Thursday, January 6, 2011

Gun-loving pick-up guru allegedly shoots a woman in the face

Actual logo for Gunwitch's "The Way of Gun"
A creepy, gun-loving pick-up artist (PUA) guru whose "technique" for charming the ladies is just one small step away from actual date rape has been arrested for allegedly shooting a woman in the face. 

And, no I'm not making this up. Allen Reyes, known in the "seduction community" as Gunwitch because of his love of guns, apparently got into an argument with a 20-year-old woman at a party in his hometown of Klameth Falls, Oregon. This woman is now (at least according to the latest news report I have managed to find) in critical condition at a local hospital with gunshot wounds to the face. (See here for more details, and here for Jezebel's take on the subject.)

The man known as Gunwitch, arrested Monday, is apparently quite gun-obsessed. On his website, he notes that he's "an avid hand gunner." One of his PUA audio tapes is called "The Way of Gun" and -- especially creepy in light of the charges he faces, the logo he chose for it features an actual gun and, well, see the picture at top right.

Gunwitch has never been what anyone would call a "nice guy." His slogan? "Get laid, not liked."

Unlike many seduction gurus, Gunwitch doesn't recommend a lot of gimmicks or clever opening lines or subtle techniques of manipulation. His "technique" is simplicitly itself: lurk around in  places where lone women tend to congregate, and when you see a woman who makes you horny, don't wait for your boner to go away, just get into a "dominant" frame of mind and start pestering her. Then, if she shows anything that looks like interest, ISOLATE her and work your magic. If she doesn't seem interested, don't give up, keep pestering her until she gives in or bluntly rejects you.

He goes through his technique in more detail on his web site. Let's look at some, er, highlights.

So where's a good place to meet the ladies? Aside from the old standbys -- coffee houses, the gym -- Gunwitch recommends lurking around the magazine racks:

I like the magazine racks at dept stores, where I can stand there and wait 'til some Cosmo magazine reading hottie comes into what feels to her like your space, and feels like she's approaching, then boom I'm on it "so what ya reading?"

Learn a thing or two from someone who knew how to get the ladies "isolated" quickly: Ted Bundy:

ANYWHERE you see them you must imagine having sex with her, visualize it, feel the desire and lust. ALWAYS do this as soon as you see a woman you find attractive and eventually the state you will go into when seeing a woman will be one of -sexual- state, rather than panic or fear of meeting her. This makes approaching random lone women easier. Ted Bundy, the infamous serial killer/sociopath didn't feel fear or panic when he saw a target. He felt rage, sexual perversion and desire to kill, hence NO fear to approach them, of course wanting to have sex isn't the same thing, but its still more effective than feeling fear or confusion about your desires and direction.

Don't worry about invading her personal space. In fact, make sure you do:

Since you aren't gonna be seductive or sensual standing 2 feet away from her, you need to be within 6-8 inches of her.

Even though you've just met her, don't be afraid to start groping her:

Touch her. Since touch is the first step in getting her comfortable with you as a sexual creature, you want to sneak this in slowly. A good progression is: hands, arms, lowers back, upper back, face (while whispering something to her) and hair, then thighs (hand placed but relatively stationary), and upper legs.

Don't take no for an answer unless she really really means it:

I commonly get snubbed, the cold shoulder ... or overall rejected with the women I have sex with right away, but I just persist and eventually things take a turn. 

And remember, get her alone as quickly as possible:

ISOLATE. You cannot have sex with women in public or in front of people with any consistency. If that's your bag, try it with women you are already in a relationship with. You have to get her alone with you. ANY opportunity to isolate BEFORE going into sexual state should be taken as well of course.

If she's with friends, stalk her like a panther stalks his prey until she is alone:

At a bar, when you see a group and want one of them, WAIT for her to leave the herd, wait for her to be coming out of the bathroom (not IN as she may have to piss bad), wait for her to go to the bar to get a drink, wait for her to be ALONE to approach, and then try to keep her from her friends.

