But after reading the cached page... I really don't understand what the creator did wrong?
He was a guy that I a lot of people can identify with, whom is publishing a book about his experiences?
Is seduction intrinsically bad?
Quoting from the "manual":
> 5) Get CLOSE to her, damn it!
> To quote Rob Judge, “Personal space is for pussies.” I already told you that the most successful seducers are those who can’t keep their hands off of women. Well you’re not gonna be able to do that if you aren’t in close!”
> “All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They began touching them immediately, kept great body language and eye contact, and were shameless in their physicality. Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That’s hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.
> Decide that you’re going to sit in a position where you can rub her leg and back. Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don’t ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.
This is the bit that's being decried as "intrinsically bad" - not seduction in general - because it advocates invading another person's personal space and touching them when they've expressed they don't want to be touched "because it will arouse her".
They are banning all projects related to seduction though. This seems a bit excessive, considering even the supreme court basically released a guide to seduction at one point. (C.f. the 'one bite at the apple' rule as it relates to sexual harassment.)
Maybe I'm being an idiot but where did it say that in your quote?
Perhaps it's this line:
>Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. //
I'd say implicit in that is that "when you have to stop because they've rejected your advance it's fine because they KNOW [blah blah blah]".
To be honest it's Kickstarter's gig, but I think putting someone down in this way for simply advocating diminished personal space in social interactions, seems a bit heavy.
Seriously from the "We were wrong" post I was expecting the "manual" to be telling you how to feed someone rohypnol [memory removal drug] not to touch their back when you're on a date.
>Content promoting or glorifying violence against women or anyone else has always been prohibited from Kickstarter. //
Where's the bit that promotes violence? It must be very obvious in the book otherwise they wouldn't surely be risking libelling the creator by making them out to advocate violence against women.
So, basically, trying to teach awkward dudes how to start physical stuff if they're too inexperienced to know how.
I haven't seen such a broken thinking process anywhere else. If anything seduction is about giving women what they really want. That said it does have a somewhat, hmm, sketchy reputation which is no doubt related to a combination of loathing for men who have a difficult time getting laid and the extreme marketing tactics that those kinds of guides are usually sold with.
And seduction isn't inheriently bad, but there are still some around who are trying to be politically correct and seduction isn't exactly something you are supposed to talk about in polite company.
"Pull out your cock and put her hand on it. Remember, she is letting you do this because you have established yourself as a LEADER. Don't ask for permission, GRAB HER HAND, and put it right on your dick."
(from: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/1dvnem/above_the_...)
The whole thing is disgusting, degrading, and has no place on this earth.
I simply don't think the line is as clear-cut, for many of those who were outraged at Kickstarter. I think the company may have inadvertently stepped out onto a PR tight-rope.
[1] Note the use of words like 'murder simulator'/'rape simulator' or the outrage and claims of sexism/homophobia/stereotyping whenever there's a fictional representation of a character or situation that happens to (however briefly) conform to some stereotype.
I wonder how many people outraged at this have explicitly asked for permission before every step of physical escalation in every one of their relationships.
Keep in mind that in the original post it only happens after dating, kissing, fondling and fingering without protest. At that point, if you describe the next step between two consenting adults out of context it's going to sound "rapey".
First, it disturbs women because it's perceived as a shift in the roles and their power over the other.
Second, it disturbs men, at least some of them, because when read it from the armchair, looks just ridiculous.
Third, expert players ("PUA"s) are very often troubled people, who become expert because they have a great need for validation. Their writings can be perfectly valid and effective, but surrounded by tons of self-validation, so they cause aversion to the person rather than the content.
There is a mix of #2 and #3 in the reaction to your comment.
The problem is that the things written look rape when put out of context. Abstractly, they are all forms of physical assertion. Nobody, except fools and rapists, would do them where inappropriate.
Putting the girl's hand in one's k is something that is effective in a very specific context. Putting a a girl on one's lap is something that, again, is effective in a very specific context.
Both of them are not* done unless one expects a consenting reaction.
The key difference between physical assertiveness and rape is that the first is done with expected consensus, the second with expected dissent (so that force is involved).
The armchair critics are mixing the two, just because they don't have idea of how those things work in real life.
Regarding the general idea of seduction, that's a separate subject, and it's actually complex and multi layered.
Summarizing, seduction is at his essence psychological hacking. Asserting that it's bad the exact analogue of a non-engineer saying that hacking is bad.
To conclude, the guy writing the book is clearly psychologically troubled, and there are way better books than his.
"Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That’s hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.”
In all honesty I don't blame Kickstarter for approving it originally because at face value the project does seem harmless, but nevertheless they f'ed up and admitted to their mistake and I applaud them. It's never easy to admit you were wrong.