Dating coach banned from several countries after internet feminist outrage over misogynist vid

[Antischism]

There's a difference between being an $#@! (this guy) and being confident. You can be a good person and still display confidence in your tone, posture and actions. What this guy is doing simply preys on the lowest common denominator—on people with very low self-esteem or psychological trauma. While being a douchenozzle will get you more women than being a pushover, both are still unattractive qualities. The douche will never have a lasting, fulfilling relationship, but will get more one-night stands than your typical "nice guy." Being a dick to other people in the hopes that you can exploit or manipulate their emotional or psychological issues or hell, scare them into complying, is abhorrent. You get much better results and don't reduce yourself to scum by being a good, confident person with social tact.

Women want confidence, not an $#@!. The advantage that the $#@! has over the "nice guy" is that their $#@! qualities can sometimes come across as confidence, but more often than not, they're really insecure and controlling, both of which are huge turn-offs. Eventually, the facade wears off. I have no respect for clowns like this and have read more "PUA" literature than I care to remember for the sake of freelance stuff I've written. There are absolutely different schools of thought. There are pieces of $#@! like this, and others who offer more solid advice that doesn't rely on manipulation or tactics such as those displayed by the guy in question. The "PUA" movement (the decent parts at least) is mostly just basic social psychology, self-improvement/empowerment and 'fake it 'til you make it' confidence. Some people have found ways to monetize the basics and common sense while embellishing it with pseudo science and other distinct things.

One could argue there's no real need for such a movement since the important aspects of it can be found by studying psychology and applying common sense, but obviously there's a market for having it neatly packaged and applied to relationships. In the end, most of it comes down to being confident and ridding yourself of outcome dependence. As soon as you start ridding yourself of the fear associated with rejection, your confidence will naturally go up and you'll do better in social situations. Obviously it's more nuanced, but that's the gist of it. Being an $#@! should never factor in. You can be "cocky and funny" which means you're playful about it and project that in your tone/mannerisms, but being a dick is a big no.

[RonPaulIsGreat]

Women "in general" are either into $#@!s, or the complete opposite, which is a pushover. There is little in between, also, alot of women say they are attracted to "confidence" but they are with a $#@!, this term "confidence" is not at all standardized.

Me, I don't care, content to be single.

As far as the PUA guy, as long as he's not raping anyone, I don't care, it's not society's responsiblity to protect women anymore than men.

[Paulbot99]

Impressive... But, I wish the people would mobilize against other things as well: imperialism, statism, morality police, lying to the American public...

But, I guess this guy is different in he didn't have any allies to protect him.

[ChristianAnarchist]

Women "in general" are either into $#@!s, or the complete opposite, which is a pushover. There is little in between, also, alot of women say they are attracted to "confidence" but they are with a $#@!, this term "confidence" is not at all standardized.

Me, I don't care, content to be single.

As far as the PUA guy, as long as he's not raping anyone, I don't care, it's not society's responsiblity to protect women anymore than men.

I agree... women, don't like these kinds of guys? Slap them across the face (like girls used to do when I was young) and call them names at the top of your lungs. They will run away as fast as they can and won't be anxious to try it again. You might try a kick to the nuts while you're at it for extra emphasis. But really, I too have found these kinds of jerks have some strange appeal for many (not most) women. Unfortunately it's usually the attractive air-head types that guys want to have a good time with so, yeah, it probably works on a subset of women...

[jmdrake]

lol. You really believe all women like that $#@!?

EDIT: No interest in 'debating'. I just had to ask that question.

*exits thread*

Nope. And not all Americans respond to the Nigerian email scam. But enough to for it to continue. Speaking from experience I lost the only real girlfriend I had in HS to a "bad boy". Years later he got convicted of rape.

[jmdrake]

I'll bet the feminist outrage and subsequent media coverage at least triples his profits.....

Yeah. The advertising vids for PUAs usually start with "Hurry up before they ban this video!" Now this one can add "Hurry up before they ban me form other countries!"