And don't give up:

Of course if a girl NEVER goes into sexual state for a long period of time, you just try to isolate her anyway and "make the ho say no". NEVER eject. Always either get either a lay, or a rejection.

Did I mention that you shouldn't give up? If you're making out with her and she doesn't want sex, just keep pressuring her until she says yes:

[S]ometimes, she'll say "I don't know you enough" ect. When this happens don't get mad or upset ect. Just say, "I understand" or "ok, this is nice though huh?" then go back to necking and making out. Eventually go back in for the sex, if happens again say "I understand" and go back in for more kissing and making out, and repeat until it goes through. Hell even if she never gets ready, what have you got better to do than make out with some hot little number? You've got no real "make the ho say no" style of getting a close or getting a rejection to work with at this point, as she already has said no but MAY change her mind.

Just remember not to actually rape her:

DO NOT struggle or tug or bear weight on her at this stage, as that is considered rape. Use persistence not force, and you'll be ok.
 Somehow I don't have a lot of trouble thinking that the allegations against him might just possibly be true.

On the discussion forum for his "Witching Hour" podcast, though, while many of his fans seem genuinely shocked by what has happened, at least some of are defending him, or otherwise making light of the shooting.

One started a topic called "Shoot to Kill," and declared "Thats my man."




Another chimed in with a little ditty:
Shoot to kill, Klamath Hills
too many podcasts and too many pills yeah!
Shoot to thrill, pickup skills
Jerkin off to Barry Kirkey gonna fire at will

(Barry Kirkey is another PUA guru who has done podcasts with Gunwitch.)

Still another offered this take:

Im sure Gun has a perfectly good reason for shooting that girl in the face

This last comment struck some on the message board as utterlly hilarious.

I'll update this, or perhaps do more posts, as the story develops.

Big thanks to the Man Boobz reader who alerted me to this story.

77 comments:

  1. Now David, I'm really happy for you, and Imma let you finish, but Max had the best coverage on this issue of all time. Of all time!

    ReplyDelete
  2. BTW, your lists of enemies and friends seem to be broken - for me at, least. I use Chrome FWIW.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Deezee, I'm switching the domain name to manboobz.com; I think it's a blogger glitch caused by that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, we already learned that PUAs don't see women as human. It's not so surprising to see them basically high-fiving each other over this.

    And some men wonder why women tend to be wary of the strange dudes who approach them in public...

    ReplyDelete
  5. PUAs = hate movement. This isn't about just getting laid anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If I were still single reading this would cause me to be much less polite when rejecting a persistent man. It would likely be the kind of harsh rejection that sends these people over the edge in the first place.

    I guess they asked for it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well what can I say? Guess he's a better shot than Valerie Solanas was.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To borrow a theme from you feminuts:

    I'll care about this when all false rape accusations stop.

    Random Brother

    ReplyDelete
  9. i need to modify your introductory sentence...

    "A creepy, gun-loving pick-up artist (PUA) guru whose "technique" for charming the ladies is just [...] date rape has been arrested for allegedly shooting a woman in the face."

    there there...all better!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Great, predators in department stores. Lots of them judging by this ones fan base.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Richard, what you said does not address ANY existing imbalance. Where you claim you're stealing that from probably DID come from a feminist quote addressing an imbalance.

    But it's so clear that you men are dangerous. Keep talking, we'll keep documenting.

    Still waiting for someone like Richard to show me the massacres or murders committed by Dworkin types that were drawn to and wrote manifestos regarding, radical feminist rhetoric.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Telling how many men are willing to show up here and support shooting women in the face for the "crime" of making misogynists desire sexual congress with people they consider inferior.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @citizenlemonade

    Sexual assault and rape are never ok, justifiable, or laudable--even if they happen to a convicted criminal in prison. It is unfeminist, and frankly unhumanist to say otherwise/

    From Shakesville's piece on "Rape Culture 101":

    "Rape culture is 1 in 33 men being sexually assaulted in their lifetimes. Rape culture is encouraging men to use the language of rape to establish dominance over one another ("I'll make you my bitch"). Rape culture is making rape a ubiquitous part of male-exclusive bonding. Rape culture is ignoring the cavernous need for men's prison reform in part because the threat of being raped in prison is considered an acceptable deterrent to committing crime, and the threat only works if actual men are actually being raped."

    http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. @switchingtoglide:

    Thanks, I kind of wanted to say something to that effect but couldn't quite get it together. I'll associate myself with those remarks, and also say that citizenlemonade's blog is generally in poor taste and not feminist.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes...that's precisely it.

