How Female Ambiguity Promotes PUA and Poor Dating Advice

I was recently ranting about the ambiguous signals of women, which are partly due to nonsensical dating advice, but also to their narcissist wish of wanting to have their cake and eat it, too. They know that they can only get male company if they fuck the guy, but since they don't want to fuck any guy that comes along but still want to have some losers around who bolster up her fragile ego, they just string them along.

An interesting corollary of the female unwillingness to clearly let the guy know whether they are interested or not is that this behavior enabled the spread of the inane PUA culture. PUAs take the words of women at face-value. Instead of realizing that if she doesn't allow physical advances (one of the main points of Minimal Game), she's probably not interested in you as a sexual partner, PUAs are happy as long as women talk to them, and search for techniques to turn the interaction sexual at some point.

The Ambiguous Signals of Women

There have been some heated discussions in the comments to Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World I and Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World II. Some feminist tried to defend standard female behavior of not clearly indicating disinterest and therefore leading guys on. There was a consensus that women, when it comes to dating/mating as opposed to mere socializing, often don't clearly show when they are not interested, but also when they are. It's all too convenient for feminists to excuse "female laziness", as Alek Novy calls it, and demand of men to read the mind of women. However, since women hardly ever make the first move, this step is up to you. But beware: feminists are quick to cry "Sexual harassment!!! Attempted rape!!!!". Compliment the wrong girl on her dress, and you've sexually harassed her.

Presumably any man no matter how good or bad looking has experienced that a "no" from a woman can mean "yes, but you've got to jump through some stupid hoops first", while a "yes" can easily mean "no, but I'll lead you on anyway and cancel our date for next week five minutes after the meeting time". It's easy to see why men are getting fed up with this. Of course, then there are all the girls who play games on principle. Let's say she's flirting heavily with you in some social setting. You call her up the next day, and then she brings up some bullshit excuse. But because you've got more women lines up, you don't bother and move on. If you happen to have some mutual friends, you may now hear that "Jennifer totally wanted you to take her out. Why didn't you take her out then?" If you now say that you don't like girls that play games and, in fact, prefer those that don't, you immediately become the asshole, of course.

Reader Comment on the Sexual Power of Women

I'll post a couple of substantive articles later today and for the entire rest of the week, but as a warm-up, here's a comment a reader just left on Do women really hold all sexual power?

The first time that I saw this claim that women hold all the sexual power, I just knew that something was wrong with that statement. It is shown to be nonsense by being mocked by reality.

For example, many women, with “all sexual power,” are in relationships in which they are miserable and unhappy.

Many women, with “all sexual power” have been pumped and dumped have been the community mattress, cum receptacle, with their STD infested pussies, are damaged goods find that no decent man would ever touch them with a long stick.

Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World II

As we've seen in Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World I, feminist definitions of sexual harassment are to a large degree subjective. Remark to some woman that she's as tall as your wife, and you're on the hook for a five-figure settlement --- if you're a Republican presidential candidate. But let's have a look at what Joe Schmoe has to expect at Monash University in case he wants to meet girls:

What actions constitute sexual harassment? 

Examples of sexual harassment:
• uninvited touching;
• uninvited kisses or embraces;
• smutty jokes or comments;
• making promises or threats in return for sexual favours;
• displays of sexually graphic material including posters, pin-ups, cartoons, graffiti or messages on notice boards, lockers, desks, computer screens;
• sexual insults or taunting;
• repeated invitations to go out especially after being refused previously;
• flashing or sexual gestures;
• sex-based insults, taunts, teasing or name-calling;
• staring or leering at a person or at parts of their body, and
• unwelcome physical contact such as massaging a person without invitation or deliberately brushing up against them.

Sure, flashing someone or calling someone names is something I'd consider inappropriate. All the other bullet points are at least to some degree questionable. Let's start with "uninvited touches". You may now say that there is no way that this is okay, but look at dating in the real world: Assume you're talking to some chick in a bar, she's pressing her tits against you, and you may now as well touch her. She didn't first ask whether it's okay with you if she pressed her tits against you, and it would be pretty weird if she asked for permission first. Likewise, it would be pretty absurd if she claimed that you sexually harassed her if you proceeded with putting your hand on her ass.

Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World I

After dissecting Stoya's cry for attention in What exactly is Sexual Harassment?, I asked myself whether there is a plausible definition of sexual harassment. As I have written in that article, one could probably agree on drawing a line physically aggressive maneuvers when it is clear that this is uncalled for. I do not intend to paint men in a bad light, however.

It's apparently quite popular to depict men as sexist swine who commit countless acts of "street harassment" and grope unsuspecting women. However, speaking from my perspective as a reasonably attractive slender 6'3" guy, I can tell you that I've had to endure countless acts of "sexual harassment". I can't even count how many times women have rubbed their tits against me as they were walking past me in the club. The more daring (drunk) ones have little qualms pinching the ass of men that are clearly out of their league. (Why is it almost always the absolutely plain and average if not unattractive looking women who do that?)

Sure, feminists claim that it's always men who approach women who are not interested in them but, believe it or not, any guy with options knows full well what it is like to be hit on by a woman you couldn't fuck with all the Viagra in the world. If it is true, as women claim, that men are much more visual than women, which I doubt, then it is infinitely worse to be a guy who gets hit on by an ugly chick than the other way around, but let's not shove too much logic down the collective throat of feminists.

What exactly is Sexual Harassment?

In the comments to PUA Travesty on Kickstarter a reader pointed me to a two part series of blog posts by some porn starlet named Stoya, in which she describes some of the examples of sexual harassment she has had to endure. Partly, she claimed this is due to her "taking off her clothes for a living", but of course mainly you've got to blame all those male sexist pigs who make advances. Alek Novy did a good job pointing out Stoya's hypocrisy, but let's go through it methodologically, before arriving at a possibly surprising conclusion. It should be surprising for feminists, at least.

First, Stoya lumps all unwelcome encounters of a sexual nature together. Some guy trying to shove his fingers up her cooch and some other dude squeezing her ass in the context of porn conventions is seen as  "absolutely nothing, NOTHING" compared to the pain it causes a delicate flower like her to just walk down the street. Now, please note that I don't intent to trivialize sexual harassment, I mean, real sexual harassment, like guys forcing themselves upon girls, grabbing their ass and the like (and of course this also includes the many women who dared to pinch my ass in night clubs). Then again, since girls do that too, a reasonable argument could be made that this is part of human dating behavior, and only once force comes in, people clearly overstep a line.

However, look at what kind of actions overstep a line according to "International Porn Superstar Stoya(tm)", with commentary:

Sex as an Exercise in Seeking Validation

In one of my recent articles I tangentially made the point that guys who want to have sex with a great number of women are mostly driven by validation. They enjoy the thrill of the chase, a sense of novelty, and that women show sexual interest in them. I don't think many men will be able to put himself into a position where the latter is a reality, and the former should quickly lead to frustration if there aren't enough successful encounters. The implosion of the PUA fad is directly related to that. Approaching 1,000 women just for a date is idiotic. But even for those who were fortunate enough to have sex with many women, it's normally just a phase to go through.

While I was primarily writing about the male perspective, I think that the female perspective is largely identical. Think about it: it you only wanted to have sex, you're better off finding a nice girlfriend who enjoys having sex with you. Any guy who is single or only sees women casually will find it very difficult to have sex as often as someone in a committed relationship could. There is no difference between men and women. If she only wanted to have sex, she'd get some guy who turns her on and who enjoys boning her, and that would be it.