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I see generation after generation growing up with no male role-models whatsoever. PUA's fill that gap. But women these days have learned that they don't need no stinkin' man. So the endless cycle of youngsters running off to take their lessons from folks like this pick-up artist, and women just become more and more unhappy with each passing generation.

Man, you said it. The funny thing is that these little worms are schooling the male generation that should be schooling them. These boys with their own self-concept issues are now haunting the feminists that like to belittle tradition, fatherhood, male roles, manhood, etc.

Feminists love to play down the differences between men and women. Some say they don't need men and that even their children do not need a male role model. These feminists are then confused and outraged at the result of their social engineering that ignores natural biology.

The chickens have come home to roost and the no-common-sense feminists still can't figure it out.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

There's a difference between being an $#@! (this guy) and being confident. You can be a good person and still display confidence in your tone, posture and actions. What this guy is doing simply preys on the lowest common denominator—on people with very low self-esteem or psychological trauma. While being a douchenozzle will get you more women than being a pushover, both are still unattractive qualities. The douche will never have a lasting, fulfilling relationship, but will get more one-night stands than your typical "nice guy." Being a dick to other people in the hopes that you can exploit or manipulate their emotional or psychological issues or hell, scare them into complying, is abhorrent. You get much better results and don't reduce yourself to scum by being a good, confident person with social tact.

Women want confidence, not an $#@!. The advantage that the $#@! has over the "nice guy" is that their $#@! qualities can sometimes come across as confidence, but more often than not, they're really insecure and controlling, both of which are huge turn-offs. Eventually, the facade wears off. I have no respect for clowns like this and have read more "PUA" literature than I care to remember for the sake of freelance stuff I've written. There are absolutely different schools of thought. There are pieces of $#@! like this, and others who offer more solid advice that doesn't rely on manipulation or tactics such as those displayed by the guy in question. The "PUA" movement (the decent parts at least) is mostly just basic social psychology, self-improvement/empowerment and 'fake it 'til you make it' confidence. Some people have found ways to monetize the basics and common sense while embellishing it with pseudo science and other distinct things.

One could argue there's no real need for such a movement since the important aspects of it can be found by studying psychology and applying common sense, but obviously there's a market for having it neatly packaged and applied to relationships. In the end, most of it comes down to being confident and ridding yourself of outcome dependence. As soon as you start ridding yourself of the fear associated with rejection, your confidence will naturally go up and you'll do better in social situations. Obviously it's more nuanced, but that's the gist of it. Being an $#@! should never factor in. You can be "cocky and funny" which means you're playful about it and project that in your tone/mannerisms, but being a dick is a big no.

I think this a pretty good post that says a lot.

[dannno]

I really wonder if people on here are aware of what they're defending sometimes.

Ok, I'd like to take this on finally and give my opinion on what the likely context of this teaching tool was. PUAs are scientists - they literally study what works on women to get them into bed and are completely obsessed with it. They know way more about what women want when it comes to a sexual partner than women actually know themselves, and here's why... I know the women and even a few men here are going to fly off the handlebars at some of the stuff I'm about to say, but be patient because I promise you what I'm about to say is 100% accurate. I also want to say that again this is not particularly related to the concept of women who lack self-esteem.

The chart above represents the most extreme example of what type of man women are sexually attracted to. Julien isn't teaching men to do everything in that chart, he is a scientist who has figured out what women are most sexually attracted to.

Notice I DID NOT just say that what is in the chart is "what women want". What women want and what they are sexually attracted to are completely different things and it is a dichotomy that creates a huge struggle women unfortunately have to deal with throughout their life. It is the subject of many a chick flick and romance novel. In fact, that is why women often say that 'they want a nice guy' or something along those lines, because they constantly struggle with having to convince themselves that. And the fact is, they can potentially have a loving, positive sexual relationship with a guy who is more polite and reserved if they have a more understanding and giving nature. So it's not that women's sexuality is driving them to be with a man that treats them like $#@! - in fact what the chart represents are actually male traits or at least associated traits that don't necessarily have to be used in a context to treat women horribly, they can be used to rule a nation or control various types of resources in order to best provide for them - but they recognize these traits first when they are used against women instead of being used to support them and the inevitable family that would be created and so that is how they are able to recognize those traits and that is what turns them on sexually.