    The Men show up to make fun of and encourage and excuse violence against a woman...

    and the feminist stand up for the jokes about rape against the men.

    And yet? we are the fucking bitches.

    If you all weren't so dangerous I'd find you sad.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "and the feminist stand up for the jokes about rape against the men."

    I'm interested in the part of your world view where refuting a statement as the same as standing up for it. Please, tell me more about the fascinating prism through which you view the world.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Telling how many men are willing to show up here and support shooting women in the face for the "crime" of making misogynists desire sexual congress with people they consider inferior."

    Because never in the history of feminism have women sat around and talked about shooting men in the face (or completely killing them off entirely).

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'm new to this blog, but from these comments I can't tell if this is a feminist or safe space or not.

    This would be a good time to start linking to 'Schrodinger's Rapist' again: http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/

    ReplyDelete
  19. But as for David, I am loving your blog, even though the topics make me sad.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "I'm new to this blog, but from these comments I can't tell if this is a feminist or safe space or not."

    Oh, dear God no! It's like the UFC of ideologies in here!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Deeze, seriously. Talked about it? This man SHOT this woman in the face and men do this type of thing DAILY. Who are you trying to kid?

    And to Richard, who thinks he's 'borrowing lines', your borrowed line about not caring addresses NO imbalance. There is no imbalance addressed with your comment about false rape, but I'm sure the original statement you are borrowing from DID highlight an imbalance.

    I also agree that the comments here are telling. Keep talking and we'll keep documenting. Thanks.

    (David sorry if there are extra comments, please delete. There is something buggy going on with my google log in. And I can't tell if I've messed up or got caught in the spam thing.)

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dear MRAs: this is what people are telling you when they call you creepy. It has nothing to their attraction to you, or lack of it.

    ReplyDelete
  23. citizenlemonade, I deleted your comment for making light of prison rape.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The "main MRA" (if there is such a thing) reaction to this guy has been overwhelmingly negative. I already linked to Max's piece above, but Ferdinand Bardamu of In Mala Fide also thinks this guy should rot. Just a friendly reminder that Manboobz focuses on the fringe elements. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  25. Booboonation -

    Oh come on. Lorena Bobbit lops off a man's penis and is heralded as a hero. Women abuse men every bit as much as men abuse women - Davey-poo here got into a big argument about with Paul Elam a while back, which you can read about all you want.

    "Men do this type of thing DAILY." If you honestly believe that the average man (or even MRA for that matter) thinks it's okay to walk up to a woman and shoot her in the face, you're seriously misguided and delusional.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Deezee: Gunwitch was not a "fringe element" in the PUA subculture; he was sort of a big deal, and his "teachings" were widely distributed and discussed. Given that he (allegedly) SHOT A WOMAN IN THE FACE, I would assume that virtually all human beings would find this troubling, as indeed most PUAs on his site and elsewhere seem to do. I said nothing about MRAs at all in my post.

    Also, by the standards of most people in the world, the entire MRM is a "fringe element."

    And yes, Deezee-poo, I would encourage anyone to read my debate with Paulie-poo; there's a link in the sidebar under "further reading." It makes very clear that while wmen indeed do commit abuse, some of it quite violent, they do NOT "abuse men every bit as much as men abuse women."

