= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on How to deal with someone in a LessWrong meeting being creepy - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (769)
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.
I agree; it's just a symptom. "A universe where no one likes anybody" is a much better summation.
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.
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.