So a woman can recognize those traits in a man, potentially, if he has a lot of power over other people. But what if he is a meagre employee at a factory? What if he happens to have a friend or two who are more alpha than him? It becomes more difficult for the man to display these traits in this situation, even though he is likely able to provide for his family. Or, a man may have these traits but not display them within the relationship with his female companion and she may never or rarely observe them in action. But what the pick-up artist does is shows the woman he has these male traits right off the bat as soon as they meet and start having a conversation.

So men have astutely observed that other men who best represent what is in that chart have the most wild sex with the most beautiful women certainly throughout their younger years. Men who do the complete opposite of what is in that chart suffer the worst and often lack sexual experiences, and when they do have a relationship women are not as enthusiastic with them sexually as they are with these other type of men represented in the chart and may even turn off more after time. Men notice this. Men want sex, they want amazing sex with a woman who is incredibly enthusiastic. So a lot of men have subconsciously learned to adopt those traits to get more sex from women - other men study and learn these traits from their male friends who are more successful with women or through PUAs.

Skip to 2:30-ish to see this racist POS in action.

Ya this is not something that is very good to do to women at all, I agree he is sort of taking advantage of the culture as well. However while I can't condone the behavior, I can't really quite classify it as assault... it is literally right on the razor's edge border of being consensual, you literally cannot go any farther than this without it turning into something that could be classified as assault. It's almost in a grey area between consensual and assault, but based on his vast experience with women and what I know the types of things PUAs engage in, I'm going to give him that benefit of the doubt that -- He is not "forcing" their head down into his crotch, I am certain he is doing some pushing but I am not at all convinced that he was grabbing their neck in a way that they could not easily move their head to the side, push back, do or say SOMETHING to stop him from doing what he did. If a man puts his arm around a girl and she doesn't like it, she needs to say no or physically remove his arm, men have the active role in dating and pursuing relationships and women have the passive role - men HAVE TO MAKE THE MOVE.

Women are attracted to men who make the move and are confident, so if women are going to continue to take the passive dating role and continue to be attracted to men who are confident and make the first move, you can't blame the man who makes the move at the wrong time on the wrong women if he is doing so in a way that allows the woman to respond in some way negatively to prevent something like breast or genital touching. So if the man kisses a woman, and she kisses him back, and he puts his hand on her breast and she says no and he takes her hand away, we recognize this is not assault because the man generally has the active role in furthering sexual activity, and often MUST do so in order to be considered attractive by the female.

Feminists really need to come to terms with this and as was pointed out in another thread related to the cat calling issue, if women want to change this the best way would be to change their role to the active dating role. Find a guy YOU like, let him know you like him and what you want to do sexually. However instead women tend to retract, maybe even become lesbian and men become more sexually frustrated and have to turn more toward women who have stronger sexual desires that are more connected with the guy represented in the chart. It's an unfortunate dynamic.

[pessimist]

So you're saying PUA "scientists" have esoteric knowledge of what women truly want but most are oblivious to?

Wow! I really need to read up on this stuff.

What really turns women on? They want to be dominated, treated like $#@!, tossed around like a rag doll, and disposed of like a useless piece of garbage. The code has been cracked! We have been enlightened! Lock up your mothers, daughters, sisters, and aunts!

[erowe1]

On the other hand, if somebody went around giving lectures that teach women how not to fall for the wiles of a pick up artist like Julien Blanc, that person too would find herself in the crosshairs of feminists, who would screech about how she's blaming the woman, and how unfair it is to criticize a woman for her sluttiness while man-whores like Blanc take pride in doing the same things.