    ReplyDelete
  27. Okay, seriously, where are all the feminists heralding Lorena Bobbitt and Valerie Solanas as heroes? Sure, there might be a few crazies out there who still take the SCUM Manifesto seriously (though you sure as hell won't find any of them on the major feminist sites) but Bobbitt? As far as I can tell, some (not all) feminists defended her when she was on trial because she was suffering from severe PTSD as a result of her husband's abuse, but I've never heard anyone call her a hero. Anyone who did so on Jezebel or Feministing would probably be banned.

    This guy, on the other hand? Like David said, he's far from a "fringe element". It looks like his ideas were taken very seriously by a lot of people. And while I'm glad that most MRAs are condemning his actions, I'm also not terribly surprised that many think he was justified. Wasn't there a post just a few days ago about a guy who thought that killing "skanks" was hilarious and awesome?

    Love your blog, David, but I think the comments here might be a bit much for me.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I don't follow the PUA culture but it seemed like the reaction to Gunwitch even among them wasn't all that favorable. As Dave pointed out, "MRM" is fringe in and of itself, so we're talking about a fringe PUA guru, PUA itself being the fringe of a larger fringe movement. The fringiest of fringe! And yet people still go off saying "oh, the average man must think this is okay, they do it daily." Take a reality pill and get some perspective.

    Bobbit: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2010/12/28/exp.nr.int.lorena.bobbitt.cnn?hpt=C2

    ReplyDelete
  29. That people, even a small number, have followed this guy's advice is mindboggling.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Because never in the history of feminism have women sat around and talked about shooting men in the face (or completely killing them off entirely).

    Huh? I don't know anyone who does this. But here you have evidence of MRAs celebrating an attempted murder, simply because they have reason to believe the woman in question might make them want to have sex, which causes self-hate and loathing. That some woman somewhere says something out of line doesn't implicate us all, but that you can't post something like this without bringing a bunch of misogynists down to celebrate killing (or attempting to kill women) is telling.

    ReplyDelete
  31. @radicalbookworm

    After the Bobbitt incident the German feminist Alice Schwarzer wrote an article about the case, in which she stylized Bobbitt as a role model.

    Quotation:" Eine hat es getan. Jetzt könnte es jede tun. [...]Amerikanische Hausfrauen denken beim Anblick eines Küchenmessers nicht mehr nur ans Petersilie-Hacken. "

    "One woman did it. Now every woman could do it. [...] American housewives don't just think of chopping parsley anymore, when they see a kitchen knife. "

    Alice Schwarzer is a feminist icon in Germany. She is in her 60s now, but is still the most popular and influential feminist here. Only recently there was a followup article in her magazine, something like what is Lorena Bobbitt doing now.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I think the problem a lot of MRA/PUA advocates have is that they cannot really distinguish people from the group (which is pretty funny in light of your most recent post, Women Are... Part 6).

    The person is the whole and the whole is the person. Anything done by one person represents the whole, and anything done by the whole represents the person. A single woman represents all of womanhood, and you can use the same PUA techniques to pick up any woman. One criticism of the MRA/PUA movement is that they don't see women as individual people, but I'd actually posit they don't even see other men as individual people. They are all representatives of the collective.

    So a group of MRA men posting support for the shooting is equivalent to one Lorena Bobbit. What Lorena Bobbit did is a stand-in for what all women must want to do, and if one other woman supports her, it's exactly the same as the group supporting her. Therefore, the men who are supporting Gunwitch are equivalent, even though there are numerically more of them than there are of Lorena Bobbit and her one friend. Because each man is part of the collective whole, you count them as one single instance of support. If ten men express support for Gunwitch, they are still representing the collective animus and it's no different than if five or fifteen men expressed support. It's all about the group mind and the collective. Collectively, to their mindset, all women oppress all men. There are no deviations or outliers. One woman oppressing one man can be extrapolated to apply to the whole. One man oppressing one woman can also be extrapolated to apply to the whole, but now the wholes are equivalent.

    This is the only explanation I can think of as to why MRAs dig up extreme examples and post them as blanket fact, while dismissing members of their own group acting violently. 1=1, 5=1 and 100=1.

