget about it. Because it’s NEVER going to happen”.

    Couldn’t thank him for all his support, or anything. Nope…..she HAD to be disrespectful towards him.”

    Most married women need a spanking.

  72. Cane Caldo says:

    Re-reading the article again, I see that he is most likely not from some other culture.

    The suspect is described as an Asian male just over six feet tall with short, spiked black hair who spoke English with no accent.

    Which leads to say that my initial suspicion has a good chance to be true: This man has actually been reading Game blogs or books. Cold approach, kino, conversation routine, be persistent…

    In both incidents the suspect approached the female students and blocked their path. In the first reported situation, the male “grabbed her hand” and said something suggesting he thought she was good looking and that he wanted to talk to her.

    During the following days’ incident, the other female student backed away when the suspect attempted to grab her, a similar conversation followed

    …it’s all there. It’s straight out of Mystery Method or RSD. I notice the second attempt was at 11am–and he was tipsy.

    In the second incident, the suspect appeared to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

    He’s young and Asian so one shot of courage would probably be enough to glaze his eyes.

  73. earl says:

    “My own experience with Game is not far from this guy’s”

    If you try that stuff with women who are sober in the light of day…game doesn’t work too well.

    If you see a lot of PUA videos at bars or nightclubs…you quickly figure out how game works, alcohol.

    Any man can be a pretty decent stud if the gal has thrown a few back. I learned that in college.

  74. greyghost says:

    The comments in this thread are good examples of why others see the Men’s Sphere as misogynistic. The women here didn’t do anything wrong, and the authorities who responded treated the guy fairly. They didn’t arrest him. They didn’t hassle him. In fact they publicly defended and exonerated him; saying he broke no laws, and intended no harm.

    I agree with this and this case is different and that ackward man can thank the work of all men spreading the red pill for those officers even having the capacity to come to the conclusion they did. Only red pill men did what they did with this man.This comment was jaw dropping

    We’ve given him suggestions on how to properly and appropriately start those interactions [with women].”

    That comment coming from the cops is a big win for the manosphere and all of its participants. All of the comments on mainstream articles and youtube videos etc. have slowly made progress into minds of people that are normally part of the problem.

  75. Novaseeker says:

    Men don’t “go gay” because there is a huge amount of social pressure that men put on other men to “remain straight.” There is NO such pressure women put upon other women to “remain straight.”

    I see.

    @ everyone else? Do you agree with this? That is, men don’t engage in homosexuality due to women frustrations to the same degree women do because there is greater social pressure on men not to engage in homosexuality than there is on women? Is this how you experience it?

  76. Drew says:

    @GreyGhost

    The government has absolutely zero authority over this issue. This isn’t a win.

  77. thedeti says:

    “Men don’t “go gay” because there is a huge amount of social pressure that men put on other men to “remain straight.””

    I missed this the first time.

    You’re kidding, right?

    See, IBB, this is the kind of thing that makes guys around here think that at least some of the time, a woman is posting using that handle.

    Straight men don’t “go gay” because they’re straight. They don’t EVER go gay voluntarily.

    They don’t engage in gay sex because they’re not gay. It’s because they’re not attracted to men, and because they don’t want to have sex with men. It isn’t because other men pressure them to be straight; it’s because their own internal hard wiring dictates it.

    A straight man who has no sex partners available to him or who cannot attract a woman, simply does without. (A typical straight man reacts the same way if the only women available to him are women he isn’t sexually attracted to. This is the attraction floor concept.) He just doesn’t have sex. He uses porn. He masturbates. He watches hard “R” movies on Skinemax. If he has to, he gets other kinds of titillation-inducing material. He works, he has hobbies. But he does not seek out men for sex.

    He doesn’t avoid men for sex because other men pressure him not to; he avoids men for sex because he doesn’t find men sexually attractive and doesn’t want to have sex with them.

    All of which is a long way of saying that a straight man who can’t get a woman simply finds ways to live with it and do without sex.

  78. Mr. Roach says:

    Some of this is game related, but some is that women are more awkward, less gracious, and less socially confident than ever, glued as they are to their friggin’ smartphones all day. Back in the day, Southern girls would deflect awkwardness by saying “Bless your heart.” Now they say, “RAPE!!!” We live in a fucked up time.

  79. thedeti,

    I missed this the first time.

    You’re kidding, right?

    See, IBB, this is the kind of thing that makes guys around here think that at least some of the time, a woman is posting using that handle.

    I have to go to a meeting right now. I’ll addess this query… after. But before I go….

    Straight men don’t “go gay” because they’re straight. They don’t EVER go gay voluntarily.

    ….if this were true (and its not deti) then men who have ONLY ever had sex with women all their lives would never be having sex with men just because they are in prison. You don’t ever go “gay” the moment you hear the words “life in prison.” That doesn’t “rewire” you. There is something else at work now isnt there?

  80. greyghost says:

    The government has absolutely zero authority over this issue. This isn’t a win

    I wouldn’t start sucking each others dick over this,misandry isn’t dead. Think about how the cops handled this. As stated the women are all looking to be victims of sexual asault real or imagined , a couple years ago that guy would be in jail or out of school or at least charged with some kind of harassment deal on campus.
    BTW the government has authority over all unless you have a few divisions of armed men to say otherwise.

  81. Boxer says:

    Dear Cane:

    Re-reading the article again, I see that he is most likely not from some other culture.

    I’m sure this will be read by some here as proof of my own latent racism, but Asian dudes in Canada are very ensconced in their communities.

    The University of Waterloo is in sort of a rural/exurban area, between London and Toronto. This poor chap almost certainly grew up under the watchful eye of mamasan. Chinese and Korean women in Canada are vicious matriarchs, and the Chinese esp. in all the major Canadian cities are very insular.

    Long story, but I have seen this many times. Chinese dude who heads off to uni is, for the first time, outside the sphere of his crazy mother, who has kept him so repressed that he has no social skills. Many of these brothers become quite successful playas, but most of these guys are rejected so viciously by local chicks (Chinese Canadian chicks are also the worst at rejecting dudes, they think they’re quite something) that they end up turning completely inward.

    At this point, the meddling university cops have called his bitch mom, the feminists are making a big to-do about him being a “rapist” on campus, and he’s likely contemplating suicide for the shame of it all. Someone needs to send this poor schlub a subscription to Heartiste. He’d do well to read this blog too.

  82. thedeti says:

    In my experience, and from my knowing and talking with gay men, male sexuality (either gay or straight) is just hardwired. It cannot be changed. A man’s sexual orientation manifests itself despite all efforts to suppress it.

    You can’t seem to get a gay man to be straight and attracted to women, any more than you can persuade a straight man to be gay and attracted to men. Men just don’t seem to work this way at all.

    As an aside, I’ve lived in forced celibacy as a much younger man, and it never once occurred to me that I should try to solve that problem by seeking men for sex. I vividly remember walking through that desert, and I don’t remember ever thinking I could, should or would even try to slake the thirst by going gay.

    Even male preferences about body types seem to have deep hardwired circuitry. You always hear talk about guys who are breast men, ass men, leg men, face men, what have you. Some guys like real athletic type women. Some guys just like chubby women; others seem to be into BBWs. And there’s some fluidity there. For example a breast man can be attracted to girls with smaller breasts if she has other things he likes. But he’ll really be drawn to women with big breasts. And it’s a preference that seems hardwired.

    So: No, I don’t agree at all that men who have girl problems or periods of incel status stay straight because other guys pressure them not to “go gay”. They avoid going gay because they’re straight and because they are not attracted sexually to men, and that cannot be altered even by forced celibacy.

  83. Boxer says:

    Dear thedeti:

    As an aside, I’ve lived in forced celibacy as a much younger man, and it never once occurred to me that I should try to solve that problem by seeking men for sex. I vividly remember walking through that desert, and I don’t remember ever thinking I could, should or would even try to slake the thirst by going gay.

    A couple of years ago, a woman I was seeing (particularly immature, age 19) got upset at me for not making her my girlfriend when after we’d had a couple of weeks of regular romping. “What are you, gay?” she asked.

    It was odd, because that was the first time I’d really ever thought about the whole process. Gay dudes have so many advantages (never having to deal with women is the most obvious) that I thought, for a while, I would probably choose to be a homo if such things were choosable. I told her as much, and her reaction was sorta funny, but not relevant.

    Male sexual biology isn’t an intellectual pursuit. If dudes don’t turn you on, you aren’t going to be able to perform in a sexual way with them. Our cocks just don’t stiffen up on command. It’s an instinctual thing, that operates beneath waking consciousness.

    Boxer

  84. The HUSsies are clucking now about the (apparently fake) video of guys trying to “help” a drunk but still conscious and coherent girl.

    …but Deti, we just “KNOW” these guys are rapists.

    Same with this guy.

  85. JDG says:

    Why play with fire. Even if I were willing to hop in the sack with strange women I wouldn’t role the dice under these circumstances. But then I wouldn’t roll the dice with strange women period (VD, crazy woman drama, false accusations, the possibility of fathering a child with a
    slut sexually empowered woman (It would devastate me to know that I placed my own flesh and blood into the hands of a woman like that). And on top of all that, God said don’t do it.

    I’m I the only one who thinks God may be telling us something with all of these upside down moral proclamations now being turned into policies and laws? I remember when people were complaining about Christian morality being shoved down there throats. Well, now who’s morality are we choking on?

  86. Opus says:

    When I reached America I was hit by a barrage of Homosexuals – usually very unhappy Homosexuals at that – perhaps in England they were just somewhat more closeted – Americans do like to let it hang out and a bit too much for my liking; still one must admire your not being backwards in coming forwards. If Homosexuality is so hard-wired then (I ask rhetorically) why have I never come across any reference in the Greeks (Pederasty does not count) or the Romans let alone the Christian writers to Homosexuals? Shakespeare is entirely silent as are all other writers down to the nineteenth century which was when the medical profession invented the term. There is I observe some desperation amongst Homosexuals (rather like Mormons baptizing the dead) scouring the pages of history so as to out them. I am not (of course) trying to suggest that no Homosexual act ever occurred before 1800; rather, that to their credit the Christians saw Homosexual acts as merely a temporary weakness.

    I suspect that Homosexuality is adaptation to prevailing circumstances and thus in a country with an aggressive unresponsive female population one will get adaptation. I could of course be entirely mistaken for there were a few boys at school who were certainly Homosexual in inclination, yet at the same time they were abusive and predatory – they seemed to have a certain psychopathy about them and were much hated irrespective of their sexual proclivities. No other boys produced such dislike.

  87. JDG says:

    Bee – Most married women need a spanking.

    FIFY

  88. JDG says:

    And they need to make sammiches… for men.

  89. infowarrior1 says:

    @thedeti

    Why is it then that supposedly heterosexual men rape other men in prison at much higher rates than the average population? If sexuality is hardwired?

  90. sunshinemary says:

    Cane, your comment was sensible.

    @ Dalrock
    @ Deti

    If your 18-year-old daughter called you from her cell phone at noon from campus and says some guy just grabbed her and told her she’s hot and then tried to block her path, and she ran away from him, your advice to your daughter would be, “Don’t worry about it! He’s just bad at game!”? You’d tell her just to go about her day? You wouldn’t say something like, oh, “My god, he grabbed you and wouldn’t let you leave? You need to tell campus security to check and make sure this guy belongs on campus and isn’t some wingnut!”?

    It would be one thing if he had walked up to them and then been really bad at flirting or establishing rapport or whatever…but he, a total stranger, put his hands on them and then attempted to block or retrain them in some way. It was absolutely appropriate for the girls to be alarmed by that behavior. I don’t care if you are a man or a woman – you don’t walk up to a stranger in public, grab a hold of them, and attempt to restrain them.

    So, now we live in a society in which it’s a crime to screw up trying to talk to a woman

    No, deti. If you read the article, you’ll notice this bit:

    Dan Anderson, director of UWPS, said, “The student, after we interviewed him and realized what he had been doing from his perspective, has not committed any offence… His intent was not malicious.”

    So nothing bad happened to him. He behaved in a wildly inappropriate – not just awkward – way and the alarmed girls contacted the campus cops to report the incident. The cops investigated, found that the guy was just socially retarded, and tried to straighten him out. They specifically said that what he did was not a crime. But it was appropriate for them to check this out to make sure that’s all it was.

  91. JDG says:

    Homosexual attraction is not hard wired. It certainly was not in the design.

  92. thedeti says:

    SSM:

    The hapless dude got hassled by the cops. Cops don’t hassle a man unless they have a damn good suspicion the man committed a crime.

    So, OK, maybe this guy escaped getting jammed up — this time. The next man probably won’t be so fortunate, nor will the cops likely be so … understanding.

  93. sunshinemary says:

    “Hassled” in this case was simply being talked to, Deti. That’s a reasonable response, given that he grabbed them and apparently (allegedly) would not let one girl leave. That’s beyond being a doofus. It was good that the police explained this to him, and you do him a disservice by saying he did nothing wrong because what he did there would be more than enough to get him fired from virtually any job he might hold in the future, and he might as well learn that now. It doesn’t help him to lie to him and tell him the girls were just bitches for being upset about being grabbed and restrained by a strange man.

    I don’t give a fig about cat-calling (so long it’s just verbal and no touching/following/threatening), and I think YMY is a terrible policy that will be misused and actually will paradoxically cause more women to be truly sexually assaulted because it will give them the idea that an inherently dangerous activity (having sex with someone you aren’t married to) is perfectly safe. You know I’m in agreement with ya’ll on those topics. But I have to say that any sane person would look at this situation and completely understand why the girls were alarmed and why the cops wanted to at least talk to the guy and make sure he wasn’t a danger.

  94. sunshinemary says:

    I just want to check to make sure I understand where you guys are coming from here. So what you are saying is that these girls, who were just walking down the sidewalk on their way to class – not trawling a bar doing shots and looking for hot guys – have no right to expect strange men not to grab and restrain them? You’re saying that men have a right to grab women they don’t know in the middle of a public sidewalk and block their path? That it’s unreasonable for girls not to want to be grabbed by strangers on the way to school? That at some point in the sane past, men could grab girls they didn’t know and it was all good and then feminists messed it all up?

  95. SSM,

    So what you are saying is that these girls, who were just walking down the sidewalk on their way to class – not trawling a bar doing shots and looking for hot guys – have no right to expect strange men not to grab and restrain them?

    I don’t know if some of them said that. I said this:

    This guy is an idiot.

    Never ever try to block a woman’s path (certainly not one you don’t know) and if you don’t know her, DON’T try and take her hand (or touch her in anyway.) If he did this then yes, that is assault. It is not welcome behavior (it almost criminal) and he should know better.

    I got some crap for that. Guess I’m just Mrs-IBB-mangina-white-knight.

  96. Joshua says:

    Cane + SSM=Typical TradCons

  97. thedeti

    In my experience, and from my knowing and talking with gay men, male sexuality (either gay or straight) is just hardwired. It cannot be changed. A man’s sexual orientation manifests itself despite all efforts to suppress it.

    You can’t seem to get a gay man to be straight and attracted to women, any more than you can persuade a straight man to be gay and attracted to men. Men just don’t seem to work this way at all.

    That is almost blue pill deti. Seriously. Are you really legitimizing the concept of sexuality?

    I’ll defer to Opus and his excellent point.

    If Homosexuality is so hard-wired then (I ask rhetorically) why have I never come across any reference in the Greeks (Pederasty does not count) or the Romans let alone the Christian writers to Homosexuals? Shakespeare is entirely silent as are all other writers down to the nineteenth century which was when the medical profession invented the term. There is I observe some desperation amongst Homosexuals (rather like Mormons baptizing the dead) scouring the pages of history so as to out them. I am not (of course) trying to suggest that no Homosexual act ever occurred before 1800; rather, that to their credit the Christians saw Homosexual acts as merely a temporary weakness.

    There is NO SUCH THING as sexuality. There never was. There never will be. Everything below the waist is mechanical. I want you to hard-wire-that into your brain.

