We were wrong

http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/we-were-wrong

by lukashed • 13 years ago

205 525 13 years ago

kickstarter.com

emingo• 13 years ago

Maybe I was raised by a bunch of rabid dogs...

But after reading the cached page... I really don't understand what the creator did wrong?

He was a guy that I a lot of people can identify with, whom is publishing a book about his experiences?

Is seduction intrinsically bad?

dwb4• 13 years ago

There's paragraphs to write on the subject, but in short, yes this was very bad. Details here: http://caseymalone.com/post/53339539674/this-is-not-fucking-...

inglesp• 13 years ago

I don't have anything to add beyond this quote from the linked-to blog post:

"Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That’s hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.”

famousactress2• 13 years ago

It seems pretty clear you haven't read the parts of the published guide that were raising alarm flags. They're quoted in this blog post linked to from the apology: http://caseymalone.com/post/53339539674/this-is-not-fucking-...

aeorgnoieang5• 13 years ago

It also seems fairly clear that you haven't read the context of those same quoted parts.

redwood• 13 years ago

There must be more in the depths of reddit that made this far worse than it seems within the kickstarter page..

swombat2• 13 years ago

See http://curiousrat.com/kickstarter-allowed-funding-for-a-sexu...

Quoting from the "manual":

5) Get CLOSE to her, damn it!
To quote Rob Judge, “Personal space is for pussies.” I already told you that the most successful seducers are those who can’t keep their hands off of women. Well you’re not gonna be able to do that if you aren’t in close!”
“All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They began touching them immediately, kept great body language and eye contact, and were shameless in their physicality. Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That’s hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.
Decide that you’re going to sit in a position where you can rub her leg and back. Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don’t ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.

This is the bit that's being decried as "intrinsically bad" - not seduction in general - because it advocates invading another person's personal space and touching them when they've expressed they don't want to be touched "because it will arouse her".

Tichy3• 13 years ago

A bit further on they also write that the seducer should learn to figure out when NO really means NO. And if humans are wired that way (responding to touch) then it's not the fault of somebody writing a book. There is also scientific research that people are more likely to respond to your requests if you touch them while asking. It's just psychology.

Alex3917• 13 years ago

This is the bit that's being decried as "intrinsically bad" - not seduction in general - because it advocates invading another person's personal space and touching them when they've expressed they don't want to be touched "because it will arouse her".

They are banning all projects related to seduction though. This seems a bit excessive, considering even the supreme court basically released a guide to seduction at one point. (C.f. the 'one bite at the apple' rule as it relates to sexual harassment.)

pbhjpbhj• 13 years ago

touching them when they've expressed they don't want to be touched //

Maybe I'm being an idiot but where did it say that in your quote?

Perhaps it's this line:

Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. //

I'd say implicit in that is that "when you have to stop because they've rejected your advance it's fine because they KNOW [blah blah blah]".

To be honest it's Kickstarter's gig, but I think putting someone down in this way for simply advocating diminished personal space in social interactions, seems a bit heavy.

Seriously from the "We were wrong" post I was expecting the "manual" to be telling you how to feed someone rohypnol [memory removal drug] not to touch their back when you're on a date.

Content promoting or glorifying violence against women or anyone else has always been prohibited from Kickstarter. //

Where's the bit that promotes violence? It must be very obvious in the book otherwise they wouldn't surely be risking libelling the creator by making them out to advocate violence against women.

khawkins• 13 years ago

All he's saying here is that you should test/push boundaries, not to continue once they've rejected the advances. But, he notes, that even if they reject, it achieves a desired effect which may eventually pay off.

angersock14• 13 years ago

It seems, though, that those are taken out of context--the context being what to do once in an intimate setting and having already established some form of relationship.

So, basically, trying to teach awkward dudes how to start physical stuff if they're too inexperienced to know how.

maximilianburke• 13 years ago

When the guide is written like a rape manual, yes, yes it is. It features quotes like:

"Pull out your cock and put her hand on it. Remember, she is letting you do this because you have established yourself as a LEADER. Don't ask for permission, GRAB HER HAND, and put it right on your dick."

(from: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/1dvnem/above_the_...)

The whole thing is disgusting, degrading, and has no place on this earth.

roc2• 13 years ago

At the same time... if this same content was written as fiction, with the viewpoint character/hero accomplishing his goals through these same methods and relaying that same philosophy through dialogue or internal monologue, would it be (as) problematic?

garethadams3• 13 years ago

That particular comment is taken from a part of the guide where you're already with a girl in "a private, intimate setting". It's assuming that you're with someone who's already comfortable around you. It's not saying that you should get naked in a nightclub with someone you've just met.

Anderkent6• 13 years ago

I don't see how that's a 'rape manual' quote if it is clearly in a section labelled sex. I.e. you both already have the expectation of sex - are in a bedroom or whatever. It's obviously clear that he doesn't suggest such behaviour in a different context.

aeorgnoieang5• 13 years ago

That quote was in a section about sex.

rlt9• 13 years ago

Are you saying you consider that "rape", even if the subjects were already kissing and fondling?

I wonder how many people outraged at this have explicitly asked for permission before every step of physical escalation in every one of their relationships.

blaabjerg• 13 years ago

Maybe I'm a horrible person, but I don't think taking someone's hand and placing it on your dick is such a horrible, disgusting thing to do when you're in a situation like the one described in that post.

Keep in mind that in the original post it only happens after dating, kissing, fondling and fingering without protest. At that point, if you describe the next step between two consenting adults out of context it's going to sound "rapey".

knowaveragejoe5• 13 years ago

The lack of context given in the blog post is what seems to have fueled this groupthink storm.

tomjen317• 13 years ago

Apparently for these people seduction = violence against women.

I haven't seen such a broken thinking process anywhere else. If anything seduction is about giving women what they really want. That said it does have a somewhat, hmm, sketchy reputation which is no doubt related to a combination of loathing for men who have a difficult time getting laid and the extreme marketing tactics that those kinds of guides are usually sold with.

And seduction isn't inheriently bad, but there are still some around who are trying to be politically correct and seduction isn't exactly something you are supposed to talk about in polite company.

rimantas• 13 years ago

Take a look at some survey on the subject what women want in terms of sexual fantasies. Dominance from men will be high at the top.

Nursie• 13 years ago

It has a sketchy reputation because it's about getting as many women into bed as possible and treating them as objects rather than people.

eco• 13 years ago

I'm confused too. The blog post mentions violence against women and sexual-violence several times. The cached page is unreachable for me but I suspect a "seduction guide" doesn't advocate hitting women. Seduction guides are often sleezy from what I've seen and appear to be more effective at taking advantage of lonely men than they are about taking advantage of women. The blog post stops just short of calling this a rape guide though which I highly doubt is the case.

j546• 13 years ago

That's because the project page itself was done in a way that doesn't raise any flags. But if you dig into what his book actually contains, then you'll see what's wrong with the project.

In all honesty I don't blame Kickstarter for approving it originally because at face value the project does seem harmless, but nevertheless they f'ed up and admitted to their mistake and I applaud them. It's never easy to admit you were wrong.

pizza2343• 13 years ago

Most of the negative arguments against seduction have a few root causes. Seduction science is very disturbing.

First, it disturbs women because it's perceived as a shift in the roles and their power over the other.

Second, it disturbs men, at least some of them, because when read it from the armchair, looks just ridiculous.

Third, expert players ("PUA"s) are very often troubled people, who become expert because they have a great need for validation. Their writings can be perfectly valid and effective, but surrounded by tons of self-validation, so they cause aversion to the person rather than the content.

There is a mix of #2 and #3 in the reaction to your comment.

The problem is that the things written look rape when put out of context. Abstractly, they are all forms of physical assertion. Nobody, except fools and rapists, would do them where inappropriate.

Putting the girl's hand in one's k is something that is effective in a very specific context. Putting a a girl on one's lap is something that, again, is effective in a very specific context.

Both of them are not* done unless one expects a consenting reaction.

The key difference between physical assertiveness and rape is that the first is done with expected consensus, the second with expected dissent (so that force is involved).

The armchair critics are mixing the two, just because they don't have idea of how those things work in real life.

Regarding the general idea of seduction, that's a separate subject, and it's actually complex and multi layered.

Summarizing, seduction is at his essence psychological hacking. Asserting that it's bad the exact analogue of a non-engineer saying that hacking is bad.

To conclude, the guy writing the book is clearly psychologically troubled, and there are way better books than his.

Tichy3• 13 years ago

I guess to understand this one has to consider that Kickstarter is based in puritan America?

vacri3• 13 years ago

I'm not sure where you get that from. Puritans have never been big on the rights of women.

Tichy3• 13 years ago

They seem to have a problem with the notion of sex, though.

freehunter2• 13 years ago

Puritans in 1600, no. Puritan America in the 2000's, sex is a very taboo subject, especially when it comes to women.

e1ven• 13 years ago

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/puritan

2: one who practices or preaches a more rigorous or professedly purer moral code than that which prevails

throwit19792• 13 years ago

The rights of women? Women have a right to not have a book published? Really?

I could make the parallel argument for The Anarchist's Cookbook, and the difference between publication and action, but what's the point? Gender politics has been extraordinarily effective at driving reason out of such discussions.

Crake19• 13 years ago

Sex-negative feminists and sex-negative Christians have a weirdly large amount of things in common at times.

xauronx4• 13 years ago

Jesus, seems like an over reaction. Books and guides like this are nothing new, and should be taken in context/used appropriately. A nerd in a club is going to take this brash advice like:

"All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They began touching them immediately, kept great body language and eye contact, and were shameless in their physicality."

And not go up and rape a woman, but perhaps take a chance and put their hand on the girls shoulder during conversation to show interest, where they might have otherwise oddly looked away from them. Also, there's a huge difference between personal conduct in a night club and in a library.

Anyhow, I'm a nerd with a SO that has never drank and hates night clubs but that's my take. Seems like any other topic and people would be crying free speech and censorship. A guide like this isn't going to turn a normal man into a rapist.

ebiester• 13 years ago

The excerpted quotes of advice were pretty damn rapey.

The problem is that many (every one I've seen) of these "seduction" manuals are written in a way that is hostile toward women.

angersock14• 13 years ago

Would you mind listing some of the quotes you found "rapey"?

lewispollard10• 13 years ago

I would guess that people buying a seduction guide don't really understand 'women' - in that they believe that women are somehow different, unapproachable and alien to them. The misogyny stems from the book not teaching these people that women are equal and worthy of respect, but instead teaching them to ignore consent and be an 'alpha bro' stereotype.

cgag2• 13 years ago

You don't have to disrespect women to understand that they largely want the guy to make the first move. I don't get what all the hate here is about.

xauronx4• 13 years ago

I don't see it as ignoring consent. If you're on a date with a girl and you hold her hand without asking her, that's not sexual assault or being an alpha bro. If you're having a lively conversation and touch her arm, that's not sexual assault or creepiness, it's being a human and engaging the person you're interacting with.