    ReplyDelete
  33. @ Amanda Marcotte -

    I remember the delightful "feminist" girls at my school talking about the subject all the time. This is a servicable if dated repository of misandry and vitriol from certain sectors of the feminist movement. No different than, say, focusing on the fringe of the MRA like our friend Dave here.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Dave - did one of my comments get caught up in the spam filter? I don't want to double post.

    ReplyDelete
  35. "Deezee: Gunwitch was not a "fringe element""---David

    Um, no. He was an extremist person doing an alarming and extreme thing. Typical pick up artists do not normally engage in such graphic and shocking criminality, but you already know that . . . right?

    I suspect a few posters here are going to demonize PUA because of it. Oh, well. Carry on.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "That people, even a small number, have followed this guy's advice is mindboggling."---M

    I don't know much about about his branch of PUA but I suspect it wasn't fixated with brutal violence and murder.

    People can say truisms and dispense armchair wisdom and still be unsavory and even sociopathic. There are countless examples of this.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Deezee, the comment is unblocked now.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Your fallacy of logic Tuquoque does not make the argument invalid.

    Just because someone..somewhere somehow has done something does -not- make that this situation is alright in -any- capacity.

    Go back to school. Take a logic course. It could only do you good.

    ReplyDelete
  39. "Therefore, the men who are supporting Gunwitch are equivalent, even though there are numerically more of them than there are of Lorena Bobbit and her one friend."---LVvS

    Apparently, you don't remember when the Bobbit incident happened. Lots of people were supportive about it. There were even feminsts that proclaimed, "Now, do you get it?"

    I've even argued with posters *recently* that appeal to popularity with this---that people were behind her gruesome action so she must be in the right.

    Gunwitch and Bobbitt committed sick crimes, to be succinct about it.

    ReplyDelete
  40. "I don't know much about about his branch of PUA but I suspect it wasn't fixated with brutal violence and murder.

    People can say truisms and dispense armchair wisdom and still be unsavory and even sociopathic. There are countless examples of this."

    Yeah I was talking about his pick-up techniques. They're vile.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Booboonation said: "And to Richard, who thinks he's 'borrowing lines', your borrowed line about not caring addresses NO imbalance. There is no imbalance addressed with your comment about false rape, but I'm sure the original statement you are borrowing from DID highlight an imbalance."

    Nope. Not to my recollection. So I repeat, I won't give a rats ass about some woman cathing a buck shot facial until feminists care about false rape accusations.

    Random Brother

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Yeah I was talking about his pick-up techniques. They're vile.---M

    Vile is quite a word---I can think of more things that are truly repulsive; shooting someone in the face is. Trying to get convince someone to have sex with you is far removed from that.

    Of course, you'll probably mention the Ted Bundy quote. If he had never done anything like this that would be something not many would have made a big deal about.

    ReplyDelete
  43. If he had never shot a woman in the face I would still consider his techniques vile.

    Honestly, Wytch, until you're on the receiving end of this kind of approach you have no idea how truly vile it is.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "Honestly, Wytch, until you're on the receiving end of this kind of approach you have no idea how truly vile it is."---M

    Since you have no idea what I've been through, then you can't really make a clear statement on that, can you?

    But this topic really isn't about me or you. His techiques are "vile" to your perspective beacause of a reason you still haven't provided outside your own experience. Give a critique and we'll talk further.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Deeze said to me:
    ["Men do this type of thing DAILY." If you honestly believe that the average man (or even MRA for that matter) thinks it's okay to walk up to a woman and shoot her in the face, you're seriously misguided and delusional.]

    So, Deeze where did I elude to honestly believing the average man thinks it's ok?
    What's with you guys never DIRECTLY addressing a point? Stop changing the subject.

    Again, you miss the point and bring up Lorena Bobbit. Does this type of thing happen DAILY? NO if it did, I would be a SICK MF for saying, gee I guess there may have been a good reason, or whatever.

