NancyLebovitz comments on How to deal with someone in a LessWrong meeting being creepy - Less Wrong

16 Post author: Douglas_Reay 09 September 2012 04:41AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (769)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 September 2012 08:29:36PM 13 points [-]

See also Confessions of a Pickup Artist Chaser, a substantial overview of different sorts of PUA, a woman's experiences exploring the PUA subcultures, and some theory on the subject.

Has anyone read the book?

She picks up on something I find off-putting about much of the PUA material I've seen (and LW is almost the only place that I've seen PUA material). It seems to be set in a universe where no one likes anybody.

Comment author: pjeby 09 September 2012 02:08:19AM *  8 points [-]

something I find off-putting about much of the PUA material I've seen (and LW is almost the only place that I've seen PUA material). It seems to be set in a universe where no one likes anybody.

That is actually a good way of stating the difference between the material that I don't like, vs. the material I do. People who focus on the zero-sum aspects of mating and dating (i.e. both inter- and intra-gender competition) seem, well, creepy to me.

I suppose those folks might write off my concerns as simply saying they're displaying low status by focusing on those aspects, but I think the real issue, as you state, is simply that they seem to live in a universe where nobody likes anybody or has any positive intentions, and people who think otherwise are all just signalling or deluded. It's like if HP:MoR's Professor Quirrel was giving relationship classes!

(Luckily, this is not a universal characteristic of PUA theory, as Soporno and AMP demonstrate.)

[Edit: brain fart - I wrote "non-zero sum" when I meant "zero sum"]

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 September 2012 02:31:36AM 7 points [-]

Non-zero sum? I'm not sure that's the issue.

In theory, I think it would be possible to have an alliance-building PUA model of relationships, and it would still be Quirrelesque.

HughRistik had a different list of benign elements in PUA, I think-- but have any of the benign styles shown up at LW?

I'm not sure whether this is relevant, but it took me a while to put what bothers me about PUA as I've seen it into words, and longer than that to pull together the nerve to post about it.

Comment author: pjeby 09 September 2012 05:42:34AM 2 points [-]

Non-zero sum? I'm not sure that's the issue.

I agree; it's just a symptom. "A universe where no one likes anybody" is a much better summation.

HughRistik had a different list of benign elements in PUA, I think-- but have any of the benign styles shown up at LW?

Define "shown up".

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 September 2012 05:57:25AM 2 points [-]

Define "shown up"

Appeared with sufficient force to make an impression.

This is admittedly subjective (and probably incomplete-- I don't read everything at LW), but what I saw was probably mid-range PUA-- neither grossly misogynistic nor obviously benign-- combined with claims that there are excellent elements in PUA and I shouldn't stereotype it by its worst.

Comment author: ikrase 03 February 2013 06:19:47PM 0 points [-]

The stuff that's particularly benign in PUA is also the stuff that PUA has no monopoly on.

But yeah, I think that the true rejection is just how Quirrel-ish it is. Not harmful, not unprincipled, but just how it seems to be written for the sake of sexytimes alone.

Comment author: coffeespoons 08 September 2012 09:47:34PM 7 points [-]

Reading the book now. I'm certainly less anti-PUA than I was before I started reading it., and I have much more sympathy for the guys who join the seduction community than I used to.

She picks up on something I find off-putting about much of the PUA material I've seen (and LW is almost the only place that I've seen PUA material). It seems to be set in a universe where no one likes anybody.

Yes, this!

Comment author: Document 12 September 2012 01:53:00AM 1 point [-]

It was written by a Less Wronger. I'm not sure whether that's ironic or not.

Comment author: ciphergoth 11 September 2012 10:16:33AM *  1 point [-]

I read and enjoyed it.