We all know douche bags that make girls uncomfortable and push the line. We all hate them. They've probably (almost definitely) never read this book. A book/guide like this isn't a bro factory, and won't do anything to an existing bro that a night out with another bro wouldn't do.

Should timid guys trying to seek a companion try to emulate some portion of it? Probably. Friend-zoning is big with timid guys because they never broach the physical bubble. If a nervous guy aims to emulate 100% of this advice they'll probably successfully emulate 20% of it.

kamjam4• 13 years ago

This. Seems like a few lines taken out of context, and you can make anything seem bad if you take it out of context.

Sex - Pull out your cock and put her hand on it. Remember, she is letting you do this because you have established yourself as a LEADER. Don't ask for permission, GRAB HER HAND, and put it right on your dick. - http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/1dvnem/above_the_...

Sounds bad out of context sure, but in context he is talking about when you are about to have sex with the woman, in a private location (or whatever). You are in the act of it, not forcing yourself on a woman you just met in a bar.

Personally, I can see nothing wrong with this. Sure, the wording could possibly be better or less crass maybe, but if the book was to go to publish then there would be the time to go through that phase. All books go through edits.

Usual overreaction to everything that may seem slightly anti-feminist.

As josh2600 says above, there are similar books to this already, maybe we should start rallying Amazon et al too?

http://www.amazon.com/The-Game-Penetrating-Society-Artists/d... http://www.amazon.com/The-Pickup-Artist-Improved-Seduction/d... http://www.themysterymethod.com/

king_jester27• 13 years ago

And not go up and rape a woman, but perhaps take a chance and put their hand on the girls shoulder during conversation to show interest, where they might have otherwise oddly looked away from them. Also, there's a huge difference between personal conduct in a night club and in a library.

Touching someone you don't know is a no-no and many people find that form of contact (even in a night club) to be disturbing. Touching someone without their permission is just something you shouldn't be doing.

rlt9• 13 years ago

Oh please, we're now comparing touching someone's shoulder in a night club with sexual assault? If you don't want any contact at all with other human beings you probably shouldn't be in a night club.

papsosouid11• 13 years ago

See, this is exactly the sort of ridiculous, reactionary nonsense at the heart of these crusades. No, touching someone's shoulder is not rape. You may define yourself as the moral minority, selflessly protecting everyone from imaginary evils, but your opinion is a tiny, minuscule, insignificant minority. Virtually everyone disagrees with you.

hackinthebochs7• 13 years ago

Touching someone without their permission is just something you shouldn't be doing.

I think its pretty clear reading the comments on this post who has actual experience in typical social settings and who doesn't. (Hint: you don't)

Dewie2• 13 years ago

You should go to Latin America and tell them that they've been interacting in a universally inappropriate way all this time.

blairbeckwith• 13 years ago

Reading some of the comments on that blog post, I left thinking: Am I a terrible person?

I just don't see what's wrong with this project, and I certainly don't see the link between it and "sexual violence" – where is Kickstarter making this connection? Say what you will about the seduction community, my very brief and infrequent encounters with it have been largely positive and I left thinking that they were a generally respectful, if a little bit misguided, group. There's some of their terms and techniques I don't like, such as "negging", but there's things like that in virtually every community that I don't like.

Certainly not sexually violent.

goldins• 13 years ago

No?

"Decide that you’re going to sit in a position where you can rub her leg and back. Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don’t ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances."

shawabawa36• 13 years ago

The author's response:

http://pastebin.com/zwHYzCZe

The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around. If "Don't wait for signs, make the first move" promotes sexual assault, then "Kiss the Girl" from The Little Mermaid was a song about rape.

Doesn't seem very rapey when you consider this is after several dates and they are alone together. He also says over and over again "If she says no, stop immediately".

deong• 13 years ago

Grabbing a woman's hand and forcing her to touch your exposed penis is, I think, sexual violence by almost any reasonable standard.

garethadams3• 13 years ago

If a girl is already in a private, intimate setting with you after you've met her a few times – like that part of the guide relates to – then sex probably isn't too much of an unreasonable assumption.

Of course that counter-article cherry-picked quotes from all over the guide and threw them together to make it sound like these were all things you should do on first meeting someone

bayesianhorse3• 13 years ago

It really really depends on the context and how you define "force". This doesn't even come close to mild sado maso.

A kiss can be sexual assault, especially against minors. But even strangling (which I don't do and never did to a woman) can be part of consential sex. It's really sensitive subject. Let's not talk about fifty shades of gray...

"Consent" isn't discussed enough. For example prostitution is widely seen as consential, despite tons of evidence that prostitution hardly ever is a conscious, free career choice, and rape is rape no matter how much you pay to the pimp...

shawabawa36• 13 years ago

Actually it's completely context dependant.

The context, which is conveniently being ignored in most of the discussion, is that at this point you are already "fooling around", at which point it might actually be a fairly reasonable thing to do.

It also says "If she says no, stop immediately"

Dylan168073• 13 years ago

The relevant quotes were not on the kickstarter page itself.

josh2600• 13 years ago

Great apology. Right to the point, no dodging blame, and an acknowledgement of the debt to society.

Now, that being said, is this not a take on the book "the game", about picking up women? Am I missing something or is Kickstarter now picking and choosing what is "good" content? Obviously they have to do this to some extent, but where is the line drawn?

HaloZero• 13 years ago

I read "The Game", I was curious. It's less how-to guide than a journalist foray into becoming ingrained into the pick up community. Any behavior by the people in the book is just stating facts about what they did. So while it might be viewed as a beginner guide, it's more of a story than anything else.

I believe this is more akin to a guide to specific actions that you should take that are basically misogynistic.

throwit19792• 13 years ago

As it is with everything else, the line is drawn at "if enough people become offended".

joshguthrie2• 13 years ago

To me (and based on everything I read/searched/saw/experiences in the "community"), The Game is not really about "you're gonna have sex with plenty women", it's more about "you have to be a better person and then, you may happen to have sex with plenty of women".

It's about self-improvement: it's about "go out, socialize and meet people", it's about "have an activity that you enjoy and that drives", it's about "know yourself and know what you want",... Sure, sex is there (Because we're adults and if some of us like the married life, other crave for the carnal pleasure of one-night-stands) but it's mostly "don't shoot yourself in a foot by asking her if she still thinks about her ex". It was never about forcing oneself on women, it was about "fun for you and the persons you want to interact with".

That said, even I would punch anyone who'd follow the "advices" from this "book".

illtakesix• 13 years ago

I think it's worth reading through the creator's response to the situation: http://pastebin.com/zwHYzCZe. He claims and reasonably supports that the highlighted excerpts were taken out of context.

swombat2• 13 years ago

Definitely. Key part to quote:

The gist of the controversial advice is "Don't wait for signs before you make your move. Let her be the one who rejects your advances. If she says no, stop immediately and tell her you don't want to do anything that would make her uncomfortable. Try again at a later time if appropriate or cease entirely if she is absolutely not interested."
The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around. If "Don't wait for signs, make the first move" promotes sexual assault, then "Kiss the Girl" from The Little Mermaid was a song about rape.

gilrain• 13 years ago

I won't touch the issue of whether the action was right or wrong here on Hacker News, but I think everyone has to admit that this is a brilliant example of an apology done well.

They do not equivocate (the "sorry you were offended" apology) and they take direct action to fix what their users felt was wrong (new policy made) as well as somewhat atone for the original offense (donation to RAINN). It's also written simply but very skillfully: zero weasel words or anything.

I happen to agree with the action taken, but bravo in any case for the brilliant apology!

scrrr• 13 years ago

You are right about this being a good apology, but I think placing to much value on a good apology is not healthy. We are already living in a world where words, promises and good intentions matter too much. In the end, actions matter most. In fact, they are the ONLY thing that matters.

I prefer a company with a good track record that issues bad or no apologies to a company with a bad record, but great apologies for all of their mistakes.

I'm not saying anything about kickstarter.com here. I just want to make a point about, and I'm saying this with a wink, apology-porn.

cwp• 13 years ago

You're right that actions matter. Part of what makes this a good apology are the actions that back it up. They took meaningful action to redress the harm they caused, and put a policy in place to prevent the mistake from recurring. It's awfully hard to build up a record of bad actions followed by good apologies, because good apologies are more than just words.

But I think words are important too. The folks at Kickstarter clearly regret not having cancelled the project before it was funded, and that comes through in their apology. They gave the reasons for their failure, without turning them into excuses. That kind of sincerity is rare, and it's important. I'd rather see companies defend their actions when they believe they were right, sincerely apologize when they believe they were wrong, and never issue insincere non-apologies.

tomjen317• 13 years ago

I don't see it as brilliant, I see it as a giant foot-in-mouth situation (which may be colored by the fact that I don't have a problem with seduction guides in general, and haven't seen the material in question) - until now Kickstarter has been neutral on legal content so if I see something I don't like, well too bad, but now there is a precedent for removing something because somebody finds it offensive, but others like it; so now they either have to issue an apology and retract the next offensive thing (say a t-shirt commemorating the ban on assault weapons) or lose their stance as neutral.

If they had instead issued a non-apology-apology they would have been of the hock.

DanBC2• 13 years ago

until now Kickstarter has been neutral on legal content

No it hasn't. They've had clear policies about certain types of content. They even say in this blog that if they'd seen the Reddit material when the KickStarter had been created they would not have allowed it.

bmelton9• 13 years ago

Agreed. The more dangerous precedent is that they are willing to cave to a vocal group who may or may not be right. Without defending the material, because I frankly can't, I am troubled to see Kickstarter imposing its own value judgements on projects, and even worse than that, now subject themselves to the value judgements of whichever populace can prove to be the most vocal.

dirkgadsden5• 13 years ago

This isn't a legal issue. You can write all you want promoting rape culture. Kickstarter, as a private company, is well within their rights and Terms of Service to pull your project if they find it in bad taste. And they should most definitely be commended for deciding that rape-culture-promotion is inappropriate.

freyr• 13 years ago

until now Kickstarter has been neutral on legal content

From their guidelines:

No offensive material (hate speech, etc.); pornographic material; or projects endorsing or opposing a political candidate.

bthomas• 13 years ago

I'd normally agree with your rules for an apology (eg. after a breach) but in this case I think their aggressive tone creates a Streisand effect. I for one had never heard of this guy. He certainly seems to be gaining some fans among commenters here.

I worry that their post will only increase book sales...

vacri3• 13 years ago

No, they weren't wrong. They decided not to do a snap judgement on a controversial topic. Let it slip with what little time is left, examine post facto how it got through, tighten the cracks, explain it to the punters. They did everything right except think that they did it 'so wrong'. Making snap judgments on new areas of information can bite you back and make things much worse.

DannoHung• 13 years ago

Look at all these HNers defending sexual assault.

emiljbs2• 13 years ago

Oh, wow, really?