[pessimist]

what women are REALLY sexually attracted to.







It's "science"

[pessimist]

On the other hand, if somebody went around giving lectures that teach women how not to fall for the wiles of a pick up artist like Julien Blanc, that person too would find herself in the crosshairs of feminists, who would screech about how she's blaming the woman, and how unfair it is to criticize a woman for her sluttiness while man-whores like Blanc take pride in doing the same things.

First off, how do you know he is even "getting laid" at will? Does he record each sexual encounter? He could just be a con artist ripping of naive virginal geeks and frat douches.

Secondly, most of these PUA's look, act, and sound like date rapists. So if their "science" of attraction fails- I reckon they just drug their victims.

[pessimist]

[pessimist]

LMAO. some of these PUA's are hilarious. There is NO FREAKING WAY that self-described "pick up artist" in that video above could get any woman he wanted into bed without the help of chemicals.

1.) he has zero charisma or charm.

2.) he is ugly as hell.

3.) he is creepy.

HAHAHA "it's science"

[pessimist]

This ones a real charmer.

[pessimist]

I'm still watching these PUA vids. Some of this stuff is $#@!ing deranged.

I fear for my younger sister.

[Danke]

I fear for my younger sister.

Have a photo?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

what women are REALLY sexually attracted to.







It's "science"

I was not familiar with the picture, so I actually looked him up. He's an MMA fighter who's had his share of run-ins with the law. He's done pornography. Looks like he just attempted suicide.

It also looks like his parents split or divorced. He lived with his mother, who was a drug addict/abuser. His father was a police officer in the L.A. Police Department.

Seems to me that one or two scenarios are possible contributors. His father committed his share of domestic abuse, something generally more common with law enforcement than the population at large. The other scenario is the absent father who was not there to teach his son how to be a man, a role model, and a proper human being. This MMA fighter did live his mother only. He moved in with his father at 13 years of age. His father died shortly after the son moved in, so I'd say the second scenario of absent father is likely.

I don't follow this MMA, so the closest comparison I can make is boxers. Perhaps a very similar case is Mike Tyson, a fatherless guy who then became the protege of his trainer. Tyson's trainer died and Tyson became unraveled.

"Alpha male" has been used by a number of people in these threads. Seems more like the cultural silliness of a bumper sticker society and their narcissistic t-shirts. The last time I heard the term was when Al Gore made a fool of himself tonguing his wife on national TV.

Somebody posted the story about juvenile elephants bullying rhinos because the young elephants did not have male role models in the park reserve. Seems there was shortage of bull elephants for some reason. These elephants could actually teach us a lot, but people still foolishly insist on belittling biology, family, parenting role models, etc.

The population looks to people like Al Gore, abusive police, and some TV thug as normal male representation, so it's no wonder people are so befuddled about relationships and other matters.

[dannno]

LMAO. some of these PUA's are hilarious. There is NO FREAKING WAY that self-described "pick up artist" in that video above could get any woman he wanted into bed without the help of chemicals.

It's not about getting ANY woman into bed, it's about getting the highest number of women by playing on women's underlying sexual desires and showing them that you have certain traits that are sexually appealing to them.

HAHAHA "it's science"

Yes, it is absolutely science - the reason they fail is the same reason they do well, they are constantly testing out and calibrating on different women and trying to figure out what works.

You can pretend to be ignorant and think that these guys never get laid if you want, but that's just being delusional.

[dannno]

what women are REALLY sexually attracted to.







It's "science"

First this is a really bad argument, a lot of women stay in relationships like this for a long time due to these base sexual instincts. That is evidence they exist in and of itself. The fact that men who are able to obtain the most women use these traits to pick up and obtain women is not surprising, yet I do think it is sad.

But you still don't seem to understand that there is nothing preventing women from adjusting their attraction to other men.