    There is not an imbalance against men the way there is against women. MRAs lie every time they say women are just as violent as men, or women abuse men just as much. You are just lying. Stop lying, you deserve no respect until you do.

    As far as the side controversy goes, I have never been the type to understand revenge, but as I get older I do understand wanting a person who does not value other sentient life, harms sentient life, kills life, or tortures life to have their OWN life suffer in some way, not as revenge, but it seems LOGICAL that people would not worry about said person or want them to LEARN EMPATHY the hard way, or any way.

    I seriously doubt every argument put forth here is "feminist" or representing feminist ideologies, whatever those are (meaning as if there are no controversies or tough issues). Prison rape is surely a human rights violation, and not "feminist" ideology to want that to happen to someone.

    I wonder why deeze is so hostile toward feminism with no real world evidence to support these kinds of irrational, emotional positions he takes. The evidence is clearly not on his side.

    ReplyDelete
  46. His techniques are vile because they invade other people's boundaries. It's only a sociopath that does not get this and wants a fucking bar graph and a pie chart. Coercion is wrong, and taking advantage of the nature of many females fear of directly shaming a man, this is repugnant, and THIS is why men deserve to be directly SHAMED, because they think this kind of boundary degradation and coercion to get INSIDE another person's body is wrong.

    Do men want someone INSIDE of them? You may think, well I'm not a homosexual so no, but women are not attracted to every man. If we don't WANT TO it IS like homosexual sex to someone hetero, if you are NOT appealing, then you are NOT appealing.

    MRAs make me realize that men need to be shamed more, not less.

    ReplyDelete
  47. *correction

    They think this kind of boundary degradation and coercion to get INSIDE another person's body is NOT wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  48. yea...because one of the pillars of Pick Up Artistry is "Shootin bitches in the face"
    You're not a real PUA until you at least curb stomp a chick
    that's how you move up the totem
    lvl 1: insult chicks
    lvl 2: slaps/punch chicks
    lvl3: GET FUCKING SERIOUS about beating bitches curb stomp that bitch!!!!
    lvl4: Shoot her in the face
    Right now, I'm only a lvl 1, but some day...SOME DAY I'll get to Gunwitch's lvl

    ReplyDelete
  49. BTW Dave, even if we disagree, props to running a site that has a pretty hands off commenting policy.

    Booboonation -

    If you don't understand how the statement "Men do this type of thing daily" could be interpreted as implying you believe average man think it's okay to do that type of thing daily, you need a crash course in phraseology.

    The "you're just lying" approach to refuting unbiased academic research is very cogent and well thought-out; your input is duly noted and certainly appreciated. Not that you'd care for rational arguments anyway - damn that patriarchy and its oppressive logic! Knowledge was a tool to oppress women!

    And since when did I have emotions? You clearly don't know me. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  50. Lorena Bobbitt was one single case more than twenty years ago. Valerie Solanis more than 20 years before that. Skim a police blotter any random single day for more violence committed by men than you can shake a dick at.

    ReplyDelete
  51. "His techniques are vile because they invade other people's boundaries. It's only a sociopath that does not get this and wants a fucking bar graph and a pie chart. Coercion is wrong, and taking advantage of the nature of many females fear of directly shaming a man, this is repugnant, and THIS is why men deserve to be directly SHAMED, because they think this kind of boundary degradation and coercion to get INSIDE another person's body is wrong."

    The other part of my response I think got caught up in the spam filter (Dave - I think it has something to do with posting external links? Google/Blogger seems to have been cracking down on this - I've noticed it a lot) but anyway, this statement demonstrates exactly how you think the "average man" thinks its ok. Most men do not think like Gunwitch, hun' - just like most women aren't an abyss of evil and hatred like Andrea Dworkin. But good job buying the party line and all. I'm sure you're making someone proud.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Snobographer -

    As a man go to the police and tell them your girlfriend just beat the shit out of you and see what kind of reaction you get. Any wonder the police blotter isn't going to paint the whole picture for you?

