My point was not about PUA. You said:

nagging too much will make people so desperate to be left alone they may well agree to sex

I have a very hard time imagining this working... I can't see why this would be rewarded with sex. Sex with a woman might happen in spite of nagging, not because of it.

You also talked about PUA, but the above is a simple claim of fact which is incorrect.

Well, sure. I was taking issue specifically with Konkvistador's post, above, and the claim:

nagging too much will make people so desperate to be left alone they may well agree to sex

I have a very hard time imagining this working... I can't see why this would be rewarded with sex. Sex with a woman might happen in spite of nagging, not because of it.

This is NOT me saying "evil PUAs do this", it's "orthogonal to your points about PUA, you have made a simple factual claim backed by personal incredulity which is, in fact, false".

I think you need to give us the definition of PUA you are using, because you seem to be using one that excludes a lot of actions or strategies which one might think would be advantageous to a person who wants to get laid, and unethical persons who want to get laid seem highly likely to be a subgroup of people perusing and participating in a hypothetical discussion of PUA that tabooed all ethical criticism.

Yes, nagging and pulling down pants are definitely entirely different things. The latter is more ethically grey while the former is more pathetic.