Well, isn’t that nice, then? To think all the people who have horrible raped someone in this world could just “smooth things over with them afterward” and they’ll “often” be forgiven. After all, it was just some minor “offending” the rapist did. :rolleyes:
TWTTWN, you are a sick, bastard, creep. You’re a fucking nutjob, asshole, and possibly troll all in one.
He’s so used to gaming people that he really doesn’t get it when you call him on his bullshit. It’s like a teenager that argues bitterly when you call them on their bullshit that you aren’t playing by the rules.
TWTTWN has implemented a social strategy that relies on superficial signals in others rather utilize the frontal lobes of his brain as it matures to process social situations in more depth. This strategy may make short term sense in that superficial response works early in that development, but over reliance on the superficial as that part of the brain matures means you’re not exercising that part of the brain.
He really doesn’t get that we can form “big picture” inferences from the large number of posts.
I said repeatedly in the thread that it’s not what I do, and the experience I have with it is with the concept in relation to sex and studying it not with actually executing it in the severe “rape her and convince her it’s okay” form. Other people are the ones who took that to mean that the example in that post was my M.O. despite my repeatedly stating through the thread that I’m saying it’s POSSIBLE, not that it’s what I do.
I’m sorry you don’t like my wording. I don’t know why you put “minor” in there when I didn’t say it but I guess it helps you to bully me if you make shit up. So which part of the summary of my point: “If you offend a person but smooth things over with them afterward, they’ll often forgive you” do you specifically disagree with?
I love you too. If you’re going to insult me, do it based on things I’m saying instead of snippets that outrage you where you fill in some blanks based on your own stereotyping.
Just a side note, I responded to the OP in this pit thread because it left out relevant quotes that make the OP’s outrage baseless, but my participation in this thread will probably be limited to drawing ASCII penises because it’s just going to be a silly negative doggy-pile and I don’t see any reason to participate in it.
Read this social cue: I can’t figure out how in hell you think that the bolded part is the least bit persuasive.
Read this social cue: if everyone here is majorly creeped out by you, maybe those vaunted PUA skills of yours aren’t as well-developed as you think they are. Maybe in real life people are also majorly creeped out by you, but IRL they’re too polite to tell you how creepy you are.
Read this social cue: telling us how many people you’ve banged is not going to change my mind at all, nor should it. Your experience is tightly focused on one tiny set of social interactions, and you’re so narcissistic that you’ve shown practically zero concern for what harm you might cause to others, a willful blindness that renders all your experience moot.
On one hand, it is possible to have sex in which one party is protesting, but still a willing participant. (Just recently, for example, my girlfriend was in a particular mood at about 4:30 in the morning on a morning in which we both needed to be up at 7:30, and needed sleep.) My “We shouldn’t be doing this.” didn’t mean “I don’t want to have sex.”; it meant “I want to have sex but I also want to sleep; I need a minor prod to start getting into this; I reserve the right to be smug about this when we’re both stumbling around exhausted in a few hours.”
On the other hand, I sure as hell wasn’t protesting the whole time once the aforementioned minor prod was provided.
Now that you mention it I guess I sort of assumed people would give other people the benefit of the doubt and realize that “the whole time” wasn’t a literal timeframe the way “making pancakes” doesn’t mean you have to actually make pancakes, but everyone wants to jump on the PUA = Rape bandwagon.
I actually got looped into youwiththeface’s “do you have experience with that?” super vague question, where when I said yes I meant with being in the general “this could go either way” situation, not executing the “rape 'n pancakes” example specifically, but I didn’t realize till later that she/he was asking “do you have experience raping a girl and making her pancakes”, so I guess that was my bad for not interpreting his/her question in the most attacking light possible before answering.
On top of that, as I’ve said a million times the original post was an exaggerated example discussing a general psychological situation, not a play by play of my Saturday nights. I gave the opposite example to contrast it as well, but nobody cares about that. This is like saying “I know how to cheat at poker, and if you had a partner you could collude to cheat the rest of the table.” and then someone asking “So you have experience with this?” and me saying “Yes, I have experience with the situation of people cheating in relation to poker” and everyone jumping on me going “SO YOU CHEAT AT POKER EHH!!!”
Like, that’s not what I said, relax.
