Saturday, October 18, 2014

Can Sean Stephenson even have sex?

People find my blog through all kinds of search phrases. Some I find quite remarkable, though. Infrequently, there are phrases that combine ‘sex’ and ’Sean Stephenson’, for instance in ‘can sean stephenson have sex?’. We’ve been talking about that guy a bit some time ago, in the comments section of Confessions of a Convert. However, since I haven’t written a lot about PUA scammers recently, that guy is as good a target as anybody else.

So, let’s consider Sean Stephenson’s lot: As I wrote earlier, I consider him to be one of the most dangerous people in the wider self-help industry, since he is using his handicap to scam people out of their money. Hey, if Sean Stephenson can do X, why can't you? You're healthy, after all! He’s using the cultural narrative that the poor and handicapped are intrinsically good. I’d say you can’t have seen much of the world if you think so. Just like many of the rich aren’t working harder, or are any smarter, than people who have a lot less money — due to not having been born into money and/or favourable life circumstances, it’s quite a stretch to claim that being handicapped makes someone somehow a better or more honest person.

Let’s state some facts: Just as guys prefer, ceteris paribus, young and good-looking women with pleasant personalities, so do girls prefer tall, handsome and well-off guys. It’s of course a sliding scale, but at one point you’re out. You might be able to tolerate a slender chick with a bit of baby fat (and by that I really mean a minuscule amount of fat), but you probably wouldn’t want to bang an obese chick. Likewise, girls want to bang physically healthy guys. If she can’t get tall, athletic ones, and, for whatever reason, can’t increase her sexual market value, then she has to lower her expectations as well — if she doesn’t want to end up like those feminist hags who complain that "men are afraid of strong, independent women”.

Say the hot, athletic guys ignore Jenny. But there are others who are coming on to her. At one point, she’ll have to decide whom to take. However, and nature is ‘cruel’ like that, she will probably not have a good reason to let go of all her minimum standards. There are some pathological cases, like Anna Nicole Smith marrying some geriatric multimillionaire for his money. I don’t know how much money Sean Stephenson has, but money is literally all he could offer to a woman. In fact, if you see a picture of a hot girl and him, I'd bet money on the fact that she's a paid model.

Of course, Social Justice Warriors will get deeply upset about this, but the biological purpose of having sex is to produce healthy offspring. For precisely this reason, women don’t shack up with cripples. Instead, they prefer healthy partners, just like men do. Even if Sean Stephenson can have sex — and I have a hard time imagining how — I find it even harder to imagine that any woman would want to do him, since there are simply so many healthy men around.

I guess everybody who questions Sean Stephenson is just a "hater". Again, I'm astounded at the utter stupidity of the people who could fall for that kind of bullshit. The Salty Droid had an article on Sean Stephenson some time ago. The first comment summarizes the problem with that guy perfectly:

God, can this even be real? People fall for this shit, I’m in the wrong biz man. Just get some guy in a wheel chair, and some chick who looks like she’s half stoned, shoot some quick videos about finding some “insert sci-fi name” + “other word for love” here and make quick cash.
Well, the self-help industry is just one more industry that relies on our educational system pumping out one moron after another.


  1. Good to see you handling Sean Stephenson.

    I'll be honest, I've been involved in the self-help industry for a while and I think it's full of people who make their money by giving seminars and I think that's how they got rich. You really have to be enormously rotten on the inside if you want to lie to people like that. Or they tend to hide their background, in Belgium when I asked one guy he said he used to sell "vaccum cleaners". Yeah right, does this sound like the pua saying they used to be rocked scientists?

    Also Sean doesn't have quite a plesant personality as well. Due to having him on facebook, I remember a post where he cited an audience on how poor people had lousy hobby's (watched more tv, get up later, less exercise, ate more lousy etc.). Off course correlation doesn't equal causation, but Sean was lashing out to these people in poverty. Yep that's our self-help guru right there, look at all the empathy he's showing to people who can't offer him his money :p.

    Next scammer is Tony Robbins I presume?

    But yeah it's virtually impossible that that girl is with him for his looks or personality. Money is all he's got to offer, that's for sure. If this guy would be an average looking guy with that ammount of money, he would be dating models. Off course if that was the case he wouldn't have made that ammount in the first place and would probably be one of those poor people he cited above.

    1. I may write a couple of posts on the self-help industry in general, and how it ties into the mythology of the 'American Dream', which primes people to fall for those scammers. Tony Robbins is the same as all the others: a guy who made money by telling others how to make money. The problem, though, is that he made money by talking how to make money, so there is not a lot of substance behind it. His "walking on burning coals" shtick can be explained by physics and physiology, but apparently morons don't much appreciate scientific explanations.

    2. I've actually been to a Tony Robbins seminar and yes I've done the "burning coal" thing. :D

      In all honesty, it was just me being inexperienced and naïve. Sort of like people who encounter game for the first time. Off course now I'm more wise, but critical thinking is something that I'll teach my kids later on.

  2. When you think about that, girls react the way we would react if the situation was reversed and we where passive. Do you imagine ugly women with strange personnality and peacock costume trying to get in our pants using routines and techniques. We would give false numbers and have our version of cockblock etc. On the other hand, we would just hope that hot girls came and move forward, no matter what is the opener or the exact sequence of events that follow. What do you think about that?

    And sorry for the mistakes, english is my second language.

    1. I fully agree. In fact, reversing the roles in a thought experiment, as you just did, is a great way to deflate PUA bullshit.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.