So just because some people are asking "Hey, is there something intrinsically wrong with these guides or what?" they're defending sexual assault.

blocking_io19• 13 years ago

Yes, because there is something intrinsically wrong with these guides.

ebbv2• 13 years ago

And people wonder why there aren't more women in tech.

blocking_io19• 13 years ago

HN is ground zero for privilege denying wealthy cis white men.

Chris20483• 13 years ago

What's the insinuation here?

Crake19• 13 years ago

Just like tumblr is ground zero for privileged females attending $30,000/year liberal arts colleges for women's studies, right?

shawabawa36• 13 years ago

I think you're a murderer.

Anyone who defends you is defending murder.

blocking_io19• 13 years ago

brilliant analogy apart from the bit where this guide actually does advocate sexual assault.

superuser2• 13 years ago

Is there proof that the guide was promoting sexual assault?

theorique6• 13 years ago

No. It suggested aggressive tactics for communicating your interest in a girl, not sexual assault.

Doesn't seem to have slowed down the twitter / tumblr hysteria at all, though.

angersock14• 13 years ago

Look at this one HN ignoring the documented context for the remarks.

Sexual acts, taken out of the context of mutually-interested intercourse, do very much resemble assault. It's a funny sort of fact of life.

Put even more coarsely, to quote probably one or more very confused offspring having happened upon unlocked doors "Why are mommy and daddy wrestling?"

merlincorey7• 13 years ago

From the author:

The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around. If "Don't wait for signs, make the first move" promotes sexual assault, then "Kiss the Girl" from The Little Mermaid was a song about rape.

http://pastebin.com/zwHYzCZe

blocking_io19• 13 years ago

Sorry, but if you're using a Disney film as an example of a good portrayal of women, you've already lost.

tomjen317• 13 years ago

Look at you, unable to understand that things aren't binary and that it is possible to be interested in seduction guides and wanting to have consensual sex with attractive women without wanting to rape them.

It might even, gasp, be possible that women wants to have sex with men. Have you considered that.

kepano• 13 years ago

I don't think one can fault Kickstarter for this or the Kobe Beef Jerky incident. As the platform grows so will the number of abuse cases. The submission process is a fairly strict filter, but from there the project is more than crowd-funding, it becomes increasingly about crowd-sourcing the due diligence process.

My concern is that a crowd-sourced due diligence process can be slow and requires active participation from the backers. That sense of common responsibility is what's needed to help the company take rapid action and for the community to remain a positive place for funding great ideas. I hope Kickstarter can continue inspiring that proactive participation from its users.

hacker7893• 13 years ago

Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men.

If it becomes necessary to take a few quotes out of context in our noble quest to protect the fairer sex, so be it.

Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles.

The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around. If "Don't wait for signs, make the first move" promotes sexual assault, then "Kiss the Girl" from The Little Mermaid was a song about rape.

http://pastebin.com/zwHYzCZe

lewispollard10• 13 years ago

Well of course the misogynist doesn't believe he's misogynistic. Why should his opinion matter more than the hundreds of people who complained?

tomjen317• 13 years ago

Truth is not subject to voting and Kickstarter has proved that they consider women inferior and in need of protection by banning this type of content.

newnewnew8• 13 years ago

Is it misogynist to learn what women like in a partner and attempt to be that? Isn't that making a world more according to women's preferences? How is that "hatred of women"?

If the author is wrong, and you write a better manual, many men struggling with the modern dating world will gladly buy your more effective book. But we aren't arguing fact, are we? We're arguing religion.

papsosouid11• 13 years ago

How about the millions of people who didn't complain? Just because a handful of people who literally spend their entire lives seeking things to be offended by complained about something, doesn't mean their opinion is the majority, or more valid than anyone else's.

WA2• 13 years ago

Is this a joke? Inferior? Women like to have sex just like men do. But many women, especially in their early 20s, are often reluctant to take the first step. So a man needs to take action. That's what the whole fuss is about.

Anderkent6• 13 years ago

It's sarcasm. 'Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men.' and therefore we must ban this kickstarter.

tomjen317• 13 years ago

And all seduction guides do is offer advise on how to do that, but somehow what is acceptable for every issue of Cosmo (and a fair number of mens magazines) isn't acceptable for a guide on kickstarter.

rlt9• 13 years ago

I'm pretty sure the OP was being sarcastic.

king_jester27• 13 years ago

There is a difference between being the one to break the ice vs. violating someone's physical space, which is what the project in question advocates.

Cushman19• 13 years ago

Women have been the target of systematic oppression for millenia, of which sexual violence has been a primary tool. Are you open to the possibility that that might not be over quite yet? That that might actually be deserving of a little sensitivity?

hacker7893• 13 years ago

Oh yes. I'm sure everyone would agree history has been so much easier on men than on women. The world isn't black and white.

pizza2343• 13 years ago

That's a very naive thought

Do you think that women in the meanwhile, has been just poor victims? Don't forget that women are generally way ahead of men in human skills.

Men and women have, their own forms of dominance. I agree that physical dominance is despicable, but don't think that the forms of dominance were going only in a single direction.

Crake19• 13 years ago

Men have been the target of systematic oppression for millenia, too, you know.

Throughout all of history, it's men that have been forced to fight and die in wars without any choice in the matter. There's a lot of raping of males that goes on in Africa during their various wars, but any coverage will inevitably focus on women instead (due to funding issues--no one cares about a male rape victim).

Life is hard for everyone, male and female.

scarmig7• 13 years ago

”5) Get CLOSE to her, damn it! To quote Rob Judge, “Personal space is for pussies.” I already told you that the most successful seducers are those who can’t keep their hands off of women. Well you’re not gonna be able to do that if you aren’t in close! ” “All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They began touching them immediately, kept great body language and eye contact, and were shameless in their physicality. Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That’s hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.”

“Decide that you’re going to sit in a position where you can rub her leg and back. Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don’t ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.”

I don't know if it should have been removed from Kickstarter, but this is bad, bad behavior that must be discouraged.

As for the "whip your cock out and drag her hand to it" bit, everything's contextual, but for some reason I'm skeptical that people buying a "seduction guide" will grok the very subtle facets of circumstance that might make that consensual.

cgag2• 13 years ago

Excuse me miss may I please sit close to you and touch you? May I kiss you now?

How exactly do you think people should go about this kind of thing?

alipang• 13 years ago

I'd say his use of the word "escalate" would mean to start somewhere innocuous, touching a shoulder or whatever, and go from there.

You portray the potential customer of this as some kind of rapist dreg, but I'm guessing it'd be more like a shy guy who is too timid with women (which he seems to portray himself as as well). In that light I find this delivered in slightly bad taste, but not really something to be up in arms about.

Kickstarter pulled this cause it's not politically correct, and people were upset about some quotes taken out of context. That's also fair, it's their right as a business, but still kind of weak, nice apology or not.

Metrop02185• 13 years ago

EDIT: Apparently the OP was being sarcastic, and I failed to read deep enough into the ASCII characters. But if he hadn't been sarcastic, I would've still said what I said below.

What the hell? I had to read this over 6 times to make sure I was understanding it correctly.

"Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men."

That right there ladies and gentlemen, is the thinking that permeates and sustains misogyny throughout our world.

I understand that the original poster had good intentions, but the way is high and his eyes are definitely upon the ground.

Women are not sensitive, fragil, or inferior. Please avoid false blanket statements like this.

rlt9• 13 years ago

Hint: sarcasm

jff• 13 years ago

It's sarcasm, dumbass.

throwaway40042• 13 years ago

I'm so glad this is the top comment.

I've read almost all of the author's comments on reddit and he writes like a man who respects women deeply but also understands that a lot of men do not understand how to talk to and deal with women.

I understand that 'seduction' is a band brand, one which people react negatively to when the see it, but by looking at the material you will probably find that it isn't offensive at all.

The quotes are taken out of context and are not a good sample of the material. The truth is, most women are so bored at a bar and in life with the guys they meet, they are probably bigger beneficiaries of the material than the guys who read it.

doktrin2• 13 years ago

What I dislike most about these discussions is that it invariably attracts ideologues of all stripes, of which you appear to be one.

"Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men.
Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles."

You're attacking a straw man with ad-hominems.

More importantly, you're glossing over the fact that women legitimately face threats and concerns that are significantly different from those of men. It's disingenuous to paint this as a plot by evil feminists.

Relevant :

    "More than one in three women worldwide have experienced physical 
    or sexual violence, a report by the World Health Organization 
    and other groups says.

    It says 38% of all women murdered were killed by their partners, 
    and such violence is a major contributor to depression and other 
    health problems." [1]

[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22975103

newnewnew8• 13 years ago

I missed the chapter on murdering your partner.

Crake19• 13 years ago

Well, it probably helps that male rape culture is in full effect. In the UK, it's legally not even possible for a woman to rape a male. Most US organizations won't count it either--the FBI found almost a 50/50 ratio of male and female rape victims, but a man being raped didn't count as rape because it "didn't count as rape." If there is a rape culture, I'm not entirely sure it's a female rape culture. Raping a female is basically condemned by everyone at this point. Case in point: national outrage over the Steubenville thing.

Domestic violence rates have been for years known to be roughly 50/50 between the sexes. Some studies have even found that women are slightly more likely than men to initiate violence.

Of course, only women get societal support and access to domestic violence shelters. My father was warned by the police that if he ever called them when my mother was beating him, the police would be forced to arrest him instead (due to the domestic violence laws pushed through by feminists in the VAWA).

newnewnew8• 13 years ago

The tension in feminism between sexual liberation, on the one hand, and repression of male sexuality on the other is remarkable. And make no doubt, feminism is now included in the official religion of our day. How long before "misogynist" tweets are banned on twitter? Before "misogynists" are kicked off of facebook? And don't worry gentlemen, it is not violating your freedom of speech because these are private companies controlling every means of communication you have...

We are slouching towards a soft tyranny of the mind, driven by the marxist ideology that each member of an "inferior" group has the right to not be offended.

scarmig7• 13 years ago

Right not be offended?

Right not to be groped or sexually assaulted, you mean. They're offensive, but much more than that too.

Cushman19• 13 years ago

Male sexuality is not about violence, and repression of violence is not repression of male sexuality. Signed, a man.

king_jester27• 13 years ago

The tension in feminism between sexual liberation, on the one hand, and repression of male sexuality on the other is remarkable.

Male sexuality isn't the domination of women and feminism makes no attempt to quash people's sexuality. This is pretty close to attributing social strata and gender roles to biological determinism, which is totally false.

And make no doubt, feminism is now included in the official religion of our day.

Feminism has not been and is not a religion. Further, given the existing statistical data about social inequality, we can most certainly say that feminism is NOT a mainstream point of view for must people in the United States.

How long before "misogynist" tweets are banned on twitter? Before "misogynists" are kicked off of facebook?

Given how much misogynistic stuff is on both facebook and twitter, never. But rest assured people will call you out for misogynistic crap and they are right to do so.

And don't worry gentlemen, it is not violating your freedom of speech because these are private companies controlling every means of communication you have...