For example, most guys are actually turned off when a female takes the active dating role. My base sexual attraction would then tell me not to be attracted to these women, yet I have no problem with women who take the active dating role. I made an adjustment, many women make these adjustments often and end up being with a guy who doesn't have these characteristics - although as I said before it is often less sexually centered and the men in these relationships can sometimes feel neglected in that the woman would do more sexual things more often for an alpha male type who treats them poorly and seeing this dynamic play out is what causes so many guys to treat women poorly.

All I'm saying is that feminists like to complain about how men treat women, yet women give the most sex to men who treat them poorly - they may SAY they like men who treat them better, but women on the whole give them less sex and so men think that what women really want is to treat them poorly.. men want sex because most men who aren't addicted to benzos and have a sex drive actually need to get laid once in a while so they can calm the $#@! down and so they can focus on thoughts and other things besides how horny they are and how badly they need to get laid.

[dannno]

I'm still watching these PUA vids. Some of this stuff is $#@!ing deranged.

I fear for my younger sister.

Have you seen the one where Tyler goes around telling women his girlfriend just died?

[pessimist]

It's not about getting ANY woman into bed, it's about getting the highest number of women by playing on women's underlying sexual desires and showing them that you have certain traits that are sexually appealing to them.




Yes, it is absolutely science - the reason they fail is the same reason they do well, they are constantly testing out and calibrating on different women and trying to figure out what works.

You can pretend to be ignorant and think that these guys never get laid if you want, but that's just being delusional.

Dude, I have no interest in this. The problem is that you and others on here view sex as a conquest; a game that is played. The more women a guy sleeps with, the more of a "man" he is. The more alpha. It's very primal and hunter-gatherery.

Just look how some of dudes on here talk about women. Women = sex. Nothing else. They have an extremely low opinion of them. Their view of gender and relationships is cringe inducing. They think they have all this esoteric knowledge of human relationship and understand women, but yet they have no idea how to connect to the opposite sex. It all centers around "getting laid", "sex drives", and "dominate men/submissive women".

It's quite sad actually.

Are there women out there who want to be submissive or treated badly? Sure. There are women out there who want to be dominate as well.

I think most people though, desire a relationship where there is mutual respect and compatibility. Obviously sexual attraction ties into this, but sex does not sustain a relationship. I think most normal people want a relationship (both men and women).

I will need to see actual concrete evidence to EVER be convinced that PUAs have sex with "a large number of women" purely based on their "scientific methods".

From what I have seen, they are either:

a. LYING.
b. DRUGGING.
c. PAYING.
D. ALL of the above.

[pessimist]

First this is a really bad argument, a lot of women stay in relationships like this for a long time due to these base sexual instincts. That is evidence they exist in and of itself. The fact that men who are able to obtain the most women use these traits to pick up and obtain women is not surprising, yet I do think it is sad.

But you still don't seem to understand that there is nothing preventing women from adjusting their attraction to other men.

For example, most guys are actually turned off when a female takes the active dating role. My base sexual attraction would then tell me not to be attracted to these women, yet I have no problem with women who take the active dating role. I made an adjustment, many women make these adjustments often and end up being with a guy who doesn't have these characteristics - although as I said before it is often less sexually centered and the men in these relationships can sometimes feel neglected in that the woman would do more sexual things more often for an alpha male type who treats them poorly and seeing this dynamic play out is what causes so many guys to treat women poorly.

All I'm saying is that feminists like to complain about how men treat women, yet women give the most sex to men who treat them poorly - they may SAY they like men who treat them better, but women on the whole give them less sex and so men think that what women really want is to treat them poorly.. men want sex because most men who aren't addicted to benzos and have a sex drive actually need to get laid once in a while so they can calm the $#@! down and so they can focus on thoughts and other things besides how horny they are and how badly they need to get laid.

So SEXUAL INSTINCTS/ATTRACTION is the reason women stay in ABUSIVE relationships?

I learn something new every day.

[pessimist]

Have you seen the one where Tyler goes around telling women his girlfriend just died?

No I didn't see that one.

These dudes have a low opinion of men as well. They're human garbage.