    Deti, if you are held down against your will by four men, and a fifth patiently takes his time to jerk you off (again, against your will) you know what is going to happen to you? You’re going to cum/orgasm. You are going to hate yourself for it but it will feel good. It does not make you “gay” because you never were “gay.”

    Why do men (who claim to be homosexual) have the highest rates for suicide among males? What made them decide they wanted to have sex with men? I’ve known entirely too many guys who told me they were gay and in almost every single circumstance each one of them had sexual relationships with women (and most of them were engaged/married to women at some point in their lives.) What the hell happened deti?

    Hell is exactly what happened to these poor pitiful souls. They confused love and physical attraction with an orgasm. They found out that they could have an orgasm with another man (maybe they were molested by a man as a small child) and as result, they incorrectly assumed that they were “gay.”

    This is why you never see references in ancient Greek literature about homosexuality. That term would have meant nothing to them (even if they ALL understood very clearly what it means to lay with other men in lust.)

    Always, always, always, refer to your King James Bible and understand things the way God would have you understand it. Genesis might very well be the most important book in the Bible. What happened in Sodom clearly describes the what and (most importantly) the why as to the reason for sex between men.

    Opus,

    I suspect that Homosexuality is adaptation to prevailing circumstances and thus in a country with an aggressive unresponsive female population one will get adaptation. I could of course be entirely mistaken for there were a few boys at school who were certainly Homosexual in inclination, yet at the same time they were abusive and predatory – they seemed to have a certain psychopathy about them and were much hated irrespective of their sexual proclivities. No other boys produced such dislike.

    I boldened your post as to make the point and bring it home loud and clear for everyone so foolish to think there is hard wiring here. The act of one sodomizing another (be it male on female which is usually the desired response or even male on male) is an act of lust and domination. He who enters the other is “top dog” the true “alpha.” This explains (very clearly and vividly) why this behavior is so prevelent in prison. That is an isolated area where power and domination are a way of life. Men just don’t become “gay” the minute they enter.

  98. greyghost says:

    IBB
    C’mon man

  99. Gunner Q says:

    IBB, why did you advise me to self-pleasure or book a sex cruise? You know I’m Christian.

    “@ everyone else? Do you agree with this? That is, men don’t engage in homosexuality due to women frustrations to the same degree women do because there is greater social pressure on men not to engage in homosexuality than there is on women?”

    Social pressure AGAINST sodomy? Here in California, Sacramento has ordered schoolchildren to be taught sodomy is good and to share bathrooms between the sexes. If sexually frustrated guys would naturally consider sodomy then why do the elites try to corrupt boys into it? Those laws were a real risk… it could have rallied the Church in California out of its coma. (Not even a sermon, as it turned out, although the inevitable lawsuits have been filed.)

  100. “If you see a lot of PUA videos at bars or nightclubs…you quickly figure out how game works, alcohol.”

    Haha, great point. It’s like the old saying, witchcraft can kill someone if you also feed them arsenic.

  101. Yeah, this is totally an encouraging story! It used to be that if a man made an ass of himself with a woman, everyone laughed about it and went on their way, but now that man gets the police called on him–and the police respond! What a great trend! And since cops are always well behaved and respond to a situation appropriately* who cares if they show up? Nothing to see here, folks!

    *http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/11/police-killings-hundreds/18818663/

  102. Elspeth says:

    Before I read the article in its entirety, I operated on the assumption that the guy was just a little awkward and the girls were just being ridiculous and snobby feminist rape culture fanatics towards him for calling the cops.

    Then I read it, and I have to agree with Cane and Sunshine. This was just not a good example to use to make whatever point it is Dalrock intended to make. This guy was…dare I say it?

    Creepy.

  103. KB says:

    Dammit being ‘creepy’ isn’t a crime.

    If the guy actually grabbed the girl, then I understand calling the police.

    Actually forget it, she was right to call the cops, because we KNOW, we KNOW, women never lie about this kind of thing.

  104. Elspeth says:

    I am operating on the assumption that the story as reported is true (that he grabbed her which witnesses supposedly corroborated).

    So yeah, I know how that word goes over to some, and maybe I should have said “frightening” but either way, this is not just about an awkward approach or lack of game.

  105. JDG says:

    Thanks for the links MarcusD.

  106. Spike says:

    Basically, if the definitions of male behaviour become increasingly defined as deviant, if the definitions of rape are broadened, then every man will end up with a criminal record. This is done with the tacit approval of supplicating politicians on behalf of the elites. Those elites then get a workforce of men they can employ for slave labour.
    Feminism was never about liberating women. It was and is a agenda to enslave us all.

  107. Anonymous age 72 says:

    So, some of you are suggesting that a high percentage of men in prison sodomize others? That violates all norms of human behavior. Human behavior is such that one would expect a minority of men in prison to be predators and sodomize a large number of men, perhaps as a forced group activity.. But, perhaps you have statistics that say differently. Except for graduating from high school in a prison town, I have had little contact with prisons, so stats would change my opinion.

    A few months ago, I read a blog by a black women, writing for black women. She told them not to let black men do anal, and explained all the reasons it is bad for a woman.

    She wondered if the tendency for black men to want anal has to do with the high percentage who have been in prison, thus became indoctrinated to the practice.

    A reminder that here in Mexico men in prison do have visits from wives; concubines; or volunteers at least once a week, so rape is not common at all. There is a prison a very few miles from my house, and the Wife Bus leaves our town center at stated times, though I don’t know personally what time that is, since I am not a wife.

  108. Cane Caldo says:

    @Elspeth

    This was just not a good example to use to make whatever point it is Dalrock intended to make.

    To be fair, there are two different sets of authorities in the story. The police who responded handled things well. The administration of the college may be a different matter. As Dalrock quoted from one of the officers:

    Anderson could not confidently say whether or not the student will face further disciplinary action.

    He can’t say because he knows most colleges in the West are run by anti-male leftists. The reporters themselves reveal their bias by saying “further disciplinary action” when there was no initial disciplinary action. Explaining how to avoid a mistake does not rise to the level of “disciplinary action”.

    That (in addition to the fact that dating makes fools of everyone) is what the commenters should be focused upon instead of:

    1) The women–who did nothing wrong
    2) The cops–who did right by the women and the guy
    3) Imagining that everyone always has it out for them Betas even when it is shown not to be true.

    @KB

    Actually forget it, she was right to call the cops, because we KNOW, we KNOW, women never lie about this kind of thing.

    Two instances, reported by two different women, at different times, in the same place, by a guy with the same description, and 20-30 tips called in about the incidents. Dude, that’s plenty of good reason for the cops to look into it. The fact that women (or anyone) will sometimes lie is–itself–a reason to investigate; which is what the cops did.

    The only reason I’m even engaging in this discussion is because I’m hoping that someone, somewhere reads this and chooses to see these situations and we in the Men’s Sphere in a clear light; to further learn how to see through the bullshit and their own biases to the truth.

  109. Joe Katzman says:

    University of Waterloo is one of the top computer engineering schools in North America. This is totes believable.

    This was handled properly. Security intervenes, deals with him in an understanding but clear way. Otherwise, you’re basically criminalizing the autistic.

  110. MV says:

    OT

    It appears that feminists are getting increasingly upleased even with their male homosexual best friends these days.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/rose-mcgowan-attacks-lgbt-community-for-failing-to-campaign-for-feminism-gay-men-are-more-misogynistic-than-straight-men-9841873.html

    Thus passes the Pride of the world.

  111. Rorinon says:

    Dalrock – Not sure how to bring this article to your attention directly, so I will link it here. I think it is worth your perusal and commentary.

    http://survivalblog.com/seven-survival-tips-for-the-modern-feminist-by-j/

  112. Regarding the “flexibility,” of homosexuality, as it is, I was stationed aboard a ship during a multinational exercise; RIMPAC. The Australians were the only other Anglo culture aboard, but they were bunked in with the Koreans, Malaysians, and Tongans. According to them, the Koreans, and I believe the Malaysians as well, were engaging in homosexual activities, which horrified them. They were quite disturbed by it. It is apparently a reaction that when no women are around, men are good enough. See also, Afghanistan, where men there have sex with boys or animals, even though they are married with children. It is a problem that the military has to handle with care, because it is such a common occurrence.

    In addition, many homosexual men are those who have mental issues with sexuality, as a result of molestation or similar childhood sexual trauma. They eventually overcome these hangups, reverting to heterosexual attraction if they get the care they need. While some are undoubtedly biologically dysfunctional, plenty of others are merely mentally warped. The refusal to admit that homosexuality is a disorder prevents these borderline cases from getting the help they need, condemning them to madness and illness.

    The Shadowed Knight

  113. Just Saying says:

    Look, women are your prey – you are the predator. It is that simple – and women like it that way, they want to be hunted and taken down by a man whom they cannot resist. Why do you think the “rape fantasy” is so strong in women? They want to be helpless and controlled by a man. But they want that man to be one that they want – yes, it doesn’t make sense – but that is the female logic. Don’t try to understand it – fortunately, women get turned on by actions, your looks don’t matter, your actions do. I had one woman at a party – kept her head turned away the entire time, I was kissing her neck and feeling her up, took her to a dark room banged her several times from behind, and left – she never saw my face or knew my name. The rest of the evening you could see she was going to fuck the guy she came with like an animal – why, because anonymous sex, with no strings attached, no responsibility and NO ramifications are what every woman wants.

    They may not want that advertised (heck they will deny it mostly because they hate to be understood and have it used against them), but every guy that has been with enough women understand it, and use it to his advantage.

  114. MarcusD says:

    Speaking of attention-seeking:

    http://culture.viralnova.com/haley-morris-calfiero/

    One particular comment on the article:

    She sets up a camera in the middle of the street, stands there looking awkward, she’s dressed like she got dressed in the dark and she expects people not to give her weird looks? She then has the audacity to say they are judging her because of her weight? They were looking at her because she looks pissed off and dresses funny! Get over yourself and stop trying to find discrimination or judgement where there is NONE!

  115. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    Your hitting pretty close to home with this post.This is my backyard.Kitchener/Waterloo is 1 hour West of me.I know the area and the University quite well.All across Canada we have been having an “National Anti-Misogyny Campaign”.First with a CBC Radio Host,2 OHL hockey players suspended,former Deputy Prime Minister Sheila Copps sexually harrassed etc. etc.This is all I have been reading in the National and local papers????? This is just a continuation of the campaign.Keep looking up around this area and you will find A LOT of to post about. This is what is becoming of a top notch school.The University of Waterloo is known for it’s Engineering and Computer Science programs.Go out to Silicon Valley.You will meet all kinds of guys from that are graduates of that institution.In fact when I started University in 1984 the 2 top schools in the world for Engineering were U of W and the U of Moscow.

  116. “So nothing bad happened to him. He behaved in a wildly inappropriate – not just awkward – way and the alarmed girls contacted the campus cops to report the incident. The cops investigated, found that the guy was just socially retarded, and tried to straighten him out. They specifically said that what he did was not a crime. But it was appropriate for them to check this out to make sure that’s all it was.”

    Women grab men all the time. When you approach someone, you cut off their path. That is normal. Once again, you all believe these women without even bother to give the guy a chance to speak his side of the story.

    This is sinking into non-alpha guys that having anything to do with women is not beyond stupid. Join the chorus SSM, ban men talking to and interacting with women. I’m all for it.

  117. Gah, call it early morning issues…

    Meant to say, “that having anything to do with women is beyond stupid…”

  118. MarcusD says:

    Yeah, it’s a witch-hunt now.

    Sexual harassment gossip, but no accusers, as Ghomeshi effect engulfs Quebec university
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/11/13/graeme-hamilton-sexual-harassment-gossip-but-no-accusers-as-ghomeshi-effect-engulfs-montreal-university/

  119. “Then I read it, and I have to agree with Cane and Sunshine. This was just not a good example to use to make whatever point it is Dalrock intended to make. This guy was…dare I say it?

    Creepy.”

    I remember a tweet that Roosh linked to on his feed. It was a comic with a woman walking passed a man, in the next frame the man grabs her arm and pulls her closer, in the next frame they both kiss…

    The woman’s tweet he got that off of, thought it was sexy… and it was retweeted and liked quite a bit.

    The only difference between “creepy” and “sexy” is attractiveness level.

  120. MarcusD says:

    Not cohabiting and personality disorders
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=921078

    Unwanted Divorce? (“Is the woman just out of luck in this situation to ever remarry? Doesn’t that seem harsh?” — yes, just women…)
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=921105

    Relationship Boundaries: Who’s more accountable? (…)
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=921238

  121. MarcusD says:

    Husband has fallen out of love with me
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=921251

    Kenya Using Vaccines To Slip Contraceptives To Poor Women
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=921195

  122. KP says:

    SSM,

    You totally miss the point. I want our young ladies (my own daughter include) to be demure, submissive ladies.

    But I also want them to be able to take care of themselves in case of an assault when (as will be the case 99% of the time) there is no Offical Government Law Enforcement Person™ immediately at hand to prevent a bad outcome.

    So, in regard to the OP: if he was just a jerk, I would expect the young lady (and my daughter) to just move on and write the guy off as a jerk. But if it was a situation where the Reasonable Person™ would conclude there was some kind of assault in progress? I would want to have it be one of three outcomes: (1) the guy comes to, and has no idea what happened (typical result of a serious concussion); (2) the guy comes to, and goes, WHOA! Glad she didn’t kill me, as he nurses very-sore neck muscles and a bruised Adam’s Apple, or (3) the guy never comes to.

  123. Tam the Bam says:

    “wtf is “socially awkward?” “
    http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3qlnl8

  124. KP says:

    If the guy actually grabbed the girl, then I understand calling the police.

    No way! Unless you meant, exercised her most effective Krav Maga moves against her assailant, and THEN called the police.

    People, I beg of you: the BEST law enforcement response times are in the neighborhood of 5 minutes. So wargame this already! There’s a fatal amount of mayhem that can take place in that brief interval!!! You need to be able to defend yourself if the unlikely, worst-case scenario happens to fall upon you.

  125. hoellenhund2 says:

    there is greater social pressure on men not to engage in homosexuality than there is on women?

    Absolutely.

  126. MRA-X Rmax says:

    Meh sunshinemary is THE definition of the creepy housewife

    Socially awkward in mens spaces & goes out of her way, to say the wrong thing, just to rub men the wrong way

    The women in this post were CLEARLY in the wrong,screaming assault & making false accusations of assault

    Lets not point out how spoilt & spineless & so used to riding cock, women like sunshine mary really are, they have to run around screaming at the first sign of a foibled attempt

    These women never fail to reveal just how pampered & spineless they really are …

    How many guys run around calling the cops on socially inept women ?

    Typical stayathome housetwat …lol

    Creepy housewife yep …

  127. earl says:

    “Wrong. It appears you don’t know what Game is.”

    I know what game is. I’ve read the stuff and I’ve used it. I found out very quickly how much of a fraud it is.

  128. Exfernal says:

    ^ The same ‘active PUA’ reinventing himself as ‘MRA’? Have you anything worthwhile to add to the discussion? Personal impressions don’t count.

  129. Exfernal says:

    My bad. One more post above.

  130. Opus says:

    Maybe those women were attention-whoring drama-queens. It is the middle of the day at the centre of a busy campus; people were milling around – surely: were either of these girls at risk of sexual assault? It seems unlikely. Not all touch is sexual, and not all sexual touch is indecent. In my most recent piece of street game I was within a minute or so of meeting her touching the arm of a young chick – having deployed some time distillation (TFH or Krauser would have been impressed). She however claimed to be busy (fitness test) and had to go but invited me to visit her at the bar she frequents at the other end of town. Off she rode on her bicycle. I didn’t follow it up for that would have made me look desperate and beta and anyway although she was slim and not unattractive there are many girls in the world. I may add that she was Spanish and the Spanish are both noticeably civilized and relaxed – at least in my experience. Manufactured outrage – as here – is a speciality of Canadians (I speak from experience having had the cops called on me by one merely for eye rape, though I failed to return the compliment when physically and on more than one occasion assaulted by the said female – there is nothing a policeman likes more than acting the white knight with the possibility of increasing or maintaining his Harem).