The nature of capitalism and corporatism w.r.t. the internet is another discussion to have.

We are slouching towards a soft tyranny of the mind, driven by the marxist ideology that each member of an "inferior" group has the right to not be offended.

Feminism is not Marxism, except maybe that women as a class have a right to control the output of their labor (like all laboring classes), but that's another kind of discussion. If you believe that people challenging misogyny and kickstarter projects like this that promote rape and sexual assault is some kind of encroachment of your life, then you are part of the problem.

citricsquid2• 13 years ago

How does removing the kickstarter project after funding has taken place work for the backers? Do the backers no longer get their rewards? Does the project creator have no access to the backers information? Will Kickstarter refund the backers out of pocket? Strange situation.

bayesianhorse3• 13 years ago

The backers shouldn't have a bone with the that project. They should have seen the issue themselves before backing.

iandanforth3• 13 years ago

I don't respect this. I acknowledge that as it is their playground they can make this kind of judgement call, however I have always believed that freedom of speech also protects the freedom to hate and be a terrible person. There are countless texts, movies, and other 'creative works' which both condone and encourage violence against women, mass murder, torture, and other things I find abhorrent, but I don't get to ban any of them, and that is a good thing.

If your mission is focused on art I would encourage the kickstarter group to go back and re-read the history of banned works of art, and pay attention to which groups were pushing for those bans. I suspect you won't like the company you now keep.

loumf6• 13 years ago

"Freedom of speech" is a limit on the government, not on private companies.

maxerickson• 13 years ago

As usually codified in law. There is plenty of room for people to believe that rights to speech should enjoy greater protections (I don't mean to defend that position, I mean to acknowledge it).

Dylan168073• 13 years ago

They are refusing to organize payment to these things. They aren't 'banning' them in the sense you're talking about. I find your comparison offensive. You're twisting the meaning of the word 'ban'.

azar1• 13 years ago

I see no denial of the author's freedom of speech here. The author is free to host and fund their misogynist drivel on their own server, and Kickstarter doesn't seem to be denying that. Kickstarter has a business to run, and has some semblance of ethics, so it has chosen to refuse to offer its service to this content.

shiftpgdn• 13 years ago

Two things: One. Freedom of speech is a first amendment right to protect you from censorship by the government and the government only. Anyone, anywhere running their own service is fully within their rights to boot you off.

Two. A sleazy pickup artist book isn't anywhere remotely near any previous works of banned art. I would consider something as awful the film Cannibal Holocaust to be fine art before I used that term for some idiotic kickstarted pick up artist book.

Anderkent6• 13 years ago

Freedom of speech as defined in US law and freedom of speech as liberty we value are not necessarily the same. While it's not illegal to boot someone from a private service for expressing opinions you disagree with it, it still may be wrong.

apendleton2• 13 years ago

Not sure I agree with the parent poster, but I think he/she is well aware of the distinction you're drawing, and says so up front. Certainly, legal freedom-of-speech protections don't require Kickstarter to host any particular content. But Kickstarter can still espouse freedom of speech as a value they try to uphold in their practices, even if they're under no legal obligation to do so. I think as more and more of our online interactions move to hosted platforms, we have to decide as a society whether or not we want the hosts of those platforms to police our speech. Those spaces can either be free-speech spaces or safe spaces, but probably not both, and there's a legitimate discussion about societal norms to be had about where we want that balance to fall, independent of this particular rather-icky example (and let's face it: most examples that bring this discussion to light are probably going to be icky).

joshguthrie2• 13 years ago

I would consider something as awful the film Cannibal Holocaust to be fine art before I used that term for some idiotic kickstarted pick up artist book.

Calling Godwin's Law here. Nazis were proud of burning books that were not art.

wmeredith• 13 years ago

Freedom of Speech goes out the window when you start dealing with private enterprise. Kickstarter doesn't have the power to "ban" anything more than you or I. They're just addressing the kind of content they don't want to be promoting, which is totally within their rights.

Apocryphon3• 13 years ago

It's pretty hilarious when libertarians and believers in unfettered free enterprise cry foul against corporations and businesses for having content standards.

dspeyer• 13 years ago

There don't seem to be any direct competitors to kickstarter, so when kickstarter chooses to ban something from their site, they ban it from getting kickstarted. Just because they don't use violence doesn't mean they don't have power, or that their power doesn't come with responsibility.

iandanforth3• 13 years ago

Freedom of Speech goes out the window when you start dealing with private enterprise.

Why? And before you answer, take a quick survey of all the means you used to communicate today. How many of them were provided by 'private enterprise?' And how much of your day was spent on property owned by 'private enterprise?'

Not that we're going to resolve this debate in a thread :) but please consider the implications of this assumption. Also note I'm not advocating for a say anything you want whenever, wherever world.

lclarkmichalek• 13 years ago

They're not banning anything. They're banning it from their platform. They don't get to say "You can't publish that", but they do get to say "You can't publish that in collaboration with us". There is nothing stopping the author of this work to raise funds via alternate means, which is much as it has always been. I imagine most all controversial works have had problems getting published, but I don't think people cry out "censorship" whenever a publisher rejects a work on vaguely moral grounds.

atwebb• 13 years ago

I see exactly where you're coming from but KickStarter isn't the only outlet, there are plenty of others available.

It's murky water to tread anytime you start excluding groups but you also have to preserve the community that you build and do what you believe to be correct for it. The owners and admins of KickStarter are stewards of that community and have a duty to it. If, after very careful consideration, it is deemed that this material would hurt this particular group then it's fine by me if they stopped it. The creatives will go elsewhere because there are other places (this is key).

Random House doesn't get into the business of publishing books on many different subjects but plenty of other publishers do.

bmelton9• 13 years ago

I've been tweeting jeers to @DoSomething (the group that garnered the petition) and kudos to Perry Chen and Kickstarter for not having ceded to censorship.

To be fair, the book is ugly. The passages quoted are disgusting. I would never buy this book, nor endorse that anyone else buy this book. If asked, I would state that I think the book is disgusting and that you probably should not buy it.

What is even more disgusting to me is the very popular idea that its manufacture should have been censored. While we may each be able to judge for ourselves that this book does or does not (for me, it does not) have any artistic value, none of us is capable of making that decision for the others, and certainly not for everybody else.

I'm somewhat saddened to see Kickstarter's apology for this reason, and I am disgusted that the project was canned altogether. But worse than all of that, I am deeply, deeply troubled that so many young people were so eager to jump on the censorship bandwagon.

fusiongyro4• 13 years ago

You have kind of a funny idea of censorship. Kickstarter can't stop the book from being made, and authors are certainly not owed assistance by Kickstarter or anyone else to get their work published. It's actually never been easier to get books published and there's certainly no actual censorship happening here. The only role Kickstarter plays is aggregating funds. The author is not limited from pursuing that goal through other means.

gregd10• 13 years ago

You're confusing censorship with boycotting. I don't care if his book gets published...just by nobody I do business with.

fusiongyro4• 13 years ago

I think you're conflating the right to promote something abhorrent with permission to promote something abhorrent in my space. There are many examples of rights which can be exercised to perpetrate moral wrongs. Kickstarter isn't capable of impeding that. They are, however, well within _their_ rights to revoke access to _their_ mechanism.

Kickstater is, ultimately, a business, and they've decided they will make more money by doing a little of their own policing. If what's best for art isn't what's best for Kickstarter, expect them to do what's best for Kickstarter. If someone can compete with them by doing what's best for art instead, more power to them.

effbott2• 13 years ago

Kickstarter is a business and has no obligation to uphold free speech. They need to curate their projects to protect their reputation. What if they allowed filmakers to Kickstart porn movies? You could call it free speech and make no judgments about the act itself, but at the end of the day people would start to see Kickstarter as a slimy business that's willing to host any project as long as they get a cut of it.

tbirdz2• 13 years ago

Somewhat related: There's another site called http://offbeatr.com/ which is like Kickstarter, except it is exclusively for porn, sex toys, erotic art/literature/games, and other such adult projects. I don't know if they are perceived as "slimy" or not, but there are a lot of interesting, innovative projects on offbeatr.

brudgers• 13 years ago

Kickstarter is simply selecting with whom they choose to enter into a contractual agreement. So long as they do so in a way which is not illegally discriminatory, they are within their right.

Likewise, the potential counterparties to an agreement with Kickstarter are free to choose not to enter into a contract with Kickstarter.

dkokelley3• 13 years ago

A couple of points:

1) The project creator has freedom of speech to a point. For one, he cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded theater unless there actually is a fire. He also cannot advocate or call for illegal activity by others (such as "Go and mug that guy walking down the street"). This is where the line of protected speech gets blurred. Reading some excerpts from his works it's clear that he advocates for aggressive physical/sexual contact with or without permission, to the point of making the woman struggle to rebuff advances. Basically this is borderline sexual assault depending on how good of a lawyer you have.

2) Whether or not it is within the project creator's right to publish this as free speech, Kickstarter has their own interests in mind. By facilitating funding for this project, they may open themselves to legal liability if someone going by the guidelines set in the book does end up sexually assaulting someone.

To address what I see as the core of your comment, I agree that an old fashion book burning / banning is not the answer. Just understand that this work dances the line between protected and unprotected speech, and Kickstarter does not want to play a part in that. Also understand that there is a significant difference between Kickstarter not allowing a certain project (or class of projects), and the government declaring a topic to be unpublishable.

IANAL, so everything I'm saying comes from one vague semester of business law.

iandanforth3• 13 years ago

1) I think you may be incorrect about the advocating of illegal acts thing, but neither am I a lawyer so lets agree on "they could get sued out of existence." Totally valid.

2)A larger point is that the public/private divide is a false dichotomy. We have our lives and we want to be able to express ourselves. So my point is that the difference between the government and kickstarter banning something is one of degree but not in kind. It is a restriction on expression within a space. Granted, a much smaller space.

AnIrishDuck2• 13 years ago

For one, he cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded theater unless there actually is a fire.

This meme really needs to die. The "fire in a crowded theater" standard hasn't been relevant for half a century [1].

He also cannot advocate or call for illegal activity by others (such as "Go and mug that guy walking down the street").

This sounds like the "imminent lawless action" standard [2]. IANAL, but it seems that the "imminent" part of the standard applies to someone telling his pal to "go and mug that guy", not to someone who writes terrible advice for seducing women. Even if those that follow that advice are guilty of sexual assault, it is doubtful this author is placing women in imminent danger of sexual assault.

Whether or not it is within the project creator's right to publish this as free speech, Kickstarter has their own interests in mind. By facilitating funding for this project, they may open themselves to legal liability if someone going by the guidelines set in the book does end up sexually assaulting someone.

Again, IANAL, but I doubt that Kickstarter faces real legal liability here. This seems like standard first amendment territory. I am not aware of any constitutional law that forbids running a campaign to fund a book, no matter how bad the advice in that book is. If you can cite relevant statutes or caselaw, or can state a potential civil cause of action, I'm willing to be proven wrong.

