Silas definitely is not neutral on this topic, and perhaps could do with lowering the snark. That being said, he is not alone.

The kind of experiences Silas mentions seem common for men with certain types of personalities and social experiences (or lack thereof). They are common in the seduction community, which is massive (there is a pickup club called a "lair" in almost every major city in the world). It's not at all uncommon for the following drama to unfold:

• Male interprets prescribed behavior from women, or from various cultural authorities (e.g. religion, feminists, the media)
• Male attempts to manifest those behaviors, yet encounters rejection due to some of those prescriptions being wrong, or incomplete
• Male watches other men being successful who aren't playing by the rules he was taught, or even engaging in diametrically opposite behaviors
• Male becomes bitter

I've done several posts on this subject on my blog: When You Have Feminist Guilt, You Don't Need Catholic Guilt and Why Respecting Women as Human Beings is not Enough

I don't think that female misstatement of their preferences is an attempt, conscious or subconsciously evolved, to eliminate men from the gene pool, however things may look. I summarize some research comparing female preferences and behaviors here.

Is it not equally likely that you are the outlier? That you have had an unusual experience combination of inaccurate advice from women? Or that you interpret such advice differently than normal?

No, it not equally likely that I'm the outlier. Keep in mind, PUA instructors consistently, universally have the problem of "unlearning" their students of their previous conception of how to treat women. My shackling to this unhelpful carefulness about "respecting women" is typical. So typical, in fact, that simple misogyny often results in improvement in generating attraction.

I think that most people couldn't express consciously what would attract them (as they don't know until they see it-- and everyone on this website is probably an exception to this rule to some extent), so I'm loath to accept your conclusion that they're trying to remove you from the gene pool.

The cause of an adaptation, the shape of an adaptation, and the consequence of an adaptation, are all separate things. It's not necessary that women be trying to remove me from the gene pool, but certain adaptations give them certain rules for handling certain kinds of men. The useful advice that PUAs give, diverges sharply from any advice any woman will openly give you. So why is female advice so consistently divergent from working advice?

See how the mechanism might work? Women want male children that can "get the job done". One way to filter out men who can't given them those genes, is to feed bad advice to men. The only one who will listen to it are the ones who would let women walk all over them. And so they're more likely to encounter men with good genes.

I'm not proposing this as a theory; I'm just showing how my proposal (women give bad advice to feed out the dumb and submissive) doesn't require any ill will or conscious deception on the part of women; it can just be something they naturally gravitate toward without understanding why.

People teaching you "proper behavior around women" are generally not trying to help you in the way you seem to expect. (In my experience, anyway)

If what I expect is something that will actually lead to a relationship with mutual desire, that is correct.

Anyway, my only point was that you are not very neutral on this subject (which you admit), and you don't seem to be taking that fact into account.

I'm not neutral on the topic, but that doesn't matter. I'm the living evidence of what it's like to walk on eggshells around women in the possibility that I might accidentally oppress them. That biases me in favor of telling others not to fall into the trap of buying into feminist standards while you get crowded out of the dating pool.