    Women will continue to seek redress from powerful men (the Police, the College Administration) just so long as men are happy to pander to their whims.

  131. Exfernal says:

    OT, but perhaps not quite:
    “The Prevalence and Correlates of Multipartnered Fertility Among Urban U.S. Parents”
    Is here anyone with a free access to this article who is willing to give a brief summary of its findings?

  132. MV says:

    OT

    #McGowanGate report

    After being publicly manchild-shamed, the male homosexual community seems to be splitting into two fractions:

    Red Pill condescenders: http://time.com/3572314/rose-mcgowan-feminists-gay-misogyny/
    and
    Blue Pill appeasers: http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/11/gay-men-and-misogyny-rose-mcgowans-half-right.html

    Feminist invaders are smelling this weakness and doubling down on their shaming blitzkrieg:
    http://wordsbynicolefroio.com/2014/11/13/on-misogyny-in-the-gay-community/

    This is gonna get messy.

  133. MV says:

    OT

    #McGowanGate report

    After being publicly manchild-shamed, the male homosexual community seems to be splitting into two fractions:

    Red Pill condescenders: http://time.com/3572314/rose-mcgowan-feminists-gay-misogyny/
    and
    Blue Pill appeasers: http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/11/gay-men-and-misogyny-rose-mcgowans-half-right.html

    Feminist invaders are smelling this weakness and doubling down on their shaming blitzkrieg:

    http://wordsbynicolefroio.com/2014/11/13/on-misogyny-in-the-gay-community/

    This is gonna get messy.

    ***
    I apolgize for double-posting. It was a typo in the email adress. Mr. Dalrock, please, delete the first post.

  134. thedeti says:

    SSM:

    You’re putting a bit too much emphasis on the “grabbing” here. First, an uncorroborated report by one woman says the man “grabbed her hand”. In the second, it’s reported (also uncorroborated) that the man “attempted to grab” her. As Cane pointed out, how do we know he wasn’t simply running some poorly executed Game with kino on these women? And there were 20-30 “tips”. There were NOT reports of incidents. Just “tips”. If there had been 20-30 incidents, that’s how it would have been reported.

    OK, OK, maybe the guy stepped over the line a little. But here are my concerns, and they are valid ones:

    1. This isn’t about what this man did. This is about who and what he is. It’s about his level of attractiveness, his race and his low approach skill level. Substitute Roosh or Krauser in for this “tall Asian man”, and there would have been NO police reports. In fact, I agree with Cane that this guy probably has been reviewing Game material, but doesn’t understand all of it. The reports match descriptions and depictions of aggressive day Game. So…. Why is it OK when Krauser makes his attempts, but not OK when a “tall Asian man” attempts the same thing? Answer: Attractiveness. Game.

    2. The increasingly wild overreactions that are out of all proportion to the affront presented. What the hell is wrong with saying “NO!” and “GET AWAY FROM ME I DON’T WANT TO TALK TO YOU!” What the hell is wrong with a woman telling guys not to touch them and to step the hell off?

    When I was in college, a woman could quite easily rebuff an unwanted advance with loud statements and conduct exactly like this. Hell, I still see them do it. Women did this all the time – tell a guy to keep his f*cking hands to himself and not touch her. Are women such shrinking wallflowers now that they are completely unable to assert even their own bodily integrity? Are you, SSM, prepared to agree with IBB’s whacked out idea that women have no agency? I’m not. I give women much more credit than that.

    You can’t have it both ways. Either you’re fully capable moral agents, fully responsible for yourselves out on your own, or you are not. ‘

    3. The increasing resort to law enforcement to handle, mediate and regulate interactions between men and women, or one man and one woman. The intent here is not to protect women, who, we have been told for decades now, are perfectly capable of protecting themselves. The intent here is to threaten and intimidate men, and suppress and subdue them. The intent here is, increasingly, to criminalize male approaches. It is to have a chilling effect on less attractive men, to push them further to the fringes, and to prevent them from interacting with women in any way.

    And it was more than just “talking to”, SSM. The police referred to the man as a SUSPECT. That’s what the police call people who are believed to have committed crimes, or are “suspected” of having committed criminal offenses. That’s where the word “suspect” comes from.

    The police do NOT just “talk to” someone. You and I just “talk to” people. When the police “talk to” someone, there is a lot more going on than simply words being spoken. Police have badges, guns, and the legal right to use deadly force against citizens. So when a police officer “talks to” someone, he does so with the following implied threat behind him: “You WILL talk to me and you WILL answer every one of my questions. I will tell you what to do and where to go, and you WILL comply or I will inflict serious bodily harm or death upon you. At the very least, I will f*ck up your life and jam you up so badly, for so long, and in such ways as to cause you to wish you had never been born”. That, SSM, is a lot more than “talking to” someone. And it is a lot more than just “hey, this is Western Civilization, that’s not how we do things here”.

  135. Michael Neal says:

    approaching a woman is fine, you don”t have to wait until she approaches you, just get some eye contact first and see if she is into you. If not then try someone else.

  136. thedeti says:

    Yeah, the guy was creepy. Yeah, he acted like a creep. Yeah, he stepped over the line. But this is an issue only because the guy couldn’t act like James Bond or look like Brad Pitt. If he had been smoother or better looking, these girls wouldn’t have called the cops.

    It doesn’t warrant a police response. It doesn’t warrant a call to the cops. Weird, awkward or socially retarded men trying to meet and/or talk to women is not a law enforcement matter.

    Are we now to believe that capable, strong, independent women going to college are completely unable to tell a guy to “GET THE F*CK AWAY” from them? Are we now to believe a young college woman cannot assert and police her own bodily integrity after having been told that they are perfectly able to do so, for decades now?

  137. thedeti says:

    And: this is not only about who and what this man was/is. It is also about how our society views such men, and how our society believes it has the right to treat such men.

  138. Boxer says:

    After being publicly manchild-shamed, the male homosexual community seems to be splitting into two fractions…

    I’m sorta conflicted with all the homo shaming in the ‘sphere. This goes beyond the fact that some of the best authors on gender studies here (Jack Donovan is the most obvious) like dudes.

    In meatspace, the only people who don’t immediately jump my shit, when I come out of the closet with the fact that I don’t ever plan to marry one of these fine North American “ladies” tend to be male homos. Some of them are quite forthright in the fact that they don’t like women themselves. In this regard they have much bigger balls than my regular social contacts, who go white with fear when I make the most innocent comment, in terror to think their wives may overhear me voicing my taboo opinions.

    That said, the male homosexual community (is there such a thing?) has never been vocally on our side. Individual gay dudes may be fine, but as a whole, the crew is getting their just desserts for kissing feminist ass for so many years. The self-described leaders of the gay dude political action groups have never spoken out about the importance of families or the travesty of divorce laws. That may change as homos start getting divorced. I hope it does.

  139. enrique432 says:

    I know here in the DC area, you essentially have two types of gays, although this is a raw, simple generalization: The stereotypical “fag” type, that is a hairdresser, likes to hang out with women, show Drama Queen tendencies, if he is a vocal/political kind of person, is extreme lefty/OWS type, works in typical gay men jobs, etc etc; then, you have the Alpha gays…they look great, hit the gym hard, pass as Alpha straights at work, get shit done, and bang out with other men on weekends, etc. They may be “gayish” but they are the ones that will punch someone that comes at them (as they should).

    THOSE gay men, category two, are not one’s to buy feminist BS, and sometimes are even Republican…they “get” that women are phonies and they are the guys most likely to “get” MGTOW and married Red Pillers like us. They just happen to like other men.

  140. Karl says:

    >> And the women absolutely did do something wrong by trying to get a guy arrested over nothing.

    Touching them during the initial stage of a DayGame approach: out-of-bounds conduct It most definitely ===is=== technically illegal.

    Not to mention that the females did ==not==, even when presented with an opportunity afterwards – ask for the guy to be arrested.

    Women, like cattle, are to be led by good stockmanship. Extremely experienced shepherds never prod nor whip nor touch a head of livestock; and they never “block its path”. Not for maoral reasons, but for pragmatic ones.

    in the manosphere, we don’t blame women for behaving like women; we should ALSO hold men responsible for being competent at Basic Game Moves.

  141. Anchorman says:

    deti: The increasing resort to law enforcement to handle, mediate and regulate interactions between men and women, or one man and one woman.

    Precisely.

    The incident ended with nothing more than awkwardness and public shame for him.

    Time to call the cops? Only if he wasn’t “hot.”

    That is the mindset of young women today.

    Cane, I hear what you’re saying and I think this is a matter of looking at the same situation from two different perspectives. You believe he violated social norms by taking their hand or trying to do so. I agree. So do many, if not all, here.

    What does it say about the mindset that the immediate reaction is to call the police? Their calls to police were not so they would talk to a socially awkward guy.

    They wanted him arrested. That’s why you call police.

    Regarding prison rape, I worked in the corrections community for a decade. It is abhorrent. It needs to be eliminated. It is also rarer than reported by Human Rights Watch (they estimate 10-15%). We surveyed former prisoners who had no reason to under or over-report the crime. The rate is closer to 2-3% of the population. It was also typically small, weak, effeminate men. Prisons try to segregate those types away from predators, but it still happens. The worst cases and the most instances occur in juvie facilities as a way of establishing dominance. It’s terrible and heartbreaking when you hear the after-effects on the victims. The adult inmates are more interested in living in a society of minimal fear and violence, actually. The modern system classifies and segregates predators pretty well. The bad prisons are bad, but they are filled with the most brutal thugs, inflicting it on each other.

    There is consensual sex between prisoners. A sort of “close your eyes” and return the act. Anal is extremely rare in those instances. In fact, we didn’t find any in our survey. When counted, consensual acts were still very rare in prison. 10% or so.

  142. earl says:

    “The rate is closer to 2-3% of the population. It was also typically small, weak, effeminate men.”

    There is absolutely nothing good that happens to these type of men. And yet they stay in that state.

  143. Bluepillprofessor says:

    Just last week we were arguing on the Red Pill about whether the end goal is actually that women want to enslave unattractive men and make it illegal for them to catcall, or even approach and talk to them. We were assured that would NEVER happen.

    Now this week we see it happen. Shocking.

    I seem to remember something like this in American history. Let me think. Something about categorizing a certain type of man.

    1. The first thing they did was make it illegal for such men to talk to a (white) woman.

    2. Then they made it illegal to approach a (white) woman.

    3. Then they made it illegal to interfere with the entitled princesses in any way.

    4. So they told these disposable men whenever a white woman approaches them on the sidewalk they would have to step into the street.

    5. Then they told these disposable men they would have to ride in the back of the bus.

    We are well under way past stop #3 on the new dystopian segregation that the feminine imperative is attempting to force on us. Even posters on this blog think it is near criminal just to stop a woman on the street. Oh…My…God!!! A man interfered with a woman’s walking path. A man TOUCHED a princess without her approval and consent and without inducing tingles. LOCK THEM UP. The next stop in the dystopian new segregation train will be to force unattractive men to step into the street whenever a princess approaches them- but that will NEVER happen, right? Not until next week.

  144. Lyn87 says:

    I have no way of knowing for certain what the “grabbing” consisted of, but since it appears that both incidents occurred in broad daylight in public, I’m going to guess that the “grabbing” was a lot more like touching – attempting to establish physical contact. The girls were obviously in no actual danger, and from what the story said, I doubt they had any reason to think that they were. For me, this is one of those cases of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf.” Thanks to feminism and the acceptance of the absurd idea that people in the designated “oppressor classes” (Caucasians and men), are obligated to conform their lives so as not to cause the slightest discomfort to even the most paranoid member of a member of a designated “victim class,” we now have women making mountains out of molehills and people with real authority taking them seriously. I’m at the point now where my default assumption upon hearing “Harassment” is the same as that of the townspeople in Aesop’s tale when they hear “Wolf!” In fact, that is my default reaction to lots of accusations, such as:

    Racist!… Misogynist!… Homophobe!… Pharisee!

    Having said that, it appears that the cops finally got one right. Here’s hoping we see more of that and less of the over-reaction that cops are rightly infamous for.

    As for the student… I feel for the guy: I used to be like that. Before I “blossomed” around the age of 20 I was a dork with the worse case of acne you’ve ever seen and an overbite so large I was initially rejected from a military flight program because they didn’t have an oxygen mask that would seal properly. Plus I’m a little short and slightly built. A real chick magnet, I tell you. But what I lacked in unattractiveness I partially made up for in balls: I had to consciously screw up my courage to approach a girl, but I would do so if someone really caught my eye. I struck out.. a lot. For years. Then my face cleared up, and I bulked up some, and I had orthodontic work to fix my overbite, and I was accepted into a military flight program. Then things started looking up for me. This guy is probably where I was before I got my act together. It takes balls to cold-approach pretty girls you don’t know in a non-social setting (like a club or a party)… and this guy is doing it. If he figures out how to make himself more attractive to women he has the potential to do well.

  145. thedeti says:

    Bluepill:

    “Even posters on this blog think it is near criminal just to stop a woman on the street.”

    My point simply was that the described interactions were not things that required the overreactions and calls to police. These are — or should be — things that women can handle on their own, without involving the law. (After all, we’ve heard over the last 4 decades or so that women don’t need law enforcement’s help; and that they can make their own decisions on who to date, have sex with, and marry.)

    Where I come from, women walk away, and say things like “TAKE YOUR HANDS OFF ME” and “DO NOT TOUCH ME” and “GET THE F*CK AWAY FROM ME”. And that’s the end of the interaction. It doesn’t require a police complaint. It doesn’t require jacking the poor guy up. It doesn’t require cops hassling people over what is essentially a botched, poorly executed approach.

  146. Gunner Q says:

    “That said, the male homosexual community (is there such a thing?)…”
    Yes. NAMBLA. Not a group one wants to be associated with.

    Elspeth and SSM, you don’t get to complain about this guy. He’s the result of how women have treated men for half a century, lying to us and keeping us ignorant. Not many guys have good role models for relating to women. If some chubby girl approaches a guy out of the blue, he isn’t going to freak out and call the cops. Well, not before YMY, but again whose fault is that?

  147. Anchorman says:

    Where I come from, women walk away, and say things like “TAKE YOUR HANDS OFF ME” and “DO NOT TOUCH ME” and “GET THE F*CK AWAY FROM ME”. And that’s the end of the interaction. It doesn’t require a police complaint. It doesn’t require jacking the poor guy up. It doesn’t require cops hassling people over what is essentially a botched, poorly executed approach.

    Right. It’s as if women said, “Rather than give the nuclear reaction, we’ve decided to have the police detain you and see if there’s something arrestable.”

  148. Anchorman says:

    reaction=rejection

  149. Anonymous age 72 says:

    I worked with a truly strong independent woman, a married woman. One day we were talking about our annual anti-sex harassment meeting. she said she had in the past had men who copped a feel from her. She said she never ran to management. She would turn around, get her hand in his crotch and in a very erotic manner fondle his junk without harm. She said none ever came back and copped her again.

  150. @SSM, I’ve got a better hypothetical for you; what would you do if your 18 year old son called you on the phone from college to come pick him up because he was being expelled for attempting to talk to a girl on campus who thought he was being ‘creepy’ and his casual kino was determined to be an’unwanted sexual advance’ or harassment?

    The problem is now that even the perception of harassment has become something women want to see in the men they don’t want any engagement from. Just go ask your good friend Susan Walsh how that ‘want’ is working out for her with the faked ‘drunk girl’ street harassment video she got tooled by.

    She blathered on and on about comically overblown assumptions that every guy on the street is a potential PUA rapist and bought the video hook, line and sinker. That’s the degree to which the presumption of ‘creepy’ has been taken to. You and she want to believe the worst because it fits your narrative.