Just understand that this work dances the line between protected and unprotected speech, and Kickstarter does not want to play a part in that.

It seems firmly on the right side of that line, no matter how distasteful it is.

IMO, it is far more likely that Kickstarter doesn't want to be branded in the public eye as a safe haven for molestation advocates, which I can understand.

1. http://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hac... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

patrocles• 13 years ago

Kickstarter should claim safe-harbor as they are a conduit.

This case means they open themselves up to being required to censor every project for every jurisdiction. Kickstarter apparently views the cost of that censorship as much less than the community cost.

Seems unlikely to be the case.

mcintyre1994• 13 years ago

I believe they've always censored in a fairly opinionated manner. I'd only be speculating if I tried to say why, but I imagine it's to do with wanting a much more active audience - a site needs to do a lot more to make you give your money than just keep on reading. If their projects list turned people away they'd be in a lot of trouble.

pathy• 13 years ago

For the sake of completion: http://pastebin.com/zwHYzCZe This is a statement on the matter by the author, linked in the original Reddit thread.

angersock14• 13 years ago

Relevant quote from your link:

"The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around. If "Don't wait for signs, make the first move" promotes sexual assault, then "Kiss the Girl" from The Little Mermaid was a song about rape."

OvidNaso• 13 years ago

The linked blog post has an update that is really interesting:

[UPDATE: In the opening paragraph of this beast I mentioned a Kickstarter campaign that I am passionate about, that represents everything I like about Kickstarter. But for some reason I am getting bombarded with e-mails from people that think that project and “Above The Game” are connected. And now people are pulling funding for the project I’m pumped for. Because of that, I’ve removed any mention of them by name.]

Makes you question if any thought was put into the situation by many of the people who are outraged.

oscardelben• 13 years ago

Has anyone read the actual response from the book author? http://pastebin.com/zwHYzCZe

dirkgadsden5• 13 years ago

It's easy to see why there aren't more women in computing with the mountain of rape culture, misogyny, and male privilege on display in these comments.

tomjen317• 13 years ago

And it is easy to see that whenever women are mentioned, or connected, people like you feel like you don't need to back up your assertions with facts, quotes, figure or any kind of argument.

Hn is an intellectual place. That means that we sometimes discuss news that requires you to read and understand the other sides point of view, not merely dismiss it out of hands with a few choice words that are chosen to silence debate, not to improve mankinds understanding of things.

dirkgadsden5• 13 years ago

"on display in these comments" is a pretty clear reference to a source. The people here defending the whole PUA genre are defending an objectification of women. The PUA approach treats women as objects that are to be manipulated to achieve the end the PUA desires. Defending such an objectification is a hallmark of male privilege throughout history, and furthermore is a type of misogyny and characteristic of rape culture.

Chris20483• 13 years ago

Because opinion here isn't dictated? Feel free to express your own opinions on the matter, but don't start with the slander because you dislike the opinion of others.

dirkgadsden5• 13 years ago

Slander is spoken falsehood, I think you meant libel. Also something is only a falsehood if it is false, and much of the writings here are quite characteristic of misogyny, rape culture (esp. apologetics), and male privilege as commonly used in SWE.

papsosouid11• 13 years ago

Odd you should say so. My wife is a programmer, and distances herself from the online computing world not because of "misogyny", but because of this insane crowd of privileged people who insist on pretending to be victims in her name.

dirkgadsden5• 13 years ago

Nice straw-man, since I never claimed to be a victim (I was merely making an observation). Also citing your wife's individual experience is a red herring since she alone does not represent a large sample size.

Crake19• 13 years ago

Without getting into specifics, as what the SRWs generally consider to be an "underprivileged" person or whatever...I have been feeling the same way as your wife lately QUITE a lot.

It makes it so that actual victims of sexual assault/rape/sexism/homophobia/etc can't talk about their experiences, because there's no way to distinguish between say people with ptsd!triggers and the people with omg-someone-disagreed-with-me!triggers. I hate it so much.

Crake19• 13 years ago

I don't really see any of this...although I do see a lot of examples of female privilege going on in the comments.

The type of women in tech we need are normal people who don't social justice blog for 14 hours a day on their tumblr about how oppressed they are. Oddly, the women who end up in tech are more likely to be the women who did their STEM classes/homework for 14 hours a day, so in the end it usually works out.

lotharbot2• 13 years ago

> "the decision had to be made immediately".

Kickstarter believes their only choices are "allow to continue unimpeded" or "cancel the project". This incident suggests a third possibility: "flag for review". They could set up a policy which allows them to temporarily suspend a project, placing a short-term hold on project funds so that they do not go either to the creator or get refunded. The review process would need to be fast and transparent, but not so fast as to require snap judgments.

doki_pen2• 13 years ago

He mentions having only 2 options to decide whether to cancel or let the funds go through. Isn't there a third option that they could use in the future, Put a delay on the transfer while you review it?

samspenc• 13 years ago

Why is Kickstarter unable to return the money?

ebbv2• 13 years ago

Dear fellow HN dwellers,

If you read the writings of the Guide's author and do not recognize that it is misogynistic and advocating sexual assault, you have a problem. That problem is that you are mistaking sexual assault for "taking the first step."

You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that aren't sexual assault that you could do before resorting to that.

If you believe that's a reasonable "move" to make, then you not only have no imagination, but your judgment of what's acceptable behavior is way, way off. It doesn't matter if this is a woman who you're behind closed doors with for the first time, that's not a normal, acceptable "move". That kind of thing is for people already in an established, ongoing relationship with a solid foundation of consent.

Without that consent, it is assault.

I strongly urge all of you who "do not see the problem" with the author's writings to do more research into exactly what consent is, and what women (as a whole, obviously it varies from individual to individual) see as acceptable, expected behavior.

If women are loudly saying "This is assault.", you need to take them at their word, because it is their judgment, it is their consent that matters. Not yours.

Sincerely,

A married, 34 year old HNer who is ashamed of this community right now.

EDIT:

I thought this was obvious but I have already read all the comments in this thread and all the "context" the excusers are providing. If you think pointing me to that again is refuting my points, then you didn't understand what I wrote.

Metrop02185• 13 years ago

"it is their judgment, it is their consent that matters. Not yours."

Amen brother.

Cushman19• 13 years ago

Just to be clear, because this is something misogynists like to pick on, both matter. The point of this is that you can't assume their consent just because you do.

Of course, men who don't have experience with not having the power to consent struggle with this idea.

tomp17• 13 years ago

That's true, but if she lacks consent, she should also voice it/make it clear at some point (disregarding obviously illegal power-imbalanced situations such as student/teacher, boss/worker, ...). Someone shouldn't be charged with rape just because their partner, after passionately and vigorously fucking the whole night, says she actually didn't want to the whole time.

Anderkent6• 13 years ago

You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move."

That quote was never given as 'taking the first step'. It was given as "how to begin when you're finally alone in the bedroom with mutual consent for sex". That is obvious even after only reading the one part of his 'guide' that includes this quote.

throwaway40042• 13 years ago

You haven't read the material, you took a quote out of context. You don't know what you are talking about.

Congrats on being married and 34????

garethadams3• 13 years ago

It's a good job the "pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it" advice comes in the section of things you do after you're hundreds of moves down the line and you're alone in an intimate setting with a girl, after a number of dates then.

The counter-article writer doesn't make clear that he's picked quotes from all over the guide, they aren't all "the first thing you should do" quotes

scarmig7• 13 years ago

I really can't believe I'm getting into this argument when a much more interesting discussion is whether platforms have a responsibility to be open to all comers, but alas.

You boys need a lesson in basic empathy.

Imagine you're in a bar, and a super built gay guy reeking of booze comes up to you and sits uncomfortably close to you. His face is inches away from yours but as you try to pull away he scoots himself forward. His hand brushes lightly on yours. After a couple minutes of ignoring your obvious lack of interest he places his hand on your inner thigh, which you brush away and tell him he's being a creep, and walk away to a different area. But he KNOWS that even as you reject his advances you're really getting turned on, that you're aroused physically and psychologically. So he follows you, sits next to you, and picks you up and puts you on his lap.

Now, don't skip that scenario: I want you to stop and think about it in detail. How would it make you feel? Do you feel turned on? Do you feel violated?

king_jester27• 13 years ago

It doesn't matter how many dates you've been on, if you do this and the person didn't want that you are committing an assault. You don't get a license to do something just because you invested some amount of time or energy into dating, saying otherwise is a direct promotion of rape (remember, the majority of rapes are committed by someone known to the survivor).

kamjam4• 13 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoI3O2HE9qg

Reminds me of this comedian. In one of his clips he talks about how he hates people recording his gigs on mobile phones etc, etc because then they are free to selectively show parts of a skit: http://youtu.be/Z3fZutYufGE?t=26m15s

Context means everything.

kristofferR• 13 years ago

You do realize that you're saying exactly the same thing about consent that the book is, right?

The misquoted parts is from the chapter about when you're already in a relationship, and ready to get physical.

ivanca• 13 years ago

Correct; this is yet another reaction started by radical feminists and followed by naive no-time-to-read-if-true followers; (e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2KPeMcYsuc)

dwb4• 13 years ago

The concept of consent does not vanish when you're in a relationship, and if you need a guide – especially one that advocates being dominant – then heaven help you.

shawabawa36• 13 years ago

You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that aren't sexual assault that you could do before resorting to that.

Is it sexual assault if I do that to my girlfriend of 5 years?

In many contexts it would be sexual assault, but in many it wouldn't be. I think you're just assuming it's sexual assault because you don't like the idea of a book that teaches people how to "pick up women"

FYI, the context behind that sentence is:

offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around

Metrop02185• 13 years ago

"Is it sexual assault if I do that to my girlfriend of 5 years?"

It is if she says it is. That's the whole point, you don't decide, the circumstances don't decide, only she can decide.

nkohari2• 13 years ago

Is it sexual assault if I do that to my girlfriend of 5 years?

Do you need to read a how-to book in order to seduce your girlfriend of 5 years?

jgh• 13 years ago

Thank you for more eloquently describing my feelings about this thread than I could have.

A fellow married HNer in his 30s.

cm20122• 13 years ago

First off, I'm also married and have never read a seduction book. However, I'd like to quote some other comments from this thread to refute you.

The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around. If "Don't wait for signs, make the first move" promotes sexual assault, then "Kiss the Girl" from The Little Mermaid was a song about rape.
And all seduction guides do is offer advise on how to do that, but somehow what is acceptable for every issue of Cosmo (and a fair number of mens magazines) isn't acceptable for a guide on kickstarter.

Also, would all women who have seen the full story and context call it assault? Would they call it assault in real life? Probably not.

Cushman19• 13 years ago

Also, would all women who have seen the full story and context call it assault? Would they call it assault in real life? Probably not.