Which part of “I said repeatedly in the thread that it’s not what I do, and the experience I have with it is with the concept in relation to sex and studying it not with actually executing it in the severe “rape her and convince her it’s okay” form. Other people are the ones who took that to mean that the example in that post was my M.O. despite my repeatedly stating through the thread that I’m saying it’s POSSIBLE, not that it’s what I do.” do you not understand?
Oh good, then maybe you can quote exactly where I said “PUAs rape women and make them feel better about it afterward”. You can’t, because I didn’t. I repeatedly said it’s possible because of the psychology involved, not that it’s what we do.
It’s your post linked in the OP. You described a scenario in which “rape really comes down to how the person feels about what happened afterward.” I believe everyone else is telling you that, whether you personally do it or not, your argument here is fucked-up wrong.
So, look, TWttWN really isn’t that complicated, however much he wants to be. I don’t think he’s a troll, either, because if he is then oh dear god the time he’s putting into it, I can’t even imagine it. Here’s how it goes:
Once upon a time, there was a guy who thought of himself as a loser. In his particular case, the source of his negative self-image was the fact that girls didn’t seem to want to touch his peepee. In time, he figured out a way to convince a certain subset of girls to touch his peepee, and this made him feel a lot better about himself. Suddenly there were girls having sex with him all over the place, and he drew from this the only conclusion that one can when peepee-touching is the entire foundation on which your self-image is built: I am awesome. He figured out quickly, though, that calling yourself a “pick up artist” in real life is a good way to create a whole new category of jokes at your expense, so - in constant, continuing search of someone to validate his idea that being able to have sex makes him special and awesome - he takes to the Internet. He finds his way here, and is flabbergasted to discover that people still don’t find him awesome, despite his now-extensive experience with having girls touch his peepee. So he ups the stakes. He turns this thing that 80% of the population does without much thought into this comically extended philosophy, and devotes page after page to these numbing explications of same. And yet… and yet… people still won’t acknowledge his awesomeness, nor agree with or even really give credit to his ideas. How can this be, when he is the only man in the world who has ever had any of the sex? So he convinces himself that his ideas are just too elaborate, that no one can really grasp them because they lack his keen insight into human nature. And he becomes a douchebag. And they lived happily ever after, hallelujah, amen, and The End.
This is nothing particularly unusual. People do this all the time, with fantasy sports or wine tasting or a particular film series or what have you. It’s a little sad, and you’re embarassed for them, but they generally mean well enough and honestly, everyone deserves to be happy. If getting laid via parlor trick makes you happy, godspeed and god bless.
Idle focuses on this quote:
This is a creepy quote, obviously, and that’s why TWttWN has been backpedaling away from it just as fast as his tiny little legs can carry him. But I think the more telling quote is here:
See, here’s the thing. The line separating “rape” from “romance” is less a tightrope and more a giant, twenty-foot thick stripe with neon lights decorating it from end to end, a high barbed-wire fence on either side, and a big sign that says “Jesus Christ, dude, don’t fuck people unless they want to fuck you back” hung at every fence post. TWttWN is trying to imagine ambiguity where none exists. Consent is very plain, very simple. Are there women who will say, “no, we shouldn’t,” while simultaneously unhooking their bra and pulling down your zipper with their teeth? Yes. These women are not being ambiguous. Their interest is very clear.
So why? Why does TWttWN create this ambiguity? Why “walk the tightrope” in the first place, even if it existed, which it does not? The quote above acknowleges the risks in crossing the line, some of which are substantial risks. Unless you are absolutely infalliable (you aren’t), there is a chance that you will hurt another human being very badly by “walking the tightrope.” So why would you do it? To get laid? But surely such a brilliant Artist can get laid tomorrow, or later tonight, if the current subject of your attention is less than enthusiastic about it.
See, TWttWN wants to get laid every time he tries, because it is the only prop he has to hold up his self-esteem, and as far as he is concerned he has to get what he wants. It doesn’t matter the risk to himself. More importantly, it doesn’t matter the risk he is forcing on someone else. He wants his peepee touched, dammit, and he is totally comfortable risking a woman’s health and emotional well-being to make it happen.
That’s the thing, the little touch of sociopathy, that turns “kind of pitiful” into “creeper.”
And finally, because he seems to have convinced himself that this is some kind of obliterating comeback:
None. This is absolutely true.
My daughter just turned seven, and given that your processing ability is probably right around where hers is, I figure if she mastered the following concept you maybe can as well:
If you do something wrong, planning all the time to apologize and duck the consequences, then your subsequent apology is insincere and not worth anything.