    ReplyDelete
  53. who was that chick who set her husband's crotch on fire?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Deezee, perversely, your comment about my relatively hands-off moderation was caught by the spam filter, but it's up now.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Also, yeah, I think links do increase the likelihood of getting spam filtered. But not all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Deezee, most police are men, and not typically the most liberal feminist of men. If there was a pandemic of female-on-male violence, it's very difficult to imagine they wouldn't be strongly sympathetic about it.

    ReplyDelete
  57. "But this topic really isn't about me or you. His techiques are "vile" to your perspective beacause of a reason you still haven't provided outside your own experience. Give a critique and we'll talk further."

    You need a detailed explanation for what's wrong with this guy's techniques? Really?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Snob -

    Are you a dude? Ever tried telling your dude friends that a chick just beat you up?

    ReplyDelete
  59. There is a video made by the guy on youtube

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc5pl0e5lvU

    ReplyDelete
  60. Strangely, I think I caught a glimpse of the mask coming down ...

    "Jerkin off to Barry Kirkey"

    Why does it strike me as totally obvious that a PUA-wannabe would fantasize about masturbating to another dude?

    ReplyDelete
  61. "You need a detailed explanation for what's wrong with this guy's techniques? Really?"---M

    I honestly think you find them vile because shooting someone in the face is vile.

    But hell, that's just me. I thought the Bundy comment was fishy but like I said; if he hasn't committed the crime it may have raised an eyebrow but it wouldn't seem as incriminating.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Blah . . should have read "if he hadn't committed the crime."

    Damn sleep deprivation.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Well that's an assumption on your part because his later act has nothing to do with the vileness of his pickup method. You really don't see what's wrong with his "teachings"? Really?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Fishy? The Bundy reference? Imagine what you'd call it if a female dating guru touted Valerie Solanis's philophy.

    ReplyDelete
  65. "You really don't see what's wrong with his "teachings"? Really?"---M

    And you wouldn't give a run down as to why? Really?

    ReplyDelete
  66. What a f*cking piece of shit that mutherf*cker is. What, on God's green earth would justify shooting an unarmed women in the face? I'd kick that coward's ass, and I'd do it in a dress and high heels.

    ReplyDelete
  67. "who was that chick who set her husband's crotch on fire?"

    Inner monologue: Don'tsayyourmomdon'tsayyourmomdon'tsayyourmomdon'tsayyourmom...

    ReplyDelete
  68. I just remembered George Sodini was into the PUA community too.

    ReplyDelete
  69. "And you wouldn't give a run down as to why? Really?"

    Why do I owe you a rundown as to why seriously invading another human being's personal space, treating them like an object to be isolated and stalked, and putting your hands all over strangers who very likely are just going about their days vile? I seriously do not understand the lack of basic human empathy on display in the comments section of this blog. If you cannot understand *on your own* what is wrong with the kind of behavior this guy endorses in his pick-up techniques there is just no hope for you at all.

    ReplyDelete
  70. By the way, a bunch of the quotes Deezee posted in his 5:37 link last night are fakes. Seems worth mentioning.

    ReplyDelete
  71. "If you cannot understand *on your own* what is wrong with the kind of behavior this guy endorses in his pick-up techniques there is just no hope for you at all."---M

    No hope? That's what feminism provides. No hope.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Angus, you're right about the quotes. I haven't gone through them all, but the quotes from Judith Levine are out of context and completely misrepresent her views. She's a pro-sex feminist who's written about anti-sex hysteria, not an anti-sex radical feminist.

    One of the quotes is clearly a summary of what someone else believes, not a statement of her beliefs. Another, the "man-hating" one is from a book she wrote trying to understand misandry, not an endorsement of it.

    Here's a recent piece of hers on "sexting" hysteria that will give a much clearer view of her thinking about sex.

    http://www.judithlevine.com/2009/05/decent-exposure/

    I've seen quotes from her in other "oh no evil feminist" lists passed around by MRAs that similarly misrepresent her. This does not give me much faith in the accuracy of the rest of the quotes on these lists. (I know a few of them are real, but beyond those old chestnuts I'm inclined to doubt.)

