You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

bogus comments on Open thread, Nov. 24 - Nov. 30, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: MrMind 24 November 2014 08:56AM

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

Comments (317)

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

Comment author: advancedatheist 24 November 2014 07:43:59PM *  2 points [-]

Another post I made to this AlterNet piece:

I can see why progressives want to discredit PUA coaches and belittle the men who seek their help, setting aside the question of these coaches' competence at doing what they advertise about themselves.

One, the PUA subculture promotes a politically incorrect view of women which sounds like the world view of traditional, conservative patriarchy, only read in reverse, so to speak: PUA coaches endorse the patriarchal view of women's weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and they teach men how to exploit these for sex by adopting the strategies of old-school cads. And I feel some sympathy for this view of women because to me women seem to have defective agency relative to men. If PUA coaches and writers can make a living with this message, perhaps their advice to men based on this traditional understanding of women has some validity after all.

And two, these men seek to improve themselves in an era of "You didn't build that" and the denigration of the self-made man. They've sought help in civil society and in the market instead of turning to the collectivist institutions created, maintained and thought-policed by progressives. They've rejected the progressive ethic of helplessness, dependency and victimization, in other words, in favor of the conservative ethic of self-reliance.

Comment author: bogus 24 November 2014 08:37:08PM 10 points [-]

PUA coaches endorse the patriarchal view of women's weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and they teach men how to exploit these for sex by adopting the strategies of old-school cads.

I think most pickup coaches would object to this point of view, and it might make some of them quite unhappy. PUAs teach strategies that they believe will increase your attractiveness to the opposite sex. But it's silly to see attraction as a "weakness" or "vulnerability". Many people (women included, of course) want to feel attracted in the first place, especially to someone with other good qualities - they just don't get to make that choice most of the time! That's the one sense in which 'reduced agency' could be said to be relevant - but it doesn't negate the fact that agency really is quite heavily involved in any kind of pickup.