The point of this exercise is to be proactive about not hurting people. "Would they call it assault?" is a question that should simply not be on the table.

This isn't a difficult concept.

loumf6• 13 years ago

And yet, Kickstarter can decide that they want nothing to do with it or anything else for pretty much any reason they want.

Kickstarter is claiming that they won't allow seduction manuals period ("we are prohibiting 'seduction guides,' or anything similar, effective immediately."). They have the right to do that.

If you really need a seduction manual, you need to shop elsewhere.

angersock14• 13 years ago

Have some context:

http://pastebin.com/zwHYzCZe

Sincerely,

A HNer who is ashamed of the lack of reading comprehension of this community right now.

jenius• 13 years ago

Woah, really big difference here. I wish this was up towards the top of the comments so people got both sides of the issue before pointing fingers.

kamjam4• 13 years ago

It's because someone didn't provide a tl;dr; and you know how we pretty much have our pitchforks ready having read one persons view on something and not finding out the facts for ourselves...

Context was obvious if you read the few lines around the quoted "trouble" text

Cushman19• 13 years ago

This "defense" misses the point.

The gist of the controversial advice is "Don't wait for signs before you make your move. Let her be the one who rejects your advances. If she says no, stop immediately and tell her you don't want to do anything that would make her uncomfortable. Try again at a later time if appropriate or cease entirely if she is absolutely not interested."

This is not a defense. This advice leads to sexual assault. You are assuming your partner's consent, and placing the burden on them to reject it. That is the problem.

Without a clear verbal confirmation of consent, or an explicit proactive action, you cannot know if your partner is participating willingly. Failure to reject is not the same thing as consent, and no adult should have difficulty understanding the distinction.

If you follow this advice, you will rape people while believing that they are just shy.

And for what? To avoid the embarrassment of saying, "So do you wanna fuck?" How old are you?

Or are you worried that if you ask a woman "So do you wanna fuck?", she might say no? Do I even need to explain what's wrong with that?

gregd10• 13 years ago

Oh, my reading comprehension is perfectly okay (even for an old guy). The issue that I have is that when the author claimed to have been taken out of context ("devoid of context" was the term he used), he himself removed the context surrounding his posts.

knowaveragejoe5• 13 years ago

Good lord, you need to look into the context of the cherry-picked quotes from the guide.

WA2• 13 years ago

Ask 100 women if they find it romantic to be kissed without being asked or if they want to be asked first. I'm pretty sure the answer is: being kissed, don't ask.

The author writes on reddit:

IMPORTANT NOTE ON RESISTANCE: If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says "STOP," or "GET AWAY FROM ME," or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately and say this line: "No problem. I don't want you to do anything you aren't comfortable with." Memorize that line. It is your go-to when faced with resistance. Say it genuinely, without presumption. All master seducers are also masters at making women feel comfortable. You'll be no different. If a woman isn't comfortable, take a break and try again later.

So I really don't see where this is assault by not asking first.

Thing is, if you try to kiss her and she doesn't want it, she'll turn away and that's it.

king_jester27• 13 years ago

This is such a load of shit. There are so many circumstances in which someone may feel powerless to say something or engage in a resistive act, or may be physically incapable of doing so that the time. Rapists use the justification of lack of "acceptable" resistive force all the time, there is no place for this kind of comment.

draq4• 13 years ago

Ask 100 women if they find it romantic to be kissed without being asked or if they want to be asked first. I'm pretty sure the answer is: being kissed, don't ask.

I am pretty sure the answer is more complicated.

Thing is, if you try to kiss her and she doesn't want it, she'll turn away and that's it.

Well, the problem is sometimes if you are too quick, your greasy lips might end up on her lips, making her smell your foul breath. And even if she turns away, it will not make the first seconds of assault unhappen.

scarmig7• 13 years ago

Aside from king_jester's good point, he doesn't even follow that CYA in the guide. The other (more offensive, IMO) passage that people are in an uproar about is when he talks about how even when she rejects your touching or rubbing her when you first meet, she's actually secretly getting turned on, and that you should continue.

peterwoo• 13 years ago

Ask 100 women if they find it romantic to be kissed without being asked or if they want to be asked first. I'm pretty sure the answer is: being kissed, don't ask.

Your answer seems to assume the consent of these women. Do you still think it's more romantic, even if they don't want to be kissed at all?

6d0debc0712• 13 years ago

Ask 100 women if they find it romantic to be kissed without being asked or if they want to be asked first. I'm pretty sure the answer is: being kissed, don't ask.

That depends on the man. I don't want someone I don't want to kiss me without asking. I don't want them to kiss me at all, but I'd prefer that they ask than just try it.

Do you think that women just want men to randomly walk up to them in the street and kiss them? If you don't, then there's obviously some communication that's meant to be going on.

The guide puts the onus for that on the woman. If she doesn't want it, then she has to MAKE you stop:

'Don't ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.'

Which is just a really disgusting mindset. Do you think anyone wants to have to make you leave them alone? And you have to acknowledge that some people are going to be too shy to make you stop.

It's an oversimplification to ask whether women would like someone to ask before kissing them. Not all communication is so blatantly verbal.

These sorts of guides don't help the fact that a lot of the boys reading them are poorly socialised to begin with, and are essentially being set up to rape some shy girl who may not feel confident enough to stop you doing something she's not really interested in. And that does a disservice to him and her - because I don't feel like, unless he's a total psycho, he wants to rape someone.

The book's attitude essentially seems to be that the author feels it acceptable to make people very uncomfortable, and risk raping someone, just because he doesn't want to take the chance that he'll turn off a potential date.

theorique6• 13 years ago

Thank you for bringing a voice of reason to an otherwise frantic and hysterical thread.

rlt9• 13 years ago

If I'm in a club and I pull my dick out and forcibly place a random woman's hand on it, then of course that's sexual assault.

If I do the same thing in a bedroom with a woman who I've already been (consensually) fondling, is it?

BCM43• 13 years ago

If you do it without asking, then yes.

mamoswined• 13 years ago

I would personally very much not like that move. If we are fondling, it will get to the point where I'm touching the guy's dick without any sort of prodding on his part, unless he does something to turn me off like forcibly place my hand on his dick.

hacker7893• 13 years ago

"Take your exposed penis, and thrust it into her vagina. Don't wait for her to put it in for you. Be dominant."

That could be instructions for rape. Or it could be instructions for the kind of a sex that millions of straight couples have every day. It all depends on the quote's context, right?

Right?

So stop taking quotes out of context from the author.

If women are loudly saying "This is assault.", you need to take them at their word, because it is their judgment, it is their consent that matters. Not yours.

Your language is intentionally misleading. What matters is the woman with whom you're interacting. Feminist internet commenters can neither give consent nor take it away. And the author is severely explicit about respecting consent. His quotes are being butchered.

angersock14• 13 years ago

"Take your exposed penis, and thrust it into her vagina."

wait wait wait

that's what ive been doing wrong this whole time?

and here i was thinking i was just sterile!

EDIT: Really, folks? No sense of humor here sometimes, I swear. Not to worry--the NSA is keeping record of jokes for all posterity!

jmduke3• 13 years ago

Or it could be instructions for the kind of a sex that millions of straight couples have every day. It all depends on the quote's context, right?

This is a book on seduction, not a book on long-term relationships. I'm not defending the OP, but don't be intentionally dense.

gregd10• 13 years ago

The bullshit excuse I keep seeing about "taking quotes out of context" is making me mad. The author himself, removed those specific passages from his Reddit thread when the shit storm started brewing.

If he worded what he wanted to say correctly and with the proper context, why remove them?

malandrew7• 13 years ago

   "That could be instructions for rape. Or it could be 
    instructions for the kind of a sex that millions of 
    straight couples have every day. It all depends on the 
    quote's context, right?

Exactly. I highly recommend anyone that disagrees or doesn't believe this statement to watch the interviews commonly found at the end of any BDSM kink.com videos. Those interviews at the end are enlightening for anyone with a narrow vanilla view of how sex should be. Different sexual practices and preferences are really no different than the spectrum of music preferences out there and equally valid.

pizza2343• 13 years ago

The same women that scream "assault", are very likely to have taking the of a stranger, consensually, in their hand, at least once in their lives.

What you naively don't know, is that in this field, the culture is very far from reality. Some ahem "people" would scream horror to things that they would secretly do.

It's nothing new under the sun.

blocking_io19• 13 years ago

Are you actually arguing that if a woman has touched a penis in her life before, she is consenting to touching all future penises?

Either you mean that or your writing is appalling.

mindcrime2• 13 years ago

Seduction is not inherently misogynistic, even if some seducers are misogynists. And whether an action is "sexual assault" or not is heavily context dependent.

Let me ask you this... every time you go to kiss your spouse, do you ask "May I kiss you" first? If not, then by the standard you are setting, you are assaulting them every time you initiate a kiss.

Samuel_Michon12• 13 years ago

You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that aren't sexual assault that you could do before resorting to that.

Context: this is part of the penultimate chapter, which is about what to do when you’ve gone on several dates with a woman and now you’re alone with her. Many women expect men to take the first step, the chapter explains how to interpret the signs and act on them. One of the first sentences of the chapter is:

“IMPORTANT NOTE ON RESISTANCE: If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says "STOP," or "GET AWAY FROM ME," or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately”

The part about taking out your dick is after the sections about kissing, fondling and fingering. NOT taking out your dick at this point would be more curious.

The chapter in question so you can judge for yourself: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/1dvnem/above_the_...

Now, I don‘t particularly like the tone of this guide and I don’t think it‘s very insightful or well-written, but it’s definitely not anything new or out of line. In the genre, I personally prefer the writings of David DeAngelo.

ownagefool3• 13 years ago

While I agree with the gist of the post, I disagree with this part:-

"If women are loudly saying "This is assault.", you need to take them at their word, because it is their judgment, it is their consent that matters. Not yours."

We live in a world where not everyone is resonable. Anyone suggesting you forcibly put someones hand on your penis as a courting move is not resonable. However there are also many woman who are also not resonable and you shouldn't simply back them up just because they're woman.

I also haven't read the book, so have no real opinion on it's content.

gregd10• 13 years ago

And since nobody is mentioning this, women should be very afraid of the 800 or so individuals who purchased this vile piece of crap.

aeorgnoieang5• 13 years ago

There is no obvious fact of the matter about "exactly what consent is, and what women (as a whole, obviously it varies from individual to individual) see as acceptable, expected behavior". Your own words contradict themselves; should we research what women "as a whole" think or judge or should we research individual women? Should we consult you personally if there is any disagreement or conflict among the results of these two lines of research?

tomjen317• 13 years ago

I don't believe you have actually understood the arguments put forth against your position, even if you have read the comments, but please even if you disagree with us, don't go around and mindlessly brand us as evil (or "you have a problem"). It only needlessly devides and cheapens the discussion.

malandrew7• 13 years ago

   "Without that consent, it is assault."