    Whether you agree with her or not, Levine is absolutely positively not a Dworkin-ite radical feminist.

    ReplyDelete
  73. @Booboonation

    "Again, you miss the point and bring up Lorena Bobbit. Does this type of thing happen DAILY? NO if it did, I would be a SICK MF for saying, gee I guess there may have been a good reason, or whatever. "

    So just because women may (I said may following your logic quoted) more frequently give men "good reason" to do what they do, this is somehow the man's fault? Just like the Bobbit thing is the man's fault because men don't give women reason's often enough to make it a problem

    WTF, You are a sick MF Chauvanist Pig!

    There is no reason to Kill, harm, mutilate, etc another person except in cases of self defense or in defense of another. A sleeping man is not a danger and that Bobbit woman should still be rotting in jail for her heinous crime. Anyone harming another should be in jail for these heinous crimes!

    ReplyDelete
  74. "So just because women may (I said may following your logic quoted) more frequently give men "good reason" to do what they do, this is somehow the man's fault? " Again with the ridiculous fucking victim blaming. What you say here does not follow in any way shape or form from what Booboo said. And booboo never blamed Bobbit's victim. Booboo's point was that finding one case of a woman committing a terrible crime against a man does not prove that rates of violence by women against men are equivalent or comparable to rates of violence by men against women. It is like how if I could find an example of a Jewish person torturing a Catholic in Spain during the Spanish Inquisition, it would not prove that anti-Catholic violence by Jews was equivalent to, as widespread as, etc. violence against Jews by Catholics in that time. To say that these cases (an individual Jewish perp vs the Spanish Inquisition) are not equivalent is not to justify the former, the same principle applies to the Bobbit case.

    "that Bobbit woman should still be rotting in jail for her heinous crime." And he should be in jail for raping her, or for his domestic abuse conviction against his third wife. You are awfully quick to condemn violent female criminals, but not male ones. Was Lorena right to revenge attack John? No. But I fail to see how his crime that night against her (rape) or his third wife (assault) was less heinous than hers against him. There is a difference between feeling sympathetic and thinking a crime is justified. There is also a big difference between discussing violent crimes by the victim against the perpetrator before the incident (immediately or long term and ongoing) and assuming a victim's economic class, job, clothes, drug habit, etc. means they were 'asking for it'. I find male perps whose victims committed violent crimes against them sympathetic (it is rare but this does happen, but is far more common in cases of male-male murder than male-female murder), but I don't think that justifies their actions either.

    ReplyDelete
  75. No one here that I have seen has condoned the shooting. Trying to show that most PUA folks would not condone this is not the same as condoning the shooting. Trying to show that PUA has little to do with MRAs is also not the same as condoning the shooting. Trying to show that feminists sometimes do the same thing (celebrate or at least discuss their own violence, a good example being the SCUM manifesto which is required reading in women's studies courses) is not condoning the shooting.

    Apparently the feminists here take any dialog which does not consist of "we damn the shooting, the gunman, the movement he was part of, and any slightly related movements which deal with men" as condoning the shooting.

    Pretty pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  76. @M, 1/8/11, in response to Deezee:
    "Why do I owe you a rundown as to why seriously invading another human being's personal space, treating them like an object to be isolated and stalked, and putting your hands all over strangers who very likely are just going about their days vile? I seriously do not understand the lack of basic human empathy on display in the comments section of this blog."

    It might help to reflect that people of certain turns-of-mind have always regarded basic human empathy as a fatal weakness.

    Indeed, empathy could only undermine a man's muscular resolve in a world where the highest purpose he can realistically aspire to is to get his through wise adaptation to a timeless and venerated status quo - though it be written in a bizarre code mingling scripture, biology, history, and anger raised to a first principle.

    ReplyDelete

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

Sociable

ShareThis