  151. Dalrock says:

    @SunshineMary

    So nothing bad happened to him. He behaved in a wildly inappropriate – not just awkward – way and the alarmed girls contacted the campus cops to report the incident. The cops investigated, found that the guy was just socially retarded, and tried to straighten him out. They specifically said that what he did was not a crime. But it was appropriate for them to check this out to make sure that’s all it was.

    I don’t fault the cops for following up. But there is a context to this which I think you are overlooking. As feminists are very plainly telling us, they want to create a world where men are afraid of women so it will feel safe for women to make risky choices. I don’t know the details of the encounters, only the third hand reporting
    from a suspect source (the campus paper).

    One thing I’ve written about at length is how feminists maneuver conservatives around to enforce feminism. I think this is very likely involved here, even if beta creepy guy was as bad as it sounds. As Cane wrote:

    Strange men are intimidating to women, and should be. The problem is not that most women felt threatened by an unattractive man, but that they will act foolishly when threatened by attractive men.

    But it isn’t just that women will act foolishly with attractive men, it is that women have demanded that we rework society so that they are free to be foolish with attractive men. They want to act foolishly with attractive men. As parents, what should our response to such a desire be? Should we set about making it safe, or more honestly seem safe? How far should we reorder our society to do so?

    There is a tendency in these conversations to pretend that feminism didn’t happen, then proceed to discuss what would be the proper rule in a sane society. I have some sympathy there, except that feminism did happen, and denying it while finding ways to make feminism (seem) safe is part of why feminism has been so wildly successful for the last 40+ years. Feminists want to reorder our society to make women strong and independent, and conservatives (because we believe in order and want to protect women) reflexively work to make this as safe as possible for women.

    What I would say is, we don’t have to bark every time feminists blow our whistle.

  152. MV says:

    Bluepillprofessor,
    To put unattractive man into the back of the bus, feminists would need a central authority (“Politburo” so to speak) which would have to come to agreement on clear formal definition of “male attractiveness”. I don’t see this happening. Their hamsters would go chernobyl and feminism would go down in flames of ultimate catfight.

  153. MV says:

    OT

    Feminist “war on gays” just got a racial component:

    Black female bisexual rapper Azealia Banks defends use of word “faggot” as a synonym for “misogynist” and repeats that “a lot of gay men are way more misogynistic than straight men.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/14/azealia-banks-faggot-perez_n_6159182.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices

  154. MV says:

    TFH,
    If you were a bitter old hag, hating whole world including yourself, would you not dream about an handsome blackbearded prince charming riding in to impale you on his sword and put you out of your misery once and for all?

  155. Dalrock,

    But it isn’t just that women will act foolishly with attractive men, it is that women have demanded that we rework society so that they are free to be foolish with attractive men.

    I think it might be a little bigger than that. You are right of course, but that is because your correct statement fits within the context of a much larger problem. Allow me to fix your post:

    But it isn’t just that women will act foolishly with attractive men, it is that women have demanded that we rework society so that they are free to be completely unaccountable for their actions.

    Your last post about the UK woman claiming that there be NO prison sentences for women guilty of any crimes support that line of thinking. To a feminist there simply is NO BEHAVIOR (on a woman’s part) where she should be held responsible for her bad choices if any of those choices have anything at all to do with direct interaction with a man.

  156. MV says:

    TFH,

    Glorious, indeed. GamerGate, CatcallGate, ShirtGate, FaggotGate… Feminists seem to be making themselves a new group of enemies every hour these days. Can you extrapolate this trend and define the moment when their territory will reach the size of Berlin’s Fuhrerbunker? Can I already put the champagne on ice?

  157. Boxer says:

    Enrique:

    I know here in the DC area, you essentially have two types of gays, although this is a raw, simple generalization: The stereotypical “fag” type, that is a hairdresser, likes to hang out with women, show Drama Queen tendencies, if he is a vocal/political kind of person, is extreme lefty/OWS type, works in typical gay men jobs, etc etc; then, you have the Alpha gays…they look great, hit the gym hard, pass as Alpha straights at work, get shit done, and bang out with other men on weekends, etc. They may be “gayish” but they are the ones that will punch someone that comes at them (as they should).

    That’s a good point, but both types tend to be pretty critical of modern womanhood.

    I have to work with a couple of the doughy, prancy “Will and Grace” type queens. If you ever get the chance, casually mention how toxic women are, and see how they respond. It’ll blow your mind.

    I think homos have an advantage, in that they don’t need to pedestalize women to get their needs met. They also get the inside scoop on just how whorish women are (wimminz like to “confess” to these homos, about all the different guys they did last weekend, etc.)

    Gunner Q:

    Yes. NAMBLA.

    Distasteful and irrelevant. If you have some sort of problem in this regard, then get therapy.

    Boxer

  158. ManlyMan says:

    Hey Incoherent Bystander Boston,

    Posting your sexual fantasies here is becoming a bit awkward. Would ya mind keeping them to yourself? Thanks.

  159. shiva1008 says:

    > According to the UWPS spokesman, the police coached the man on how to improve his cold approaches:

    Dalrock, as a supposedly Christian man, do you support the behavior of approaching random women for the purpose of engaging in sex? It sounds like you are giving legitimacy to this type of lustful behavior by using the “cool lingo,” and trying to make it sound like such lechery is somehow respectable. As a Christian man, why are you using Heartiste’s terminology uncritically, as if this mindset is somehow not sinful and demoniac?

  160. Shaming shiva says:”Dalrock, as a supposedly Christian man, do you support the behavior of approaching random women for the purpose of engaging in sex? It sounds like you are giving legitimacy to this type of lustful behavior by using the “cool lingo,” and trying to make it sound like such lechery is somehow respectable. As a Christian man, why are you using Heartiste’s terminology uncritically, as if this mindset is somehow not sinful and demoniac?”

    Ooooo, got to rebuild that mound! Your and SSMs spiteful attempts at getting men to back down are not going to work. Why is shaming and acting like what we say is sooooo out of bounds, always your first go to point for disagreement? It’s boring now, go be a femcunt somewhere else..

  161. Exfernal says:

    @shiva1008:

    It’s still better than trying to criminalize lechery.

  162. earl says:

    Uncontrolled sexual desire amongst both genders has led to the brave new world we stand in. After enough sexual liberation you got back to draconian laws and the collapse of civilization. That’s why sluts and Don Juans used to be shun from society.

    Perhaps if we kept sex in marriage to our spouses like we are suppose to we wouldn’t have seen things go way overboard.

  163. IT Lady says:

    I don’t like that the police or campus administration are involved based on the details of the story. So what if a man approached weirdly and women didn’t like it. Yelling or running the other way is very effective. If a guy is socially awkward, he’ll just stand there as she escapes and likely be too embarrassed to every bother again. No, it’s not proper behavior, but there are lots of strange interactions that happen every day. I don’t like when bums aggressively hassle me for money either or just rudeness in general. That doesn’t make it criminal. If someone wants to only feel completely safe, then they are probably limited to just staying home.

    I really don’t like that the vague description as there are probably a number of men who are tall, Asian (or look Asian) and don’t have an accent. Campuses have often have open borders, it’s possible the guy isn’t a student. Yet now every tall Asian-looking guy which includes staff and faculty are potential harassers.

  164. Joshua says:

    PAGING CAIN…….
    PAGING SSM……

    …….nothing?

  165. RedPillPaul says:

    Sunshine Mary,

    In regards to what a father should do if his daughter in Uni called at noon and some man was “harassing” her, maybe the correct perspective a father to have is to stop loving/caring/funneling resources to his daughter after she is of legal age. Sort of like a dowry, the dad saves enough money for 4 years in college and she is just on her own at 18; the daughter wants to marry the world so let her and let husband Big Daddy Govt foot the bill.

    She is her own person, she is not entitled to any more resources, the father did his legal duty of taking care of her up until she was of legal age. She is on her own. Why should women benefit from patriarchy when in their heart and action they rebel against it? All this “having your cake and eating it too” stuff makes the world we live in move this way. Women are creating a crueler world for everybody, all for the sake of temporary fulfillment of selfish desires. Lack of how “cause and effect” works.

  166. Oh, and then Kay Hymowitz, et al have the gall to ask: where have all the good men gone? Why aren’t men “manning-up” anymore? It’s fun to laugh at their confusion. They create an environment with nothing but barriers between the sexes, and then wonder why the “good guys” aren’t crossing them. These men don’t see barriers as a challenge; they see them as a keep-out sign and, being the respectful men they were raised to be, they will respect that.

    Having said that, if in fact the guy was blocking people’s paths and touching people’s hands and whatnot, then he’s probably a little “off”. You can get away with that when you are five years old, but not in college. I hate to say it, but when in Rome, do as the Romans do or prepare to be shut down. I don’t think this will be the last incident with this guy, I hate to say. Let’s hope for his own sake that he learned from the incident.

  167. Opus says:

    When I was a law student, there was a rather unprepossessing female-student who took a liking to me. I am sure that had I been motivated, which I wasn’t, I could have dated her, but I never sent her away. I never said: ‘you are plain and lacking in character so I am going to call the police because being placed in a position where I can see I am expected to come on to you makes me feel marginally ill at ease for the duration of our brief meetings on the hallway’. I was merely polite and I guess, she, disappointed.

  168. IT Lady says:

    Opus, Great parallel here. The world needs more kindness. You never know who your future boss, coworkers or neighbors might be.

  169. Dalrock says:

    @Shiva

    Dalrock, as a supposedly Christian man, do you support the behavior of approaching random women for the purpose of engaging in sex? It sounds like you are giving legitimacy to this type of lustful behavior by using the “cool lingo,” and trying to make it sound like such lechery is somehow respectable. As a Christian man, why are you using Heartiste’s terminology uncritically, as if this mindset is somehow not sinful and demoniac?

    Your gotacha game is tiresome.

    We have collectively abandoned marriage in this culture. At best, it is a voluntary alternative for our fundamental family structure (child support), to be converted at any time by either party for any or no reason. The average conservative Christian’s favorite movie on marriage is a divorce fantasy. When most women do decide they want marriage, they start looking for a husband after having looked for boyfriends and/or hookups for 5-10 years. A woman skipping these steps (boyfriends and hookups) is so uncommon, even in Christian circles, that it is considered not only strange but cause for alarm. This is especially true if she looks for a husband before first graduating college and establishing a career. I don’t have the links handy but others have regularly shared proof of this on CAF and Christianforums.com.

    As I have shown feminists told us they wanted to pass laws to make men afraid of women so women would feel safe traveling to foreign cities and sleeping in strange men’s beds. Even worse, many conservatives heard this and responded: That’s a great idea! This way we can return to sanity without making sluts unhappy. Never mind that “sanity” in their view isn’t a marriage culture, but a series of extended hookups (serial monogamy) where the woman decides when she wants to convert over to marriage (and then if she likes, back).

    So piss off when you claim I’m advocating pickup artist culture. I’m showing how crazy our culture really is. But the part where we abandoned marriage is something we are so comfortable with as Christians that it doesn’t even enter into the equation. It is the new normal. All most can see is weak men screwing feminism up.

  170. MarcusD says:

    @Dalrock, Shiva

    I don’t have the links handy but others have regularly shared proof of this on CAF and Christianforums.com.

    This particular thread is 22 pages and counting:

    8 Simple Rules for dating a Duggar Daughter
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=919805

    Read to understand the attitudes common at CAF.

  171. Xantippe from Marcus’ CAF article above says:

    And what if the daughter didn’t find anybody until she was in her later 20s/early 30s and financially independent. Would her 30ish suitor still be expected to ask permission to court, take a chaperone on dates, and cc parents on texts?

    I love it when they admit the truth, they don’t even realise it though.. haha!

  172. Boxer says:

    Xantippe from Marcus’ CAF article above says

    The biggest laugh about Xanthippe is the fact that she claims to be married. Can you imagine the hell that poor schlub must experience daily? No doubt her prolific internet time is encouraged by this unfortunate dolt. Every hour she’s posting her nouveau feminist nonsense on Catholic Answers is another when he doesn’t have to deal with her.

    Incidentally, one of her closest pals over there is a self-described Atheist, named “Blue Eyed Lady”, who makes it her business to tell Catholic people what they should and shouldn’t do. When solid manosphere bros go over there, they usually work in tandem, as “good-cop bad-cop” of the kooky Catholic feminist internet SWAT team. I can’t be the only person who thinks this is simultaneously funny and suspicious.

  173. Exfernal says:

    “By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you’ll become happy; if you get a bad one, you’ll become a philosopher.”
    – the husband of original Xanthippe

  174. Cane Caldo says:

    @Joshua

    PAGING CAIN…….
    PAGING SSM……

    …….nothing?

    I assume you mean me, but I have no idea to what you wish me to respond.

  175. earl says:

    ‘Even within marriage, sex should only be done to the extent that it is required for reproduction, and not more.’

    Man even though I advocate it only in marriage…it is for more than just procreation.

  176. Spacetraveller says:

    Rollo,

    “@SSM, I’ve got a better hypothetical for you; what would you do if your 18 year old son called you on the phone from college to come pick him up because he was being expelled for attempting to talk to a girl on campus who thought he was being ‘creepy’ and his casual kino was determined to be an’unwanted sexual advance’ or harassment?”

    This very scenario happened to my big brother!
    My big brother is tall, like me. In purely SMP terms, he is very attractive. And he is also a ‘badass’ alpha at times (OK, all the time, lol).

    When he was in his twenties, he got ‘enthusiastic’ about a girl who repeatedly rejected him. She was actually a ‘good girl’ from a very high class family, and my brother (I have to admit) was not the right kind of man for her, as he was, at that time of his life. Sorry, bro.
    But my brother persisted and almost got himself arrested. To be fair, he really was being a nuisance to this girl, and she was right to reject him.
    When my parents heard the story, they chastised my brother for his actions, and that was the end of the matter.

    Inasmuch as parents of girls have the duty to teach them how to protect themselves (never get drunk, don’t be in dark unlit streets at night, don’t wear revelaing clothing in public, etc), I think it is also important for parents of sons to encourage their boys to be real men, BUT… with social limits. So, by all means, son, approach women, that’s fine. But if a woman doesn’t want you, understand that it is her right. Don’t try to block her path. Don’t use your bigger physical frame to restrain her in any way. If you try 2, 3, 4 times and she still doesn’t want you, walk away. There will be another woman who will dig you. In fact, this is an essential part of Game, no?
    My parents did right with my brother, I think. He was a bit of a girl-chaser in his youth, and we all teased him about being a ‘stud’. But the minute he overstepped the line, my parents let him know.

    Now, I (having followed my parents’ ‘guidelines’ on how to live, as an unmarried young woman), never had occasion to call the police on anyone. Lucky me. I think this is due to the fact that in my social circles, young men do know how to behave, though.

    But I have to admit, if a man had ever tried to restrain me in any way, I would have found it necessary to seek help from appropriate sources, that always means, another man. Since I would not expect ‘average Joe’ to defend me if he is not my brother or father, the next logical step would then be those who are actually in charge of keeping law and order: the police.
    It would be up to them to decide how to solve the problem. I think in this case (I haven’t read the article) from what others say, this was achieved with the right result: the girls were OK, no harm done, and the boy was given the appropriate advice on how to proceed correctly in his romatic endeavours. I think this was done well in this case.

    One thing that I think is being overlooked here is that this man IS attractive. He is described as TALL. Asian or not, he is TALL.
    That means, that despite his physical advantage (he DOES have a massive leg up in the SMP, unlike other men who are avearge height or below-average height), he still blew it with his social inadequacy. This is bad – for HIM. Frustrating to see that a guy who could easily win in this SMP is stuffing things up. So, yes, more Game tips for him, because his poor Game is really knocking him backwards! Here is a guy who is blessed with a huge advantage – height. He shouldn’t be causing girls to feel the need to call the police! He should be getting the opposite result!

