Live data from Hacker News

We were wrong

kickstarter.com

321–330 of 546 posts

Re: We were wrong

#321
post #277
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, he didn't. Open [1] and search for "permission" and "dick". It's all right there. [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/1dvnem/above_the_...

Actually he had. Those passages were not there and clicking on your link led to those passages having been removed at one point at the height of the shit storm.

What are YOU looking at? I pulled open the link and searched for "permission". It's the second use of the word. The entire passage is right there.

Re: We were wrong

#322
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Woah, really big difference here. I wish this was up towards the top of the comments so people got both sides of the issue before pointing fingers.

It doesn't matter where it is, or how often it is. People don't want both sides, they want to be outraged.

This.

Re: We were wrong

#323

Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men. If it becomes necessary to take a few quotes out of context in our noble quest to protect the fairer sex, so be it. Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles. > The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advic…

Well of course the misogynist doesn't believe he's misogynistic. Why should his opinion matter more than the hundreds of people who complained?

How about the millions of people who didn't complain? Just because a handful of people who literally spend their entire lives seeking things to be offended by complained about something, doesn't mean their opinion is the majority, or more valid than anyone else's.

Re: We were wrong

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it's completely context dependant. The context, which is conveniently being ignored in most of the discussion, is that at this point you are already "fooling around", at which point it might actually be a fairly reasonable thing to do. It also says "If she says no, stop immediately"

What you are describing is still sexual violence. Forcing someone into a form of contact they didn't consent to, even if there has been some other kind of intimate contact, is still sexual violence. A lot of sexual assaults occur in this way.

So trying to kiss a girl that you've been out on several dates with is sexual assault?

Re: We were wrong

#325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you’ve gone out on several dates, you’ve kissed, she’s invited you to her home, and you’re now sitting on the couch with her, more often than not, the girl will expect the guy to take the initiative. By that time, asking her if you can touch her is a major downer for her. You’re expected to try something. If she didn’t want to fool around, you wouldn’t be there. That’s the context of the quotes, and in the book,…

That's great. So all you've gotta do is replace, "Try to have sex with her, and stop if she says no" with, "Find out if she wants to have sex with you, and do so if she does." The difference that makes to whether or not she consents -- the "downer" -- is precisely the point.

Actually the point is that how you ask the question determines the answer, both from a desire point of view and from a consent point of view.

Re: We were wrong

#326
post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a load of shit. There are so many circumstances in which someone may feel powerless to say something or engage in a resistive act, or may be physically incapable of doing so that the time. Rapists use the justification of lack of "acceptable" resistive force all the time, there is no place for this kind of comment.

There's a big difference between "resistive force" and saying no. Anyone can say no, at least in situations in which both partners are of equal power. In situations where one partner has greater power than the other, it's usually illegal for them to be intimate anyways (teacher/student, employer/employee). Also, if you, say, kiss someone without their explicit consent, I think it's pretty obvious when they are not ki…

1) Power imbalance exists in general between men and women, in favor of men

2) Rapists and society at large often blame rape victims for not resisting enough. Rapists do not have a problem with a lack of consent and relying on victims to stop their own assault is completely unacceptable. The kickstarter project in question advocated for physically violating actions to be undertaken by would-be assaulters and put the burden of stopping assault on victims and should this kind of thing should never be supported period.

Re: We were wrong

#327
post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "defense" misses the point. The gist of the controversial advice is "Don't wait for signs before you make your move. Let her be the one who rejects your advances. If she says no, stop immediately and tell her you don't want to do anything that would make her uncomfortable. Try again at a later time if appropriate or cease entirely if she is absolutely not interested." This is not a defense. This advice leads to…

>And for what? To avoid the embarrassment of saying, "So do you wanna fuck?" How old are you? I'm not the person you wrote this to, but I can answer that I am 41 years old, have been married for 11 years and have three children (including a daughter). When I think of the little scene you've played out there occurring, I see the biggest nerd in the world getting his first chance at making out with a girl when he awkwa…

> When I think of the little scene you've played out there occurring, I see the biggest nerd in the world getting his first chance at making out with a girl when he awkwardly stops and says, "Do you consent to fornication at this time?"

...really? Sure, whatever, let's go with it. If that's the only way you know how to figure out consent, that's what you need to say. And I bet it will work more often than not, too. The solution is to teach people better ways to find out if their partner consents, not to say it doesn't matter.

But a fifteen year old kid is likely not going to have a great first time no matter what. If you can't imagine a sexually active adult talking about sex in a sexy way, that's very much your problem.

> Frankly, your advice makes you sound unbelievably young and inexperienced with women. I have yet to meet a woman that wants you ask permission for every stage of a sexual relationship. In fact, every woman I've talked to about the subject has told me that it's specifically unwanted.

I'm not here for the dick waving contest, but suffice it to say my experience is not just with talking to women.

Re: We were wrong

#328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tension in feminism between sexual liberation, on the one hand, and repression of male sexuality on the other is remarkable. And make no doubt, feminism is now included in the official religion of our day. How long before "misogynist" tweets are banned on twitter? Before "misogynists" are kicked off of facebook? And don't worry gentlemen, it is not violating your freedom of speech because these are private compan…

Right not be offended? Right not to be groped or sexually assaulted, you mean. They're offensive, but much more than that too.

The kickstarter was for publishing a book, not paying someone to assault people.

Re: We were wrong

#329
post #312
post #107

Dear fellow HN dwellers, If you read the writings of the Guide's author and do not recognize that it is misogynistic and advocating sexual assault, you have a problem. That problem is that you are mistaking sexual assault for "taking the first step." You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that…

And since nobody is mentioning this, women should be very afraid of the 800 or so individuals who purchased this vile piece of crap.

[deleted]

Re: We were wrong

#330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from king_jester's good point, he doesn't even follow that CYA in the guide. The other (more offensive, IMO) passage that people are in an uproar about is when he talks about how even when she rejects your touching or rubbing her when you first meet, she's actually secretly getting turned on, and that you should continue.

> when he talks about how even when she rejects your touching or rubbing her when you first meet He suggests no such thing. He writes about having been on several dates and now you’re alone with her and you’re expected to escalate. His gives some suggestions how to do so, to make it more physical: “Be playful. Spin her around. Pick her up. Push her away as a tease and then pull her back in. Decide that you're going t…

Really? Please. Read the damn quote:

Every woman you flirt with. Touch them immediately. Be shameless in your physicality. When a girl rejects your advances, she knows that you desire her, and it arouses her physically and psychologically.

Stop trying to evade what the quote says and trying to find some legalistic way of misreading its plain meaning.

Post reply on HN