I hate to be contrarian, because by the standards in most cultural spaces in the US I wholeheartedly agree with that statement, but I've traveled enough to know that there are exceptions to the exceptions people are taking with this material when you take culture differences into account. The majority of women in the majority of cultural spaces we on HN frequent of are saying it is assault. In those spaces and for those women it is. However this is not a universal truth.

I've lived abroad several times in different places and the behavior of women in certain culture actively promotes/encourages the behavior being promoted by this book. For example, I've lived in Rio de Janeiro (and several places in the US) and there in particular you are expected, by the women, to behave in the manner promoted by this book otherwise you simply won't meet women when going out to many night venues. Seriously, the nice guy approach will net you not one number in a nightclub/dance club in Rio, you actually have to "manhandle" women to enter into a conversation. I'm a decent looking guy and normally don't have too much difficulty meeting women, but when I was in Rio, my US-acceptable "passivity" relative to the culture norm in Rio, got me absolutely no where there. It was only when I forced myself to be physically assertive that women started responding well and flirting back and I started getting dates.

With this in mind, I honestly would not be surprised if the backlash we are seeing here is indicative of a cultural echo chamber that finds this behavior reprehensible that is also ignorant of of the existance of cultural spaces in the US where this behavior is not only acceptable but welcomed by women, and that this guide is geared towards men who frequent those cultural spaces. Examples of cultural spaces in the US where this behavior is expected by women are probably the same spaces that the cast of Jersey Shore and their real life analogues frequent. Watch this video of interviews with people on a certain beach on the Jersey shore and try to tell me that these assertive "mating practices" are not only acceptable but welcome: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5weU2olAl-E . What is unfortunate is that behavior that is acceptable in those spaces bleeds intquo the common cultural spaces where this is not acceptable behavior.

Anyways, I'm neither defending nor supporting this kickstarter, but merely saying that a lot of the people on their high horse need to realize the relativism of culture and that some things that may be wildly offensive to many women may actually be encouraged by certain subsets of women in certain cultural spaces. With this in mind, public outcry and censorship of material you may find objectional can sometimes suppress culture and you need to be aware of when you may be doing so.

I think Neil Gaiman's thoughts "Why defend freedom of icky speech" is particularly relevant here.

http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/why-defend-freedom-of-...

I personally would prefer that this speech be protected even if I don't agree with it, but that Kickstarter require that the author write a chapter on the importance of being discriminatory in practicing this behavior in cultural spaces where it is not acceptable and helping them identify women that don't welcome these advances in those cultural spaces where they may be acceptable.

tanderson114• 13 years ago

The cultural acceptability and effectiveness of the asking for consent is incidental to the issue at stake.

I honestly find it shocking that so many people on HN are having such difficulty accepting the principal of expressly verbalized consent. Surely we can move on from the notion that men need to "be dominant" and "force her to rebuff your advances".

While a particular culture may call for certain shifts in attitude, that does not mean verbalized consent is not important.

I think Neil Gaiman's thoughts "Why defend freedom of icky speech" is particularly relevant here.

I think a key distinction between the subject of Gaiman's thoughts and the material at hand is that "Above the Game" purports to offer advice applicable to real word scenarios. This advice, however, will, unquestionably, lead to sexual assault if followed (not in every case, but in some).

I would certainly find it dubious for the United States Government to condemn the book, but I feel that Kickstarter's stance is defensible from the position of not wanting to be associated with such dangerous and callous material.

dkarl• 13 years ago

when I was in Rio, my US-acceptable "passivity" relative to the culture norm in Rio, got me absolutely no where there. It was only when I forced myself to be physically assertive that women started responding well and flirting back and I started getting dates

This ability to read feedback and adapt to a cultural context is exactly what the guide should teach. I know you say you're not defending the Kickstarter, but you're criticizing criticism of it, so the exact content of what we're talking about is very relevant. If you take a look at what the guide says, you'll know this has nothing to do with an "echo chamber" and has everything to do with sexual assault.

Consider the audience of seduction guides. They wouldn't be reading explicit guidance on how to verbally and physically interact with women if they had any understanding of the boundaries and expectations in their own culture. They should be learning how to read feedback from women and how to map out the boundaries in their culture and in each individual interaction with a woman. Instead, the guide advocates specific ways of physically handling women to people who are not remotely capable of figuring out whether those actions are appropriate in context or whether they constitute sexual assault.

Even worse, the guide teaches them that their "nice" impulses, their desire to respect women and their fear of making them angry by being openly sexual, are sabotaging them and making them less attractive to women. This is often true, but it's horribly irresponsible to teach people to interact in physically assertive ways while also teaching them to distrust their inhibitions against sexual aggression. If your inhibitions against sexual aggression prevent you from touching a woman while you talk to her, then your inhibitions need to be recalibrated. However, you absolutely cannot physically interact with women unless you have some trustworthy sense of how to avoid unacceptable behavior.

In other words, what the readers are in desperate need of is a way to figure out when they're making small or large mistakes, and when they're actually doing well. This would liberate them to start learning by trial and error. Instead, the guide actually says that men are notoriously bad at reading women, and you should never let any "signs" hold you back from the proper course of "ALWAYS BE ESCALATING!" What level of "resistance" is explicit enough to pay attention to? (Seriously, this is from a section titled "IMPORTANT NOTE ON RESISTANCE.") "If she says 'STOP,' or 'GET AWAY FROM ME,' or shoves you away, you know she is not interested." It then gives you a line to memorize -- seriously, a line to memorize for this situation -- and says, "If a woman isn't comfortable, take a break and try again later. All that matters is that you continue to try to escalate physically until she makes it genuinely clear that it's not happening."

Because "STOP" and "GET AWAY FROM ME" don't mean it's genuinely not happening -- they just mean you should try again later. Is this really good advice to give people who in all likelihood are already not that great at figuring out when they're assaulting somebody?

The kicker: "From now on you must ASSUME that she is attracted to you and wants to be ravished." Ravish means rape. It only sounds nicer because it is associated with an indistinct, rose-tinted past when rape could be considered classy under the right circumstances. (It is also used as a metaphor for overwhelming emotion, but the key to that image is the experience of being carried away against one's will, and once again the usage comes from a time when the concept of rape wasn't so intrinsically offensive as it is now.)

"GET AWAY FROM ME" means try again later, and you have to assume every woman wants to be "ravished" by you. This is not ambiguous material; this is material that teaches a model of interaction in which sexual assault is a commonplace side effect.

__--__• 13 years ago

"I thought this was obvious but I have already read all the comments in this thread and all the "context" the excusers are providing. If you think pointing me to that again is refuting my points, then you didn't understand what I wrote."

There's a difference between understanding and agreeing. Just because somebody doesn't agree with your flawed, poorly thought out emotion based opinion doesn't mean they don't understand where it comes from. You're doing what so many people accuse conservative christians of doing - you're trying to silence a dissenting opinion because it makes you feel bad. That makes you an authoritarian of the worst sort; the kind that would gladly burn any book you find offensive.

malandrew7• 13 years ago

    "all the "context" the excusers are providing."

To call everyone participating in civil discourse in this thread as merely "the excusers" is an admission of dogmatism, regardless of your statement of "having already read of all the comments in this thread". The discussion does not end because you say it ends with your comment as the last word on the matter.

dogmatism - "the tendency to lay down principles as incontrovertibly true, without consideration of evidence or opinion of others"

riggins• 13 years ago

this reminds me of this chris rock skit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIv4phFcAAs

dwb4• 13 years ago

Very well articulated. Thank $deity this is the top comment. I was about to turn away from HN in disgust. Agreed with every word.

loumf6• 13 years ago

Kickstarter is a private company that can decide what they want to have on their site for whatever reason they want. They have to answer to their customers. If you disagree, don't use Kickstarter.

But the idea that they have to comply with "freedom of speech" or be consistent or anything else doesn't make sense to me. Every store curates it's inventory with whatever rules they deem appropriate. Kickstarter never claimed that any possible piece of content was ok.

mkr-hn2• 13 years ago

For those who want to see what this book would have looked like, it's a collection and expansion of the author's posts on /r/seduction: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/11piau/above_the_...

hosay123• 13 years ago

Heh. So enslaving sentient organisms for the purposes of entertainment (cockroach robot app) is classed as a "creative work", while teaching teenagers how to pick up women results in outcry?

And no I'm not suggesting some equivalence between women and cockroaches, I'm objecting to their frivolous dismissal of the project on the grounds of it not being a "creative work".

boldpanda• 13 years ago

This book will sell more copies now that it's been banned by Kickstarter.

I'm curious how the funding was going before this, I can't imagine it was getting much traction.

I quantify this as a paranoid over reaction by Kickstarter, if the post wasn't breaking any of their terms of service.

Zelphyr4• 13 years ago

Agreed and now about a million more people will have heard about this project that otherwise probably wouldn't have.

This reminds me a little of when The Last Temptation of Christ came out in the late 80's. All the bible-thumpers were screaming about how blasphemous it was and that everyone should boycot it. Which, of course, people being people they did the exact opposite and had to endure what turned out to be a pretty bad film.

kamjam4• 13 years ago

Also the Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie, which due to the protests, banning by all the Islamic countries, the fatwah on the author and associated press (and this was in the days of before the Internet!)just made the sales go through the roof.

Inufu• 13 years ago

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:X5RDu8S...

tbirdz2• 13 years ago

I'm curious how the funding was going before this, I can't imagine it was getting much traction.

The kickstarter blog post mentions that they couldn't stop the project from receiving funds, so the project must have been fully funded for that to happen. I don't know how much they were asking for, and whether or not they got more funding than they requested, though.

EDIT: It seems they made $16,369 pledged of $2,000 goal.

philliphaydon• 13 years ago

I'll probably get down voted for this, but reading through what was written, and based on the fact woman LOVE the book, 50 shades of grey. I'm kind of lost as to why on one side everyones offended, and on the other side its what they desire... Yet get offended.

balsam• 13 years ago

This book: purportedly gives power to men. 50 shades of grey: describes a powerful man ceding power to a woman. Conclusion: politics brings out the extremes in people.

Crake19• 13 years ago

It's a power differential thing, I think.

What's most baffling is that...

With feminists: It's ok if women want sex, but not ok for men to want sex.

With fundamentalist conservatives: It's ok if men want sex, but not ok for women to want sex.

VikingCoder• 13 years ago

So, were they also wrong to allow Cards Against Humanity?

Paladiamors• 13 years ago

I don't think Kickstarter's response to this incident is incorrect.

We're talking about the legitimacy of a single blog post vetoing 686 backers (according to the cached link on the kickstarter post) from what it looks like from the kickstarter post.

I don't think that this response was particularly measured:

-1) Does it only take a single blog post to have kickstarter ban a project?

1a) Can we be certain that the blog post did not take the passage out of context?

1b) Can they be sure that the seduction manual was intentionally promoting the alleged "sexual violence"?

1c) Was there any reasonable attempt to communicate with the author to address the paragraphs in issue?