    Anyway, that’s just my opinion about this case. A man made a silly mistake, sad that it ended up with him having a brush with the law, but at least he came into contact with appropriate people (men with more experience about Game than him) to set him on the correct path to achieve what he wants – romantic contact with a girl.

    I would have been more upset for him if the cops he came into contact with were women, and they sent him on a ‘sexual harrasssment course’ which is just feminist claptrap. In this case, he was given useful advice by MEN who also know, no doubt, how it feels to ‘get it wrong’ at times in this (confusing) dating Game.🙂

    In other (but related) news, THIS man knows how to stand up for himself. I say good for him!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2837086/Face-nightclub-worker-accuses-Briton-crying-rape-Student-faces-extradition-slandering-Italian.html

    In this case, this woman was wrong. Good that the Italian police came down hard on her.

    In the case that gave rise to this post, I think the girls were right to seek help, and the right outcome was had by all. I don’t think these girls were ‘b*tches’, and I don’t think the man was a ‘r*pist’. There was clearly a gross misunderstanding between strangers, and the problem was fixed in the end.

    In both these stories, the real heros are the cops: In the first story, for doing right by the girls (by responding to their calls for help – there are countries in which this type of case wouldn’t even register with the police) and for doing right by the man (recognising that he was indeed harmless, but was in need of brotherly advice as to how to successfully acquire the affections of women, lol).

    And in the case I present, the cops are heros for correctly chastising a liar of a woman who knew she wasn’t raped, but nonetheless wanted to ruin the life of an innocent man whom she had willingly kissed according to the images of the CCTV.

  177. MarcusD says:

    @Boxer
    The biggest laugh about Xanthippe is the fact that she claims to be married. Can you imagine the hell that poor schlub must experience daily? No doubt her prolific internet time is encouraged by this unfortunate dolt. Every hour she’s posting her nouveau feminist nonsense on Catholic Answers is another when he doesn’t have to deal with her.

    Incidentally, one of her closest pals over there is a self-described Atheist, named “Blue Eyed Lady”, who makes it her business to tell Catholic people what they should and shouldn’t do. When solid manosphere bros go over there, they usually work in tandem, as “good-cop bad-cop” of the kooky Catholic feminist internet SWAT team. I can’t be the only person who thinks this is simultaneously funny and suspicious.

    As someone who has witnessed several years of CAF, they are indeed a strange bunch.

    A toxic, cultural Marxist, crypto-feminist, illogical, dishonest, disingenuous, self-contradicting, and misinformed bunch, of course. Still, quite strange.

    The Duggar thread would be a great place to have fun with the “good-cop bad-cop” routine (leave a comment on my blog if you’re interested — the comments are never made public). I have one or two accounts laying around ready in case of something interesting coming along.

    As for BEL, yes, she’s definitely that kind of person. If you know her life story (as she’s conveyed it, at least), she’s hardly ‘unique.’ And the simultaneous self-loathing and delusional, inflated self-esteem present in her posts is amusing if not disturbing. It’s fairly obvious that the mods there give her a wide berth – that’s even if she is lying about not being given any warnings for rules violations. Anyhow, she has a readily apparent air of self-importance (and correctness) about everything she says (even when 15-20 people have pointed out that she’s wrong). She’s basically identical to your typical Tumblr SJW/Feminist – easily offended, dishonest, narcissistic/attention-seeking, and ridiculously manipulative. I really wonder if she’s a troll, since she gets nearly everything on the “wide-eyed, true-believing prog checklist.”

  178. In both cases, the girls didn’t have to call the police, in both cases they were left alone and decided, after the case, to inform police that they had been assaulted. Only in one case did he attempt to “grab” her hand. That’s it, that’s what you and SSM and others think is a valid reason to call the police. He did not restrain her at all. Please, enough, these girls went entirely overboard, the police realised it but knew they would be accused of sexism if they stated as much.

    If that bouncer didn’t have CCTV, he would be in a world of hurt. And the woman doesn’t need to be chastised, she needs to be jailed.

  179. Spacetraveller says:

    Feminist Hater,

    Yes, I agree that the woman in the Italian case needs to be jailed.
    100% agreed.

    The impression I get (and I haven’t read the article, so I may have the wrong impression) is that it was more than just a ‘light touch’ sort of thing. The words being bandied about is that he ‘blocked her path’. That is definitely going overboard where normal social interaction is concerned, so if this impression I have is true, then I am afraid I stand by my assertion that the girls were right to seek help. I agree that if they could have found someone else to intervene, then this should have been done first. But let’s not forget that other bystander men are not to be used for this sort of thing when they have no vested interest the girls (so if they are not their blood relative or close friend, they are not to be expected to protect them) so the next best thing to do is to seek help from official quarters if that is what they need.
    And any good father of a young woman WOULD definitely have something to say about a strange man touching his daughter’s hand, let alone ‘grabbing’ her hand, or as has been reported in this case ‘blocking her path’. And it is entirely valid if he goes beserk. I think a father SHOULD go beserk in this case. Similarly, if it is his daughter who is the problem (she is ‘loose’, crying rape, etc. then he should also come down hard on her like a ton of bricks).
    You are attempting to defend the indefensible, I think. This young man was not a criminal, agreed. But he missed a step, and another man corrected him. Things in this case are exactly as they should. This is how things were pre-feminism, in fact.

    Different story if these girls were slutting it up at a bar/disco, etc. Agreed.
    But with the specifics of this case being what they are, I think things were done correctly.

    Overboard to call the police? Perhaps. But they were right to seek help if they could not easily extricate themselves from the man because it was NOT the right context (I believe they were on their way to lectures?) This same man may have won one of the girls over if they were at a party/on the beach, etc. where they are not needing to rush somewhere, and it IS the right context to make friends/meet people/relax and mingle.

    As ever, men and women will see this case in very different lights. It is as it is, I’m afraid.
    However, it is noteworthy that some men (even here, eg. Cane) will see it differently from others, and some women, like me, for example, will see it when it is a man being messed about, like the case I present.
    In all cases, let’s be fair.

  180. theasdgamer says:

    @ Drew

    And the women absolutely did do something wrong by trying to get a guy arrested over nothing.

    Totally wrong. The men assaulted the women by touching them and blocking their path. It’s a criminal offense. Note that “assault” isn’t “battery.” Maybe the men could have been hauled up on battery charges, too.

  181. theasdgamer says:

    @ Gunner, IBB

    Gunner, IBB is giving you terrible advice. For now, work on your social skills. I can see progress already. Sexually overt, aggressive, meat market (nightclub) behavior is unacceptable in most situations. However…indirect, plausibly-deniable sexualization is very important in even the most casual situations when dealing with women. Think of telling humorous double-entendres or telling stories about your own life experience where you were embarrassed and those experiences have a minor sexual component.

    Work first on improving yourself–i.e., your social skills.

  182. Luke says:

    feministhater says:
    November 16, 2014 at 1:54 pm

    “Xantippe from Marcus’ CAF article above says:

    And what if the daughter didn’t find anybody until she was in her later 20s/early 30s and financially independent. Would her 30ish suitor still be expected to ask permission to court, take a chaperone on dates, and cc parents on texts?”

    “I love it when they admit the truth, they don’t even realise it though.. haha!”

    Agreed, FH. Why would a careerist, “independent” woman in her 30s expect there to be a “30ish” guy inclined to wife her up (vs. P & D or at most LTR), that’s not only decent enough to pass muster with a parent who wants grandchildren, but also a “better catch” than all the guys she blew off when YHT with fewer miles/wrinkles/badboys on her? It’s as if someone who tried out for the Olympics at 19 in an endurance sport and didn’t make it figures they’ll try again 16 years later. What prospects would a sane observer give them?

  183. theasdgamer says:

    @ Joshua

    Cane + SSM=Typical TradCons

    Joshua=Idiot

  184. theasdgamer says:

    @ earl

    If you see a lot of PUA videos at bars or nightclubs…you quickly figure out how game works, alcohol.

    Barring one occurrence, alcohol was NEVER involved in my PUA days. I didn’t lie in any major way or rely on diminished faculties.

    Game can be very effective outside of nightclubs. One time, I was feeling a woman up within 15 minutes of meeting her and in her apt. within 30 min.

    It was early afternoon. We were the only two in an apt. complex swimming pool and played Marco Polo and did some rough horseplay with splashing, dunking, etc. When she was “it” during Marco Polo, I swam between her legs, touching her thighs. Tingles!

    This was decades ago–way before the PUA community formed. It was all my own natural instincts.

  185. You are attempting to defend the indefensible, I think. This young man was not a criminal, agreed. But he missed a step, and another man corrected him. Things in this case are exactly as they should. This is how things were pre-feminism, in fact.

    No, I am not. Here, listen. If you want guys to be confident and try to initiate, you HAVE TO FUCKING REALISE, that they will make mistakes. If you run to the FUCKING POLICE when they do, they will not gain said confidence and hence not initiate further..

    He tried to hold her hand, she didn’t want him to do that, rebuffed him and walked off. That’s where it should have ended. Calling the police is escalation and a warning to men who would try a similar approach. Either you want men to try, which means they will make mistakes, which means bar rape, actual assault and real stalking, you tell them no and let them be. OR, you try this approach and show your real attitudes towards men trying to learn, which is, be attractive and get it or a shitstorm is going to come your way.

    Fuck off with the insane comparing of this man’s actions to real assault, it’s getting real fucking tiring.

  186. theasdgamer says:

    @ feministhater

    Learn the law. Don’t be a DB.

  187. theasdgamer says:

    It’s fakking illegal, not to mention socially awkward, to try to hold a stranger’s hand in an outdoor setting. It’s understood that part of Game is not breaking the law.

    Now, was it necessary or appropriate for the women to call the police? Probably not. Was this a feminist setup? Maybe. Sure, this scenario shows the need for education for women about how to graciously handle socially-awkward approaches by men. So maybe the manosphere can use this to undermine the pedestalization of women.

  188. IT Lady says:

    Feministhater articulated what bothered me. It wasn’t as if the girls felt danger at the time and yelled for help, or ran off upset straight to the campus police. Nor did it appear this was a series of incidents where the guy kept bothering, said something threatening, or something that would constitute possible criminal behavior. Also this seemed to have been during the day around other people. The reaction was delayed, it doesn’t say how long. I suspect that the ‘victims’ told some friends about icky creepy guy that bothered her on the physics roadway. Then it was encouraged to report him so he doesn’t bother anyone else. I don’t think that the job of campus police is to give a lesson to a man on how to approach women. Just because the guy is according to 2 women is awkward. He’d figure it out soon enough whatever he is doing isn’t working for him.

    The wording is also vague. Not sure what was involved with the “grab.” Was tap on the arm or shoulder to get someone’s attention or a slight misstep and brushing up to someone? In that case, I should have called the police a few time already this morning on the way to the coffee shop. I am also doubting the claim of appearing drunk or on drugs. Maybe the guy was, but I am not thinking so. Some people are a bit clumsy with stiffer or not as well controlled movements and just not graceful. Some one moving awkward isn’t a crime or a suspicion of being under influence. That’s part of the STEM nerd stereotype, is it not?

    When I was a student, the campus regularly had various causes and political groups set up tables with agents that would cold approach people in the main walkways for donations or sign a petition. I recall that they were rather annoying. Students are trying to get to class and these people are stopping people in a busy area. It was disruptive in that it caused other people to have move around or brush against people in a small area. Maybe since I was annoyed I should have just called the police.

  189. It’s illegal to try and touch a person, that is the legal definition of assault and battery. The point is that touching is illegal by this definition, not just trying to touch a person’s hand. Which also means that trying to touch someone should immediately be dealt with by calling the police.

    If you want to encourage men to step out and initiate, that will include touching, approaching women, standing in front of them and talking, perhaps even awkwardly, don’t treat them like criminals.

    This article and the comments truly show just where people stand on this issue. No one, not anyone has yet to prove that these women suffered any harm at all. None. So, to all the ladies and gents who find themselves in disagreement with me, go shove it.

  190. Spacetraveller says:

    FH,
    Your argument is plausible, don’t get me wrong. I think if the case were made clearer, we would all be in a better position to analyse it better.
    But as others have said, it is not legal to ‘block the path of someone’ whether that person is male or female. So if this man did that, it was wrong and he got corrected. Not arrested, not put in jail – he got corrected. Problem solved.
    I so wish you wouldn’t use foul language when addressing me, but each to his own…

    IT Lady, the girls may well have elicited the help of passers-by, sure. But in this day and age, it is not expected that any man minding his own business is expected to help. Which is why I insist that seeking hep from official sources was the right thing to do in this case.
    Did they accuse him of something more serious than was reported by others? No. They told the truth, corroborated by others, and the police dealt with the matter well.
    Would you or I have called the police? Most likely not, but I shall not stand here and condemn another woman for doing this – if she did it in a truthful manner. Which (it seems to me) these women did.
    I agree that most cases of so-called ‘sexual harassment’ are false and just ridiculous. This case is not one of them in my opinion.
    Game is good, yes. But this was NOT Game! This is my point.
    Yes, men get it wrong all the time. If we are going to use this argument, we can also say that the false rape accusation brigade are also ‘getting it wrong’. Why don’t we just overlook their flaws?

    But we are not going to go there. are we…because that would not be logical at all.

  191. What is ‘blocked their path’? Did he walk up to them and talk, did he move in front of her again and again and again as she was trying to get passed him? It doesn’t clarify anything. You have still not proven that they were in harm’s way. You just want to criminalise bad behaviour. Which would be an inordinate waste of time.. and I don’t care that much about women feeling uncomfortable. They need to learn to deal with men making passes at them. Especially when they say that men are expected to do so and must do so.

    Yes, men get it wrong all the time. If we are going to use this argument, we can also say that the false rape accusation brigade are also ‘getting it wrong’. Why don’t we just overlook their flaws?

    Well, a false accusation destroys a man, and once again, I’m telling you to shove it for both comparing a false accusation made by a woman to a guy getting it wrong when making a pass at a woman and then, again, comparing the alleged touching of a hand or the attempt at doing so to an actual real assault. Fuck you!

    The police shouldn’t be called or used at all for the normal interactions between men and women. Unless you want to criminalise it.

    IT Lady, the girls may well have elicited the help of passers-by, sure. But in this day and age, it is not expected that any man minding his own business is expected to help. Which is why I insist that seeking hep from official sources was the right thing to do in this case.

    They were not in any danger… they were uncomfortable by his presence. So much so that they called police to tell him to mind his own business and leave them alone. It has gotten to the point where women like you and others, including the two bitches in the article, feel it necessary to call the flying brigade when a man causes an affront to you, at which time, you expect a man to come to your rescue, and because you’ve told ordinary men you don’t need them anymore, you have to call the fucking police.

    Pathetic! Fucking pathetic!

  192. Spacetraveller says:

    FH,

    OK, case closed. I really cannot stand bad language, so when it is used repeatedly at me, I don’t engage in the debate any further. Nice debating with you.

  193. Blah blah blah, go tell someone who cares.

  194. Try the Poooo leeece!

  195. thedeti says:

    Technically, a man touching or trying to touch a woman’s hand is “assault”. But, as usual, there are grey areas.

    It depends on the state, but “assault” is usually defined as “Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. No intent to cause physical injury needs to exist, and no physical injury needs to result.”

    On these facts, the touching would be “offensive” but not “harmful”. But, as is usually the case, “offensive” is subjective. It all turns on whether the guy is attractive to her. If Tom Brady or Brad PItt is doing the attempted “hand grab”, that’s probably not “offensive”. But “tall Asian dude” does the attempted hand grab, it’s “offensive”. That’s the problem here – a guy has to risk in approaching. And most approaches or male-female interactions where there is sexual interest, there’s some attempt at touching. And men just won’t approach women, or they will do it a lot, lot less, if they are going to risk having cops jamming him up every time they do it.