I can't even imagine my 16 year old self ever thinking these douchebags were 'cool'.

[erowe1]

The douche will never have a lasting, fulfilling relationship, but will get more one-night stands than your typical "nice guy."

Isn't that his goal, and the goal of his intended audience?

[pessimist]

@ dannno

Dude, some of this $#@! is LAUGHABLE. I mean, some of it straight up American Pie, high school cafeteria stuff.

Do you think this works in ACTUAL reality in the ADULT world?

[pessimist]

Isn't that his goal, and the goal of his intended audience?

His targeted audience.

[dannno]

The problem is that you and others on here view sex as a conquest; a game that is played.

No, sex is a lot of things and I really prefer not to view it as a conquest. Although for some women it is a conquest too, so that can be fun to participate with. For me tho it isn't a game, I don't really use the methods that PUAs talk about although it does interest me and I have studied it in the past when I've been especially desperate for female intimacy and trying to find what could make me more sexually attractive to females.

Sex is healthy, it is a biological imperative, it helps keep my senses and mood centered and more calm, it helps my focus. However it is also a way to bond either on a short term or long term basis with others, it can be like an adventure, it can be a way to show love to a significant other, a short term or long term partner.

The more women a guy sleeps with, the more of a "man" he is. The more alpha. It's very primal and hunter-gatherery.

Ya that is the reality, that isn't an idea that I promote or think is the most healthy in modern society. It may have worked well back in tribal times.

Just look how some of dudes on here talk about women. Women = sex. Nothing else. They have an extremely low opinion of them. Their view of gender and relationships is cringe inducing. They think they have all this esoteric knowledge of human relationship and understand women, but yet they have no idea how to connect to the opposite sex. It all centers around "getting laid", "sex drives", and "dominate men/submissive women".

Well I hope you aren't referring to me, but I'm not quite sure who else here you'd be referring to. I think sex is an important part of a relationship, at least for most people. But I certainly don't think of women as only for sex, I connect with females on a lot of things besides just sex. But since I don't display these traits it amplifies my need for sex when I'm not in a relationship. I keep saying my behavior is pretty much the exact opposite of the PUAs, and I am merely lamenting that the way I behave is to my detriment sexually because I'm not able to act like these guys.

You have a whole other thread where you're trying to figure out how you can get off of some very dangerous and addictive prescription drugs because you have issues with anxiety. Well, I have issues with anxiety too.. the difference is I already know my cure. Cannabis goes 50% of the way and having regular sex goes the other 50% of the way. At that point my general anxiety is gone. Sure, things can happen in my life that cause me to be anxious but it is easily controllable whereas when I don't have sex or I'm not smoking weed, I have general anxiety when it is not necessary. Not every guy needs to smoke weed, but a lot of guys do need to have sex occasional to decrease their general anxiety and withholding for longer periods of time can cause psychological trauma for some men.

Are there women out there who want to be submissive or treated badly? Sure. There are women out there who want to be dominate as well.

I think most people though, desire a relationship where there is mutual respect and compatibility. Obviously sexual attraction ties into this, but sex does not sustain a relationship. I think most normal people want a relationship (both men and women).

Yes, that's why I say that the whole thing for women is a dichotomy. Do you know what that means? It's like an internal struggle by two opposing forces. Women can succumb either way at any moment in their life potentially because women's feelings an emotions are usually more dynamic and fluid. Men's feelings and emotions are generally more static and predictable. Women can consciously decide to be with a guy they have less base attraction for and consciously increase their attraction for them based on the reasons they hold that attraction. Or they can subconsciously be attracted to a guy who is controlling and dominant.

[dannno]

@ dannno

Dude, some of this $#@! is LAUGHABLE. I mean, some of it straight up American Pie, high school cafeteria stuff.

Do you think this works in ACTUAL reality in the ADULT world?

I don't think it actually works, I've seen it work in real life adult world...over and over and over and over and over again for years and years and years. I have a lot more experience in these situations than you do.