-2) What number of the kickstarter community reacting negatively to this project?

2a) Was "Sexual violence" the only controversial topic?

2b) Was a specific (kickstarter) clause for violation cited?

2c) Was any law broken because of this project?

3)Can malicious intent be proven?

[1] If you actually look at the link to reddit comment link I don't even see conversation that could be taken as people taking this as "sexual violence" and there is even one comment from a female user (derina585) that recommends changing the language and offering advice.

This reaction to lynch mob the guy is unwarrented and is somehow legitimized by kickstarter's "apology." I think that we need to take a closer look at the information before jumping to conclusions here.

jmduke3• 13 years ago

A lot of comments are getting into the issue of whether or not seduction stuff is appropriate/misogynistic/etc., which I think is missing the point.

Kickstarter received a vocal outcry against the material. They responded quickly and fairly to remediate the issue. There are tons of times that a business is pressured/advised to stop doing something when that 'something' isn't strictly illegal or immoral. How they respond to those opportunities defines them going forward.

Part of Kickstarter's value proposition now is a certain level of content curation: moving forward, they're much less the 'anything-goes' crowdfunding platform than they used to be. I suspect they're okay with this, given how much they're pushing the social networking aspect of their site (and for good reason -- their stats on how many users went from funding the Veronica Mars or Zach Braff kickstarters to other initiatives were pretty impressive.)

Free enterprise, of course, also dictates that now there's a vacuum for a competitor which has less (or no) qualms about stuff like this.

alan_cx2• 13 years ago

Just read this thread, and it applies to my newly learned wonder phrase:

"Tyranny is the suppression of nuance"

Not many people working with the nuance here, are there? Its gotten very black and white , and if you don't agree with one side, you must simply be a sexual predator.

mkr-hn2• 13 years ago

I see the same quote about stopping if there's any rejection being repeated endlessly in this thread. Treating consent as a simple yes/no ignores the reality of a culture where women are taught to be quiet and compliant, and where they're punished when they don't go along. In a culture where half the population is treated as subservient objects, it's a good idea to seek explicit consent every time.

aeorgnoieang5• 13 years ago

There is no monolithic "culture" of which all humans are members and of which all women are treated as subservient objects. There are in fact many overlapping cultures throughout humankind and there is a staggering array of diversity among them in all kinds of dimensions.

doktrin2• 13 years ago

What a cesspool of a thread. Why is HN consistently at its worst when gender issues are brought up?

mathattack• 13 years ago

I am a fan of "I'm sorry" posts, though they have become frequent enough to become cliche. When they put a $25K donation behind the apology, then it's a lot more than false humility.

"Fourth, today Kickstarter will donate $25,000 to an anti-sexual violence organization called RAINN. It’s an excellent organization that combats exactly the sort of problems our inaction may have encouraged."

Well done!

noamsml• 13 years ago

This annoys me greatly. Whether or not the book itself was bad, an open platform shouldn't have to apologize for not immediately censoring its users on public outrage. To the contrary, I would have expected an apology if, given the first blush or public outcry, they suspended the account without a proper investigation into it.

DanielBMarkham• 13 years ago

META: I know it's wrong to talk about flagging, but I think it's also important for the community for people to try to bring up good reasons to flag posts.

I read the linked article, I skimmed many of these comments, and hell if I got anything useful at all from them. Dating standards and decisions about misogyny and important topics, but they're also highly subjective. We HN'ers could argue until the cows come home and not accomplish a damned thing. In addition, it's highly emotionally-charged.

A couple commenters tried to take the conversation towards how a company should act in the face of public outrage. Kudos to you guys. You were drowned out, though.

I love talking about controversial topics. Heck, I'll post about the existence of God, the reasons for controlling speech, the relationship between organized religion and societal progress -- I really love good conversations among smart people about important things.

But I got none of this here. Just a bunch of people making speeches to themselves. Which looked like it could go on forever without either the writers or readers gaining much insight. I flag not based on the topic, but on the quality of the comments I see around the posting. So I had to flag it. Sorry.

Helianthus3• 13 years ago

Provided HN is going to remove categories of posts, I've always advocated banning gender discussion from HN. It's just not the forum for it, and it's the same circle of discussion you see on r/politics.

HN is a "cultivated" free speech zone, which is another way to say it's an arbitrarily censored forum where some legitimately objectionable material is filtered away, some good material is lost through false positives, and we _still_ frequently have garbage content and constantly moan about it because the "cultivated" part is supposed to mean we only see gold.

To state plainly what I see in this topic: white men talking about feminism presumptuously. White knighting; "as a man, I..."; mansplaining.

They're all terms I hate because they totally box out men from participation, which is destructive and actually its own topic.

But they apply here.

Crake19• 13 years ago

To state plainly what I see in this topic: white men talking about feminism presumptuously. White knighting; "as a man, I..."; mansplaining.

But how do you know the person you're talking to is male? Or white? The person might be womansplaining instead of mansplaining for all you know.

Are you assuming they must be white and/or male because they disagree with you?

If so, is this because you consider opinions held by people of a certain skin color or biological sex to be innately inferior to others?

Something to think about.

king_jester27• 13 years ago

So many of the comments here are trying to justify this project's content by saying this are things to do when you are with something you've already been dating/wooing. I just want to say that the majority of sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone the victim knows and that ANY kind of intimate contact does not justify further contact that someone has not consented to. Saying otherwise is an attempt to justify rape.

zedshaw2• 13 years ago

Wait, I'm going to sidestep the whole book's ultra-crazy content and ask a kind of really obvious logistic question:

Why the hell was he doing a kickstarter for a book he could easily publish online for 0 money down and only cost him the time to write it and maybe get a copy editor?

The content of this book, and most similar unpopular material, is designed for the internet. That's how 50 Shades of Gray got its start, and there's been underground sex and erotica content for decades online. Doing a kickstarter just seems like a blatant scam or complete laziness, either are an indication that he won't finish the book.

So why the hell was he doing a kickstarter? Idiot.

Zelphyr4• 13 years ago

Brilliant actually. Look at all the people talking about his book now.

zedshaw2• 13 years ago

Looked like he already had people talking about it, and this was definitely not planned. It's a stroke of pure luck not genius.

bjhoops1• 13 years ago

It's really quite remarkable how much good will a simple apology can generate. I wish more individuals and organizations recognized this.

gfunk911• 13 years ago

You start by saying that if you disagree with you you're a misogynist pig, and any discussion of the merits is wrong. Just think about times you've read other people say that, and try and think it over.

solarmist• 13 years ago

I can't believe I haven't seen a single comment about non-verbal communication. No, a girl doesn't want you to ask for a kiss (it comes off as incredibly lacking in self confidence), but she better be touching you, smiling a lot (at you not just in general), laughing at your jokes, playing with her hair and/or many other things that show you she's saying she wants you to go further.

Everyone here is talking exclusively about verbal communication, but in courting non-verbal communication is the key context. Women are masters of it, but most men are only barely aware of it and that's where most of the problems in these kinds of materials come from and how well authors teach inept men how to read and respond to body language is what really separates a decent "dating" guide from a misogynistic "how to get charged with sexual assault" guide.

The Guide's author is a horrible writer and only makes passing references to reading non-verbal communication, but builds all of his "techniques" upon it. That's why they are all so horrible.

If you're chatting with a girl and she's smiling, playing with her hair and glancing down when you make prolonged eye contact you're probably okay to brush against her arm or touch her shoulder or elbow or even if you're bold pick her up and put her in your lap (but that'd force a girl to immediately decide if she likes you or to reject you).

In contrast if you're talking at a girl and she answers in the minimum length sentences, won't look at you, and has her arms crossed then touching her in anyway is going to make her want to get the hell away form you.

Similarly if you're in your bedroom because she came home with you when you invited her, you've been making out and her shirt is off then opening your pants and putting her hand on your penis probably isn't the smoothest thing, but probably isn't a deal breaker for her at that point either.

Again opposed to you sharing a taxi with her and asking her 10 times if you can come up for coffee/tea/drink then once you're inside her place and pulling your penis out, that's probably going to get you thrown out at the very least if not having the cops called on you.

This guide focuses exclusively on what the guy should "do" which, without a similar guide on how to know how and when to "do" those things, will lead to bad out comes if not sexual assault. It's written from the perspective of an instruction manual for a video game/passive object (the girl), which is a lot of what misogyny is all about, do A then B then C and you save the princess.

tomp17• 13 years ago

A woman has never asked me if I wanted to have sex... Rape? Sexual assault? Come on!

gregd10• 13 years ago

Here is an entire quote from one of his passages on a reddit thread:

Hi guys. First off, big props to thesacred. I went out with him yesterday and he has tons of game. Looking forward to many scandalous nights with him and others in Tokyo. He skipped the club to go attempt a threesome! Awesome!

Anyway, if you've followed my FR's recently, you've probably seen me mention the Physical Push/Pull (PPP) move I've been using. It's basically where you substitute actual physical pushes and pulls for emotional push/pulls, OR combine them with emotional push/pulls for maximum effect.

I was field testing it as an OPENER in the club yesterday and my GOD did it work. I highly recommend some of you guys try this out, but it's not for the faint of heart.

Example:

[see girl on dancefloor or near bar]

[approach]

[hook her in with your arm] "Aww you're so cute. Come here." [shove her aside HARD, seemingly randomly]

[approach someone else and say hi]

[Turn around. About 75% of the time she'll be staring at you with a huge grin on her face.]

[Walk back over to her.] "You really are so cute, you know that?"

[repeat]

This is one of those "reality destroyer" openers where girls have NO IDEA what just happened. You can open as many sets as you want throughout the club/bar this way and decide which ones you wanna pursue further at your leisure.

I did this yesterday in a dance club.

I re-open a girl by walking up, grabbing her, caveman-ing her against the wall & kissing her. Then I cast her aside and get a drink at the bar. The entire time she is staring like "OMG who is this guy?" (in a good way).

I come back to her with my drink. "Come on, let's go."

I walk her to the corner, escalate kino, smalltalk a bit. Fast forward and guess who is getting a BJ in the dark corner of the club? THIS GUY!

Gentlemen, try this out. It's not only extremely effective but it's hilariously fun. Your friends' jaws will hit the floor when they see you pull this off.

Go and do likewise, gents.

http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/f6ve5/fr_tofutofu...

DanBC2• 13 years ago

I wish there was a moderate MRA group, that wasn't full of hateful idiots.

super-serial• 13 years ago

Go to Japan. Gender roles are ingrained into the culture and women are naturally feminine.

A lot of MRA groups seem to fight the hate with more hate... maybe these guys just need a change of scenery.

diyang• 13 years ago

What do you mean by "naturally feminine"?

benblack• 13 years ago

I made a shirt for all you guys who think the rape, erm, PICK UP ARTISTE, book is totes cool and nbd http://www.cafepress.com/mf/79293678/i-am-rape-culture_tshir...

We were wrong

Related Stories