    There isn’t a guy around who hasn’t completely screwed up an approach, or misread a signal as interest. There isn’t a guy around who has not experienced a woman telling him in no uncertain terms that she is not and never ever will be interested in him.

    What the contrary commenters here demand of men is that they become mind readers – that they divine a woman’s interest in him just by looking at him. They demand that men read every IOI and IOD absolutely perfectly. They demand that every man here never f*ck anything up – that they execute flawlessly every approach, every communication, every interaction with every woman they come in contact with. They demand the impossible.

  196. IT Lady says:

    Feminst Hater, I get technical illegality of touching a person. However it is common enough and happens every day, which it really isn’t a crime unless there’s more to it. I don’t like the idea of random people touching me, but it happens and by itself it’s not criminal enough to call the police. You are also right, if a big issue is going to be made over unwanted advances, normal men just aren’t going to pursue. No normal guy wants to be “that guy” that is going to get a call from the police or campus authorities because a woman didn’t like him and/or his approach.

    If the scenario had been at night in or in an isolated part of the campus, the women were approached by a big strange man, who grabbed at them in a rough manner (it does not seem like that is what happened) and they had to get out being held back that is a cause for concern. Go to the campus police to report it would be a different scenario. I would agree that this type of case is more than feeling uncomfortable.

    Spacetraveller, I am not condemning the women, but stating I feel they were overreacting. Based on the account given, was no physical harm or struggle, no need to escape, so as FeministHater pointed out, there wasn’t a real danger, just momentary discomfort. Just making someone uncomfortable isn’t a crime, otherwise I’d like all pushy salespeople arrested. Yelling would be a natural expression of being in danger and calling attention to a problem which happened in a crowded area in daylight. That is not asking for a knight in shining armor to go intervene. Though likely someone in a crowded area, not necessary a man (why assume only a man could assist?), would at least whip out phone and make a call to the campus operator over a possible altercation where a woman screamed for help. The women after the fact just wanted to get that icky guy in trouble. So the guy that has lousy social skills with women now has to unexpectedly face authority figures to go explain himself over. Along with a campus news story written about him that anyone with a resemblance to his vague description could be “that guy.”

    If the scenario had been a tall handsome drama student doing the same approach in the same location in a smooth manner, then the women, even if they weren’t interested (say they were married, had boyfriends) would have never have gone to the police. The difference is tall Asian guy wasn’t considered attractive and savvy so he’s a suspect and needs to be reported to authorities. Suave tall drama guy isn’t a suspect, and doesn’t need to be reported, even though he did same thing. Even if both men did the same actions and said the same words and both men and had the same tall build (i.e. the intimidation factor is same) only icky guy needs to be reported because he made them feel uncomfortable. The other guy is nice because he was perceived flattering. Handsome and tall drama guy could also be drunk, high, just got back from drowning kittens and robbing a bank with a dye pack exploded on him, etc. but as long as he’s cool, still no issue with him.

  197. theasdgamer says:

    @ deti

    But, as is usually the case, “offensive” is subjective. It all turns on whether the guy is attractive to her. If Tom Brady or Brad PItt is doing the attempted “hand grab”, that’s probably not “offensive”.

    Doesn’t it also depend on context? Kino in a night club isn’t assault. Nor boob graze, etc. Different social convention rules for night/day game.

    The point isn’t mind-reading, but not being a fool. If you don’t understand the social conventions, learn them. Make sure there’s some interest before doing hard escalation. That requires understanding IOI’s and being able to evaluate them accurately real-time.

    I’ve made approaches to women who weren’t interested. A lot. However, I followed social conventions of not touching unless there was interest. [To readers: Touching briefly is allowed in order to get noticed in some situations. If you have her attention, don’t touch without strong IOI’s except the brief touches allowed as part of normal convo. If she indicates disinterest, leave.]

    Yes, there should be lots of grace and women should know how to deal with stuff gracefully. Maybe you should write a post to women about how to deal gracefully with unwelcome attention?

  198. thedeti says:

    ST is wrong, and FH is right, or at least has the better argument here.

    In a world where men and women are free to interact with each other; and where women select their own sex and romantic partners, there has to be some give and take here, some “play in the joints” for interpersonal contact. We expect men to approach women and take the risks. If that’s the case, then women need to expect to be approached, and sometimes they will be approached by men they aren’t interested in. And, women need to be clear about their disinterest.

    It is simply a fact of life for every woman that at some point, she will be asked out and approached by guys she doesn’t like. Sorry, but that’s just the way it is. Sometimes – lots of times –these guys f*ck it up. They’ll be too forward, or clumsy, or awkward, or nervous, or weird, or creepy. They’ll do it wrong. They’ll say something stupid or weird or offputting. They’ll touch you too soon, or too late, or in the wrong place. They’ll go in for the kiss too soon. Or they’ve touched your hand and then think they can touch your breast. This is how it works. This is how it is supposed to work.

    It’s very, very strange that we now live in a society of supposedly strong, independent women who wilt like hothouse flowers when some unattractive man makes a hamhanded approach. It’s odd to interact with strong, independent women who are completely unable to handle themselves around socially awkward men. When I was in college, women did things like say “No thanks” or “I’m not interested do not call me again” or “Don’t touch me”. They did things like pull their hands away and move away and get up and walk away. And that was the end of the interaction. And if he persisted, it was “GET AWAY FROM ME I AM NOT INTERESTED”. (And keep in mind – that’s NOT a “nuclear rejection”. That’s a woman telling a dense guy that this is not going to happen, not now, not ever. Some guys need it presented to them that way. They get the message. That’s NOT a nuke.)

    I’d sure like to know why women can’t do this. Why can’t a woman say “DON’T TOUCH ME” if some man she isn’t attracted to is approaching her? Why can’t these strong independent women be, you know, strong and independent? Why the need to resort to police to handle every uncomfortable interaction between a man and a woman?

  199. Bluepillprofessor says:

    We can’t end this outstanding thread on immature name calling and catlike bitching.

    As a legal matter, unless the dude blocked their path AFTER they clearly stated they did not want their path blocked this is not a crime. Unless the dude forcibly held their hand AFTER they clearly stated they did not want to be touched this is not a crime.

    All other analysis proceeds from the hamster. Men have a right to approach women. Men have a right to lightly touch a woman. Women have the right to do the same. Women have the right to walk away or push a hand away from them. Really! Women have this thing called “free will.” They can, you know, say NO (except in California).

    The problem is the womminz, including luminaries like SSH, are trying to alter the basic fundamental rights in this society so the womminz are never made to feeeeeeel uncomfortable.

    If the dude blocked a woman’s path and THEN continued to block her after she tries to walk around him this is a crime. If he keeps trying to paw at her after she has rejected him this can very quickly become the crime of assault. For all the rest, try to restrain your hamsters. Take out that little rodent and give it a rest. Pet it until the poor thing catches its breath at least.

  200. This whole thing is silly.

    You want to approach women you don’t know but would like to get to know better, try on-line dating. Try one of those 7-minute-date thingies where you press the egg timer and talk to different women. Try a dating service. Try going to a dance club, stand by the dance floor, and wait to be approached (that always worked for me.) Try doing something (anything) where you know (going in) that the woman you are talking to is willing and able to accept your advances. That would seriously cut down on the creep factor. And we wouldn’t have this crap.

    Seriously, none of us would ever have done with this tall asian male did. What he did was totally uncool, totally creepy. I feel bad for him because he doesn’t have a clue, but the first thing I would do is point him in the right direction. That direction of course is being in a setting where women are truly approachable.

    And stop making comments about how different it would be if he looked like Brad Pitt or Tom Brady. He doesn’t look like those people (none of us do) so get over it. It just makes you sound like an envious loser whenever you make that comment.

  201. Gunner Q says:

    feministhater @ 6:32 am:
    “If you want guys to be confident and try to initiate, you HAVE TO FUCKING REALISE, that they will make mistakes.”

    +1. Guys like me are willing to learn Game but we need to be allowed to make mistakes. Meet us halfway, ladies, or enjoy your cats.

  202. thedeti says:

    A big part of what’s going on here is women wanting to have it both ways. They want all the freedom of sleeping with hot attractive men. At the same time they want the patriarchal protections of laws, social sanction, and men with guns – all to keep away from them the evil, the inauthentic, the unattractive, the weird and the awkward.

    I’m reminded of Dalrock’s roller coaster analogy, in which he pointedly says women want danger and intrigue, but they want safety mechanisms and cops stationed on every sidewalk to make the unsafe, safe.

    They want it to FEEL unsafe, but they want it to BE safe. And they want the unsafe made safe.

  203. Gunner,

    +1. Guys like me are willing to learn Game but we need to be allowed to make mistakes. Meet us halfway, ladies, or enjoy your cats.

    Of course. You are allowed to make mistakes. We all are. But that is not the problem here.

    The fact that the tall asianed male tried to use Game and made mistakes is not the problem here. It is WHERE he approached these women that is the problem. He should not have approached them there. You guys are all missing that.

    Go where the women are approachable. Seriously, take a vacation where you can meet women socially. Do not approach women in church Gunner, they are not approachable there. I know you are a good Christian, but that doesn’t change the fact that church is not the place for you to practice your “Game.”

  204. thedeti says:

    IBB:

    I’ll say this to make my points and not to attempt to change your mind, because I’d guess your mind is already made up.

    The Tom Brady/Brad Pitt comparison is apt, and you know it (or at least you should know it). Everyone here knows that an approach by an objectively attractive man who knows what he’s doing is more likely to succeed, or at least not result in a “sex harassment” charge or police involvement. Tom Brady is a universally, objectively attractive, man. So is Brad Pitt. Just as Catherine Zeta Jones, Gisele Bundchen, and Megan Fox are universally, objectively attractive, women. Let’s not ignore what everyone with two eyes can see, shall we?

    That’s why the Tom Brady SNL skit is so funny. Everyone knows that Tom Brady isn’t “creepy” even when he does the exact same things and says the exact same words in the exact same locations as the unattractive man. Everyone’s been there, everyone’s seen it. Everyone’s been on the giving and receiving end of it. So don’t tell me that the attractive/unattractive dichotomy isn’t at work here, because we all know it is. You’re just wrong about this, IBB. Every man here can see that skit and know exactly the point being made. I don’t care if it sounds “envious”. It’s TRUE, and that’s the point.

  205. thedeti,

    They want it to FEEL unsafe, but they want it to BE safe. And they want the unsafe made safe.

    Yes, to all of this. That is why women love on-line dating. They love it. That is why women love night clubs (crawling with bouncers.) That is why women love going on cruise ship with their girlfriends (keeps all the unemployed loser riff-raff away from them.) If you want to be included, you need to go where women are safe but FEEL unsafe. Then you can practice your “Game.”

  206. thedeti says:

    “It is WHERE he approached these women that is the problem. He should not have approached them there. You guys are all missing that.”

    Oh, bullshit. It’s not about the locales of the approaches. It’s about the attractiveness and skill of the men doing the approaches. (It’s also about where that woman is in her life and how she feels at the time – about herself, about her life, about many other things; but that’s a bit beside the point.) Women are approachable by attractive men everywhere – in class, at work, at church, on the street. I’ve met women doing plays, in performing groups, in a class we took together, at a party, through other friends, on the quad while in school (though, granted, this last one was uncommon). Have you never been to college?

  207. thedeti,

    The Tom Brady/Brad Pitt comparison is apt, and you know it (or at least you should know it). Everyone here knows that an approach by an objectively attractive man who knows what he’s doing is more likely to succeed, or at least not result in a “sex harassment” charge or police involvement. Tom Brady is a universally, objectively attractive, man. So is Brad Pitt. Just as Catherine Zeta Jones, Gisele Bundchen, and Megan Fox are universally, objectively attractive, women. Let’s not ignore what everyone with two eyes can see, shall we?

    That’s why the Tom Brady SNL skit is so funny. Everyone knows that Tom Brady isn’t “creepy” even when he does the exact same things and says the exact same words in the exact same locations as the unattractive man.

    The attractive/unattractive dichotomy is at work. So what? Stop caring that Tom Brady was born lucky. Stop it. THAT is unattractive to women. Stop harping on the fact (and it is a fact) that those two girls would not have called the police. I get it. And I agree with you. If Tom brady had done what the tall Asian male did, they would have wet themselves in joy.

    Time to move on thedeti. Harping on this difference (over and over) will gain men in the manosphere, nothing. Yes there is a difference. Tom Brady is the top 1% of the top 1% of the top 1% of all men on this planet. Yes, he is one-in-a-million. He is (by far) the best NFL player in the entire history of the game with model good looks. The greatest supermodel in the world counts her lucky stars every night that she is probably the only one he is f-cking. And he traded in Bridget Moynihan (a clear 10 in my book) for Giselle. He can get away with that. None of us here can.

    I’m trying to help. The problem here is that this guy approached women in an enivornment in which they were not approachable. If he wants to try GAME on them, try it with the on-line dating or the 7-minute-date thingies or the dating service or whatever. Use you head. Don’t be stupid. And don’t be pissed off that what happened to him would never happen to Tom Brady.

    Seriously, all of you, stop. I get it. The beautiful guys get away with everything. Now, you are not beautiful so move on…. you will have it much harder in life.

  208. Oh shut it IBB, it’s not that he is lucky at being born attractive. It’s that the criminal element isn’t the ‘act’ but whether the guy is attractive or not. Which is both morally and legally wrong.

  209. thedeti,

    Oh, bullshit. It’s not about the locales of the approaches.

    If you aren’t Tom Brady, then yes it is about the locales of the approaches.

    Tom Brady is a 10. You are right, no woman would ever go to the police if she was approached by the QB/QT. And it doesn’t matter where he approaches them. They love him. They have always loved him. Man women would cheat on their husbands with him if given a chance. He has that power.

    But that doesn’t mean that a goofy unattractive loser is going to get the police after him if he tries on-line dating or the 7-minute-date thingie. In those environments for approach, the worst he will get is the nuclear rejection. And then he just moves on to the next woman. No muss, no fuss.

    Dont worry about where the super attractive men approach women. If you were in that category, you certainly wouldn’t be bitching about what they can and can’t do, here. Don’t concern yourself with their advantages in life. Do what you can to overcome your disadvantages.

    And yes I have been to college. I am a graduate.

  210. thedeti says:

    IBB:

    It’s not about being “pissed off” that attractive men can get away with things an unattractive man cannot.

    It’s about OBSERVING the fact that attractive men can get away with things an unattractive man cannot. It’s also about OBSERVING what attractive men are and do, so as to learn, and improve. If a man wants to be attractive or improve his attractiveness, then he should observe what attractive men are and do, and emulate them. He should also observe the different social dynamics regarding attractive and unattractive men.

    For some reason, you read this as being “pissed off” about it. Uh, no, it’s talking about it. It’s observing the phenomenon. It’s examining the phenomenon and asking “what can be learned from this? What can be known? What can be identified? How can we avoid mistakes that the unattractive man makes?”

    I’m coming around to the idea that all this social learning that men do from other men should take place in private, away from the eyes and ears of women, because of this shaming that occurs. “Jealousy! Envy! Loser!”

  211. fh,

    Oh shut it IBB…

    I’m trying to help. If my help is not wanted or appreciated… best of luck gentlemen.

  212. thedeti,

    It’s not about being “pissed off” that attractive men can get away with things an unattractive man cannot.

    It’s about OBSERVING the fact that attractive men can get away with things an unattractive man cannot. It’s also about OBSERVING what attractive men are and do, so as to learn, and improve.

    Okay, I agree with that. Observe all you want. That is how you learn. I am with you on that.

    But complaining about how fortunate great looking guys have it (and maybe you weren’t do this, but others were) will get you nowhere.

  213. It’s not help when you quite clearly are stating that people should just keep quiet about a social observable phenomena that explains the scenario talked about. The only difference is the attractiveness of a man. In simple terms, what these women wanted was to ban unattractiveness or at least banish it from their sight.

    Now, once we understand that, the clear intent of why they called the police comes into focus.

