I stopped reading his stuff when I realized it was having a negative effect on how I think of women, sexuality, and my own sexual identity. (I am a hetero male).

Funny that he does so partially for a set of reasons that are falling into disfavour on LessWrong.

My question is which parameter value he incorrectly estimates; after all, he is not just evil he is also imprudent in missing the joys of monogamy and matrimony. I believe that most of all, he underestimates his transparency to his observers in real life. I sometimes call this the endogeneity of face to thought and thus his face must be somewhat evil too. Since his strategies cause him to spend time only with women he can fool, he doesn’t correctly perceive how he is wrecking his broader reputation; the same is probably true for the rest of us as well.

This also piqued my interest:

(But IS he evil? Is there not a theorem which suggests that rule-governed sweet young things will in fact overinvest in the rule and, if you could selectively induce "rule disengagement," human welfare might rise? But no…that theorem was refuted some time ago.)

I'm not quite sure what he is referring to.