  214. thedeti,

    I’m coming around to the idea that all this social learning that men do from other men should take place in private, away from the eyes and ears of women, because of this shaming that occurs. “Jealousy! Envy! Loser!”

    Yes it should.

    I used to play Axis & Allies every Friday night before I went to a social club. There were no women allowed anywhere near any of our friends when we played Axis & Allies because we didn’t want them to think we were losers. Women don’t understand men (and their competitive nature) at all.

  215. thedeti says:

    “But complaining about how fortunate great looking guys have it (and maybe you weren’t do this, but others were) will get you nowhere.”

    It’s not about “complaining” about how easy it is for great looking guys. It’s not “complaining” about how fortunate they are to be great looking.

    It’s simply observing that it is easier for great looking guys. Because it IS easier for great looking guys. This is simply observable fact. It’s OBSERVING that great looking guys are fortunate. Because they ARE fortunate. They’re fortunate, because their great looks make social interactions and approaching women easier. They’re fortunate, because their great looks lead to earlier success in approaching women, which in turn leads to greater confidence earlier on, which in turn leads to having things easier in life as they age. Jobs come easier to great looking guys. People find it easier to like them and approach them. Attractive men are viewed as more credible, more believable, more trustworthy, and more competent.

    It’s not a bitchfest. It’s simply noticing these facts, and discerning what can be learned from them, which seems to be:

    Be handsome.

    Be attractive.

    Don’t be unattractive.

  216. thedeti says:

    Tall Asian Dude’s only “crime” was being unattractive while attempting to run day Game. His only offense was hamhandedly trying to approach women in public, and doing a crappy job of it.

  217. theasdgamer says:

    @ deti

    There’s another factor to consider from the women’s perspective. Let’s say that the woman isn’t attracted initially to a man, but she doesn’t want to put him off totally since her evaluation may change over time, especially if preselection kicks in. She does better to reject him gently, yet firmly, putting the onus on herself, as in, “Not the right time for me”, “I’m not ready”, etc.

    Field experience: In the past, I’ve been rejected, then from minutes or months later in my social circle women want me to approach again to ask them to dance. Sometimes a woman will approach me after initially rejecting me. This isn’t all that uncommon for me.

    So, from field experience, women need to be careful how they reject a man. Sometimes he’ll seem too hot for them to handle, so they’ll disqualify themselves. Then later, they may reevaluate if they can talk themselves into giving it a go.

  218. theasdgamer says:

    @ IBB

    But complaining about how fortunate great looking guys have it

    It’s not about looks. Attractiveness comes primarily from confidence. Looks help initially, then women look for social skills and confidence and ignore looks.

  219. theasdgamer says:

    @ IBB wife

    It is WHERE he approached these women that is the problem. He should not have approached them there. You guys are all missing that.

    Nope, it’s that he approached them as if he were in a night club. I’ve approached plenty of women during the day.

    Go where the women are approachable.

    A woman can be approached anywhere, but consideration must be taken of how to approach a woman in day locales. You got this all wrong.

    Seriously, take a vacation where you can meet women socially.

    Seriously, woman, take a permanent vacation from commenting on this blog.

    Do not approach women in church Gunner, they are not approachable there.

    You are delirious.

    I know you are a good Christian, but that doesn’t change the fact that church is not the place for you to practice your “Game.”

    Get back on your meds.

  220. theasdgamer says:

    To those of you bitching that attractive guys get away with what would be misdemeanor assault for an unattractive guy–suck it up. Grow some balls. Seriously, you’re acting like children.

  221. theasdgamer says:

    @ deti

    Tall Asian Dude’s only “crime” was being unattractive while attempting to run day Game.

    Nope, his mistake was running Night game in a Day locale. He didn’t understand game and broke the law as a result.

  222. Spacetraveller says:

    I am not an advocate of the feminine ‘feels uncomfortable therefore the whole world must pay’ thing. Neither am I an advocate of falsely accusing a man.
    If this man really did not attempt to restrain the women in any way, then I concede that I am completely wrong, yes.

    But ‘block their path’ conjures an image of him using his body (eg. his torso) to prevent them from going where they want to go…something that (if indeed these women were just going about their business) is unwarranted and is rather grave from a social standpoint. How would YOU react when someone does this to you when you are just going about your daily business?

    Perhaps my mental imagery of the situation is holding me back in this argument. If that’s the case, then I agree with anyone who argues against me. IT Lady, if you are indeed correct that they were in no danger, then I agree with you. No problem. Understand that if anyone ‘blocks my path’, such that I am unable to get away, it doesn’t matter if it is a man or a (big) woman (and it would really need to be a BIG woman because I am 6 feet tall myself), I would consider myself in a precarious situation – at least temporarily, until I can figure out how to beat the situation. This is why we have ‘fight or flight’ adrenaline mechanisms, for exactly these types of situations.

    If however, my mental image of the scene as I present it to you is actually what happened, then I am afraid I shall stand on my high ground on this one.

    With this in mind, I really hope someone will say, ‘Well, ST, your mental image is way off the mark, this is not what happened. He just said ‘hello’, touched one girl’s hand, no more than this, so calm down, breathe easy and relax.”🙂

    In which case I shall, and we can debate something else that is wrong with society.😛

    I am not American, so perhaps I am grossly informed about this: are Asian men (even tall ones) THAT unattractive? I would have thought this guy, being tall, IS attractive. It was his lack of social boundaries that caused the problem, not that he was unattractive.
    In related news I always thought Rodger Elliott was goodlooking too: And he wasn’t THAT short, I have seen a picture of him standing next to his father – they were almost the same height!
    Again, it was his social ineptitude that caused his downfall. He really needed someone to teach him the tricks of getting female attention. (Same as some unattractive girls have to learn a thing or two from older, wiser women about attracting men). Shame he never got it. THIS guy we are talking about, got it, albeit in unpleasant circumstances…

    I notice something – when some women are losing an argument, they resort to ‘shaming language’. When some men are losing the argument, they resort to obscenities/foul language. Neither is cool, but again, each to his own.

  223. Mark says:

    @ST

    “”I am not American”‘…………..Canadian? I assume.

  224. To those of you bitching that attractive guys get away with what would be misdemeanor assault for an unattractive guy–suck it up. Grow some balls. Seriously, you’re acting like children.

    To those of you bitching that women can get away with what would be murder for a man to do-suck it up. Grow some balls. Seriously, you’re acting like children.

    Laws, rules and all manner of legal issues with legal and physical detainment ramifications, need to be applied fairly to all and sundry. Good looks, sex, race and all other issues one is born with, should not factor in at all.

  225. I notice something – when some women are losing an argument, they resort to ‘shaming language’. When some men are losing the argument, they resort to obscenities/foul language. Neither is cool, but again, each to his own.

    Talk about shaming, listen, your argument doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, at all. These women were not harmed, they were not in harm’s way, you could neither prove they were harmed and can only dish out misconstrued meanings of words in an article to base your reasoning on.

    Once more, for the back seats, you do not call police to interfere with the interactions between men and women, unless you want to criminalise them. Got it? Good. Now… shut up!

  226. Lyn87 says:

    One of the IBB’s wrote this to GunnerQ,

    Do not approach women in church Gunner, they are not approachable there. I know you are a good Christian, but that doesn’t change the fact that church is not the place for you to practice your “Game.”

    I would have thought that church was about the best place of all for a Christian guy to meet Christian women, but IBB confidently proclaims a “better” idea: picking up drunk sluts on vacation:

    You need to go where the single women are horny, plentiful (they outnumber the horny guys), and they DON’T already know you. Get a passport if you don’t already have one. Schedule a vacation and book a cruise. Right now. Do it. Find the cheapest Caribbean cruise that offers passage to singles and get a cheapie single cabin.

    So a Christian guy like Gunner would like to meet suitable women, and IBB’s solution is to avoid the ones in churches and go for horny women on “singles” vacations in the tropics.

    I’ve read and heard a lot of bad counsel in my life – but that is among the top ten stupidest pieces of dating advice I’ve ever encountered.

  227. theasdgamer says:

    Laws, rules and all manner of legal issues with legal and physical detainment ramifications, need to be applied fairly to all and sundry. Good looks, sex, race and all other issues one is born with, should not factor in at all.

    The point about assault is subtle. You aren’t getting it. The laws about assault are based on the feelings of the victim. You might not like the laws, but that doesn’t change them. Attractive men tend not to assault women because the women don’t feel threatened. Unattractive men tend to assault women because the women do feel threatened. Does that help?

  228. Lyn87 says:

    All this talk about legalities is making my head spin. The simple fact is that the legal definition of assault varies widely by jurisdiction. Obviously the guy didn’t commit assault as it is defined in that jurisdiction or the cops would have arrested him rather than saying, essentially, “These girls made a mountain out of a molehill,” which is what they did.

    In many jurisdictions the same action can be either criminal or not based on irrelevant factors. For example, if you so much as touch a cop you may well be charged with a serious crime in some jurisdictions, even if the cop is assaulting you at the time. Just a few weeks ago I overheard a couple of clients talking amongst themselves – two of them had been cops, and one was relating a story about a guy in the back seat of his cruiser who he said was bumping his seat with his foot. He pulled the cruiser over and pulled out the guy (in handcuffs) and beat him up. He was proud of himself for having done that, and expressed regret that “You can’t get away with that anymore.”

    It seems to me that feminists want to give women the same sort of immunity that crooked cops (that may be a redundancy) demand for themselves – the right to do whatever they want to whoever they want, with no responsibility for their own behavior, but the authority to jail anyone who make them feel the slightest bit uncomfortable. I’ve told cops I know that if they are in a constant state of fear they should look for another line of work – cowardly and armed is a bad combination, especially for people with broad legal immunity. I’ll say the same to women – if you want to have the rights of adult men you need to stop pole-vaulting over mouse turds and learn to deal with normal social interaction like an adult. At the very least, if women are to be taken seriously when they wonder, “Where have all the Good Men Gone?,” they need to stop over-reacting every time a guy makes an unsuccessful approach.

  229. No, criminal law is not based on subjective feelings, that’s bogus. You cannot have a legal framework that makes an act by one person illegal and not by another person. Sure, feminists have been trying, and they probably will eventually get their wish. However, their wish will come with a price.

    You’re wrong, simple as that.

  230. No, criminal law is not based on subjective feelings, that’s bogus. You cannot have a legal framework that makes an act by one person illegal and not by another person. Sure, feminists have been trying, and they probably will eventually get their wish. However, their wish will come with a price.

    No criminal law is based on subjective feelings.

    However, whether or not someone wants to press criminal charges against another IS based on subjective feelings.

  231. Of course, one should realise that the law on paper is rarely practiced like that in the real world. However, if you tell a man that punishment will be meted on him but not on the man next to him, who committed the exact same offense but due to some born with quality – he gets off… you will have a problem. And rightly so, there is no sucking that up. It’s right and proper to bring it to light, all the time and in the face of the unrighteous so that they be made witnesses of an innocent so judged and be punished for it.

  232. theasdgamer says:

    @ feministhater

    No, criminal law is not based on subjective feelings, that’s bogus….You’re wrong, simple as that.

    thedeti says, “It depends on the state, but “assault” is usually defined as “Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. No intent to cause physical injury needs to exist, and no physical injury needs to result.”

    reasonable apprehension=subjective feelings

    Feministhater, you’re delusional, simple as that.

  233. Lyn87,

    So a Christian guy like Gunner would like to meet suitable women, and IBB’s solution is to avoid the ones in churches and go for horny women on “singles” vacations in the tropics.

    I’ve read and heard a lot of bad counsel in my life – but that is among the top ten stupidest pieces of dating advice I’ve ever encountered.

    I wasn’t aware that Gunner was a Christian, nor was I aware what he was willing to do or not do to meet women. I can’t keep everyone straight here. I’m sorry, it is just not that important enough to me to remember the motives and mannerisms of every single person who posts here. I have a life.

    That said, I don’t think I’ve ever known anyone to meet anyone romantically at church. It just doesn’t workout that well, at least not in my experience. The women who typically do want to meet men in church, are not the types of women I think the majority of the posters here are interested in. I even wrote an article about it on my own blog.

    http://innocentbystandersblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/should-christians-use-a-church-congregation-solely-as-a-place-to-meet-and-marry/

  234. fh,

    However, if you tell a man that punishment will be meted on him but not on the man next to him, who committed the exact same offense but due to some born with quality – he gets off… you will have a problem.

    They have never said that. They don’t mete punishment one on but not the other. The victim (subjectively) decides if he (or she) is to press criminal charges vs one but NOT the other. That is how punishment is “meted”. It is not up to “they.”

  235. Lyn87 says:

    Re; “Reasonable apprehension”

    That’s part of the problem – Western jurisprudence used to have* something called the “reasonable man standard.” The basic idea is that common sense should apply to the law, rather than building cases on extremes. But thanks to years of liberalism in general and feminism in particular, common sense is no longer common, particularly among women, and double-particularly among young women.

    So we are often left with the “unreasonable woman standard” instead. When arrests are made, suits are filed, and charges are levied on the new “standard” is where we run into problems.

    * I wrote “used to have” deliberately, because although we retain the “reasonable person standard” in law, feminists demand that we ignore it whenever a woman is uncomfortable… whether that is a rational response or not.

  236. Well, that sums it up I guess, if approaching a women can cause her to feel “offensive contact,” you’re done for.

    Haha. You guys enjoy trying to find out how to get passed that one. Damn, I love it when you prove a case for me..

  237. IT Lady says:

    Spacetraveller, If a seemingly awkward person “blocks someone’s path” then the proper response should be reporting them to authorities or inducing a fight or flight response? Stopping people is annoying and often rude, sure, but happens all the time. People ask for directions or stop for small talk. Strangers comment on looks, outfits, chit chat with other people all the time. Sometimes people are just awkward, that’s not a crime. A lot creepy behaviors, while outside social standards, are not illegal.

    The man did not harm the woman or else he’d be in legal trouble now. It was not reported that there were any threats or vulgarity involved, just that he stopped two women for unwanted conversation. “Blocking path” is vague; was there no way of just walking around him or go the opposite direction away from him? It sounds like since the women walked away without a scene, he stepped in front of them, which could be described as a block, but not one that prevented leaving. Some kind of touch was involved, if it wasn’t a touch that hurt or restrained the woman, then there was no harm done, just weirdness. If he had grabbed a woman so that she had to fend the man off, then he’d be in trouble for that.

    Regardless, if just being awkwardly approached tripped a fight or flight response because they felt danger, why would some not yell, run away, or if restrained attempt to fight off the attacker? Not just walk away then go off and complain to authorities later.

  238. Please guys, try digging yourselves further into a grave. Anything can be deemed offensive to any person. However, the intent of the law is not to criminalise socially awkward people who may have overstepped a boundary. It’s intent is to protect people from actual harm. If it is used badly, as this case above shows, it will lose its efficacy and people won’t respect it.

    Anyways, you can all enjoy excreting yourselves out of that conundrum.

  239. fh,

    Well, that sums it up I guess, if approaching a women can cause her to feel “offensive contact,” you’re done for.

    Not really. In order for that “offensive contact” that she is feeling to cause you any jeapordy/harm, she is still going to need to get a criminal conviction. No matter what you or I or any of us say here about this tall asian male, its unlikely he was ever in any real jeapordy as it is highly unlikely he would have been convicted of… anything.

    Look at what is happening with Jameis Winston right now. He is still under the scrutiny of having sex with that FSU co-ed who now (almost 20 months later) claims she was raped. She has been making that claim for over a year. And yet (even after all her statements to police and the DA) no charges have filed against Winston. He was never arrested, not even questioned. Nothing. And that is because the DA is smart enough to know that this rape/consentual-sex was “he-said/she-said” and knows that he will never get an actual conviction.

    Remember fh, people like you sit on juries. So long as there is one person (out of twelve) such as yourself who is not immersed in this feminist imperative (who can see something as harmless or even consentual), then men really aren’t truly “done for.” Its not as bad as you say.

  240. Lyn87 says:

    Mr and MRS IBB,

    We’re all used to you contradicting yourself in the same threads – that’s the main reason most of us think there are two of you using that screen name.

    At November 17, 2014 at 10:47 am one of you wrote, “Do not approach women in church Gunner, they are not approachable there. I know you are a good Christian

    And when I called you on the bad advice you gave him, the other one responded at November 17, 2014 at 1:55 pm, “I wasn’t aware that Gunner was a Christian

    So you went from KNOWING that GunnerQ was a Christian (your words, not mine), to claiming IGNORANCE of his religion about four hours later. This is the second time in the past couple of weeks that I have shown you directly contradicting yourself from one post to another in the same conversation. Are you still going to claim that only only one person is posting as IBB?

  241. IBB, you don’t get the issue. It’s not that this guy did not have trouble with the law. The police did indeed act correctly given the circumstances. It’s the people here who think this was actually assault and required the police intervention that the women used. That’s the issue, not what actually happened after the case.

    Whether a guy doesn’t get found guilty for assault or whatever, doesn’t diminish the fact that he was accused and accosted by Police Officers for being socially awkward. That is the principle here, that a bad approach can get a man in trouble with the law.

  242. Lyn87,

    We’re all used to you contradicting yourself in the same threads – that’s the main reason most of us think there are two of you using that screen name.

    At November 17, 2014 at 10:47 am one of you wrote, “Do not approach women in church Gunner, they are not approachable there. I know you are a good Christian…”

    And when I called you on the bad advice you gave him, the other one responded at November 17, 2014 at 1:55 pm, “I wasn’t aware that Gunner was a Christian…”

    So you went from KNOWING that GunnerQ was a Christian (your words, not mine), to claiming IGNORANCE of his religion about four hours later.

    Yeah, why don’t you do something meaningful go and check the date-timestamp on my initial post recommending Gunner go on the cruise, check the date-timestamp of his response back to me telling me that he was Christian, and then get back to us? I’ll give you a hint, they were both before today….

  243. Which is exactly what I think Dalrock meant with his heading. A criminal lack of game?

    If you don’t have the correct game and know how to use it, you can land yourself in trouble. Therefore, either learn game and accept the chance you might get in trouble or don’t approach women at all.

  244. theasdgamer says:

    Well, that sums it up I guess, if approaching a women can cause her to feel “offensive contact,” you’re done for.

    No, an attempt to touch must be made. An approach itself isn’t criminal.

  245. mikediver5 says:

    To all the women (and even the few men) that insist that his “blocking her path” constituted assault, let me say that if so then I am assaulted by women almost every day of my life. Women in the west assume that every man will step aside and yield to them. Some (which are either very common or I just have bad luck) push the envelope to force the man to go way out of his way. This is dominance behavior not common courtesy denied.

    I work in a downtown area. I walk on crowded sidewalks and in crowded hallways every day, five days a week. There is not one day of those that some woman, or group of women, does not block my path. Should I call the police and demand their arrest? I have even been standing motionless to the side of a hallway and have women fail to alter their path to avoid me. They walk right up to me and then stare at me with very challenging looks demanding that I move to not “block their path.” Am I subject to arrest for assaulting them by standing in a hallway? This has become so common that I have started to just tell them to go around me. That I have to tell them that says volumes about the attitude of the average woman in the west these days. When two men are on collision courses, in the hallways or on the sidewalks, they both make minor adjustments and pass with little interference. I have observed that this seldom happens between me and women. What has been the experience of other men on this board?

    BTW I am old, large, have a heart condition, and have severe arthritis in both knees. I do not move quickly, so I may get more than my share of these rude interactions. The analogy of the black man under slavery or Jim Crow with white women and all men with all women today is very apt. I will be damned before I will start stepping into the street to let any woman pass on the sidewalk. What ever happened to equality?
    To all the women (and even the few men) that insist that his “blocking her path” consitituted

  246. Whether a guy doesn’t get found guilty for assault or whatever, doesn’t diminish the fact that he was accused and accosted by Police Officers for being socially awkward. That is the principle here, that a bad approach can get a man in trouble with the law.

    I get it. And it sucks. And it is probably a good reason why men should avoid women altogether. You expect moral agency where there isn’t any.

    Let me confess something here and maybe you’ll be a little sympathetic. My parents threw me a big graduation party when earned my bachelor’s degree in Computer Science. They were very proud of me, invited all my close friends…. and my then BPD, girlfriend. I had no idea what BPD was or really anything about mental health conditions, not as much as you and I know now. But then all I knew was that I was in love and I thought I could put up with whatever insanity she put me through. How wrong I was.

    Long story short, my BPD-gf simply couldn’t handle “people” for very long. She would have to go into the house and insist that I go with her to keep her company because she wasn’t feeling “secure” around my friends, didn’t feel “secure” taking care of herself at my party and I had to make my graduation party all about “her.” She could not give me one day to myself. I had had enough. I told her (point blank) that she had two choices, she could either enjoy herself and enjoy the party, or go home and I never want to see her again. She proceeded to put on a good face for a couple more hours until she broke down again in a fit of sociopathic rage, and I told her to get out of my house. She got in her car and drove off. The next day, I was visited by two police offices with a 209-A restraining order (she got that on an emergency basis from a judge.) She lied to a judge, basically. Had to lie in order to get him to sign it. When I went to court and saw her a few weeks later, the judge vacated the order and she went screaming out of courtroom NOT because she was afraid of me (she wasn’t) but because for the first time in her life, people in authority (who she believed were employed by government ONLY to empower her feminist behavior) realized she was a liar. In her mind, she loses. Everything. I was afraid at that moment that she might try to kill herself.

    Point is this: those two cops giving me that bogus order were just doing their job. I met them later and talked to the two of them about it (years later) and they admitted they knew nothing about me or her or the situation. And even if they did know something about the situation (her lies) it doesn’t matter, they were not permitted to think. They could ONLY give me the order and threaten me with arrest if I contacted her, not decide amongst themselves if that is the right thing to do. That was the law they had to enforce, right or wrong. In the end, right prevailed because judges see this shit every day and they know when a woman is lying, if she is being abused or not. So I still have faith in the system. And that tall asian dude, those cops probably didn’t think what he did was a big deal (certainly far less than what happened to me) but they had to do “something” because that is their job. Still, he was never really in any danger of being convicted of anything.

  247. Lyn87 says:

    Smeagol/Gollum IBB,

    This is getting tedious. There is no need for me to look up the date-stamps… I already put the relevant date-stamps in my post so everyone could see you contradicting yourself in your own words without having to take my word for it.

    I’m not trying to convince you to stop tag-teaming the same screen name (if there are two of you), or identify which persona you’re using when you post (if there is only one of you) – you won’t admit to doing so even when you are caught red-handed time and time again… I’m just pointing it out so other readers (particularly new ones) will realize that when they see a post that starts with:

    innocentbystanderboston says:

    that there are two of you: either a husband-wife duo or a single writer speaking through two different and contradictory personas.

    You actually say some things worth being heard when you are writing as MR IBB / Smeagol – your incessant contradictions detract from those.

  248. Spacetraveller says:

    Mark,

    No I am not Canadian.

    IT Lady,
    ‘Blocking her path’…I imagine a ‘basketball-type’ blocking.
    When someone asks another for directions, there is no need to ‘block their path’, i.e. stand in front of them and prevent them from continuing on their journey.
    I do agree that it is not assault, however, but it is socially still not acceptable, under any circumstances.
    The cops did right by not blowing this out of proportion.
    Did the women say they were assaulted? If yes, then I agree they would be wrong about that.
    And also, unless it was a narrow alleyway, it would have been possible to circumnavigate the man. Again, we don’t know…
    This case is indeed vague, and I haven’t read the article so I am also under-informed to some degree (certainly less-informed than most other commenters).
    To recap:
    Touch on arm, ‘hey, I wanna talk to you’=no harm done.
    Basketball-type blocking her path such taht she is cornered=social boundary crossed, but not a crime that warrants a criminal punishment of any sort.
    The devil is in the detail, which we don’t have.
    One thing you and I will agree on is that indeed it is ‘vague’.

    Not every case of this nature is ‘open and shut’. Social decorum on the part of both men and women matter. In this case, whilst it wasn’t a crime, this man did mess up. No problem, he will get up and do more approaches in his lifetime, starting tomorrow.
    No-one sent him to jail because he didn’t deserve that. But a stern ‘talking to’ by an ?older/wiser man (shame it had to be a cop, but he brought this on himself, I have to say) does not mean his life is ruined.
    Spare a thought for those men whose lives are actually ruined by false (and serious) charges against them.
    Was this man charged with anything? No.
    Is he on some ‘register’? No.
    Is he awaiting trial for something? No.

    “Here’s how to do it better”, was the outcome for him.
    Next time, hopefully he gets it right without upsetting his target audience (girls).
    Good for him.

  249. Lyn87,

    This is getting tedious. There is no need for me to look up the date-stamps… I already put the relevant date-stamps in my post so everyone could see you contradicting yourself in your own words without having to take my word for it.

    You made a mistake. Go back and re-read what I said to you. You are not thinking things through.

    Or maybe you should just do to me what I have done to AR? It might save you the mental anguish you are now putting yourself thought.

  250. Random Angeleno says:

    Regarding the advice for Christian men to meet Christian women in church, that is really poor advice based on my experience. I realize that anecdote isn’t data, but my experience with women in churches I’ve attended is that I’m invisible even when I’m trying to be visible. Just something about being there that lumps me in with all their stereotypes of nobodies they don’t want to be associated with. I’ve long since stopped shaking my head over it, I just move on to the dance floor or some other non-church venue where I do better.

    Regarding the advice to go on a cruise, even a singles cruise, I think that is poor advice as well. You’re telling this fellow to spend money up front. Too much money up front for such an uncertain outcome before he has himself sorted out. Got to start with less ambitious (and less expensive) ventures. Like a little harmless don’t-care-about-outcomes flirting with that barista or store cashier.

  251. Boxer says:

    Dear Marcus:

    The Duggar thread would be a great place to have fun with the “good-cop bad-cop” routine (leave a comment on my blog if you’re interested — the comments are never made public). I have one or two accounts laying around ready in case of something interesting coming along.

    Your offer is both gracious and tempting. As a rule, I don’t troll any forum after being asked to leave. I do support the brothers who are over there now, spreading the good word.

    Blue Eyed Lady and Xantippe – peas in a pod… A couple of feminist kooks passing themselves off as Catholics. May they continue to dance for our amusement.

    Boxer

  252. Lyn87 says:

    Gollum,

    No mental anguish here, I’m just pointing out to newcomers that you’re not what you present yourself to be, and that you give some spectacularly bad advice between bouts of clarity and absurdity. And if you have a point about why the fact that you directly contradict yourself all the time actually means that you don’t contradict yourself all the time, why not just make your point rather than pretending that somewhere over the rainbow you said something that negates the negation of your latest negation?

  253. Lyn87 says:

    RA,

    Gollum’s advice to Christian men was to go in search of venues filled with horny single women far from home. If a man is looking for a wife, that is terrible advice. Metaphorically speaking, you won’t find a housewife in a whorehouse. Church is one of the few places he can go where the odds are not completely skewed toward skanks.

    I understand your point about churches not being ideal… really, I do. I didn’t meet my wife in church, either, but I did meet her in a Christian venue – a Christian dating service. Theologically conservative denominational and non-denominational churches have skanks, too, but almost every girl worth having goes to such a church. One can widen the search beyond one’s immediate congregation with the church as the base from which one operates… people know other people of similar persuasion, and sometimes there are events that bring multiple congregations together. And of course there are Christian dating services as well.

    I downed my share of brews in clubs when I was single, and I met some women, but I never met one I wanted to date, much less get serious about. Such places are deserts for suitable women. Churches usually have their problems, but if you want to catch a fish you have to leave the desert and go where the fish are.

  254. patrickg says:

    It is a little odd to me, to hear people criticizing the cops for doing, what they should be doing – not being “law enforcement officers” but instead “keeping the peace” as peace officers, among people. That they gave the guy a bit of advice, was proper – telling him how to stay out of trouble without going “zero tolerance” on him. (assuming it was good advice).

  255. theasdgamer says:

    @ Lyn87

    Metaphorically speaking, you won’t find a housewife in a whorehouse. Church is one of the few places he can go where the odds are not completely skewed toward skanks.

    You can find suitable women for wives in dance venues on occasion. These venues will typically transition from a dancing social circle to a meat market at a particular hour, so come early and pay attention to the shift change.

  256. theasdgamer says:

    @ angeleno

    Regarding the advice for Christian men to meet Christian women in church, that is really poor advice based on my experience.

    It’s quite possible to meet Christian women through church as part of your social circle–not so much doing it yourself via the singles groups. More attractive women avoid those groups, generally. However, married friends in church can be part of your search. I’ve known several church couples who met through church.

  257. Spacetraveller says:

    Patrickg,

    “It is a little odd to me, to hear people criticizing the cops for doing, what they should be doing – not being “law enforcement officers” but instead “keeping the peace” as peace officers, among people. That they gave the guy a bit of advice, was proper – telling him how to stay out of trouble without going “zero tolerance” on him. (assuming it was good advice).”

    You have hit the nail on the head, Sir.

    On (self-) reflection, I realise now, that coming from a British culture where one’s personal space is obsessively guarded, (and by the way, Swiss Germans are exactly the same, so I never seem to escape this ‘national disease’ :-)), I fail to look past ‘blocking their path’ because to *me* it is actually a grave social ‘no-no’, and in this case presented by Dalrock, it is THIS that is the bigger problem, and not that he was approaching women (which he is of course entitled to do – no-one is arguing against this natural phenomenon, at least – not I).
    And there are actually laws to reflect this cultural idiosyncracy in Britain, which I have grown up with, and people generally follow, hence my previous assertion that I have been ‘lucky’.
    I have been to America (where I imagine the majority of commenters here hail from), and I think it is fair to say that Americans are much more ‘effusive’, and ‘open’ than Brits, who are known to be extremely reserved, so we may be coming from ‘apples and oranges’ in terms of social perspective on this case. We are culturally very different, so it is possible that what you see as ‘normal’, I see as ‘fight or flight’.
    *I hereby disqualify myself from this debate on the grounds of ‘mutually exclusive cultural perspectives’.*🙂

    ‘Breaching the peace’ is indeed a law in Britain, and it caters for exactly this sort of infringement of one’s personal space. I do not know if it exists in the state in America where this incident took place…

    So it is the case that I don’t see this incident as a *sexual* infringement, (as I think is implied in criticisms against me on this case) but rather an infringement of personal space, which, for a Brit like me, is a serious matter, hence my inability to get past this point of ‘blocking their path’. I am well and truly stuck on this issue, so much so, I cannot see beyond it. Literally.
    I am so glad for this young man that this didn’t happen in Britain – because he would have been ‘done’ for ‘breaching the peace’…which is bad enough, but certainly not justifiable to label it a ‘sex crime’, as we all agree, I hope.

    I am certainly influenced by my prejudices, in this discussion, mea culpa.

    And now I think: but what about British Game Practitioners? How do they do ‘kino’?
    I think they tailor their ‘kino’ techniques to their environment very well, because they have to – they need to be clever about this, and they mostly are. People like ‘Krauser’ either target non-Brits, or if they go after British women, they are careful not to overstep the boundaries, because they are aware of this quirk of British life.

    I am glad I have been able to correctly ‘diagnose’ my own hang-ups about this case. I blame my Britishness. LOL.
    (Where are the British lawyers like Opus when you need them?).

  258. Chairman Meow says:

    “Update: UW Police Services (UWPS) confirmed that the two incidents involving a tall, Asian, male suspect who approached two female students on campus were cases of an individual being “socially awkward.””

    There’s always been racism against Asians in the US. We As-Am men deal with it almost every day.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s