@Ralph Haygood Paul Graham of Y Combinator told New York Times he funded some terrible guy just because he (physically) looked like Mark Zuckerberg. Your regular racists and misogynist sound like fucking rocket scientist compared to these products of the Silicon Valley "meritocracy".
@Maura Johnston: The short answer is that the San Francisco/Silicon Valley "tech" scene (in which I have done time) is substantially an asskissocracy, as Dan Mitchell (http://bit.ly/12Wzwx8) remarked apropos none other than PandoDaily, the venue for today's hijinks. Getting funded is largely a matter of knowing the right people, conforming to their prejudices, and having the right "pedigree." Bryan Goldberg, the perpetrator of Bustle, is just the kind of fellow venture capitalists are looking for. In particular, he was a founder of Bleacher Report, which was bought last year by Turner Broadcasting. Once you've had such a successful "exit," you can probably find a venture capitalist willing to fund practically any cockamamie scheme that enters your head, as long as you say you're targeting some nice big "vertical." The result is a lengthy procession of well funded, terrible ideas.
The Spiers/Holmes/Sklar pile-on was a particular highlight.
@412748100@twitter Probably hasn't heard about the Curator's Code. :(
I saw Maria mention "free speech" on Twitter and a few people here in the comments mention censorship. I don't see how those issues are even remotely relevant. Am I missing something? Kickstarter--which Hoinsky himself points out is a private company--has forbidden seduction guide projects. It is not as though the government has threatened him with jail for writing this terrible book.
@barnhouse "I believe and hope that a careful review of writing like Ken's may help them understand just how very firm that "no" needs to be. I believe men like Ken want to understand it, too. That's why I wanted to talk with him."
I'm going to take you at your word that you wanted to convey something helpful and positive with this article/interview. It's unfortunate then that what you actually conveyed was more of the common victim blame-y bs that there's a right and a wrong way to say no. Experiences like anon's are exactly why the kind of boundary pushing promoted by PUA is, as you yourself say, ugly and near-sociopathic.
One reason why I think the PUA stuff, even Ken's supposedly warm and fuzzy version, is so very toxic is that fundamentally they are focusing on the wrong thing. The problem isn't that a shy, insecure and lonely dude doesn't know how to talk to WOMEN, it's that he doesn't know how to talk to PEOPLE, period. There is no magic way to get a woman to want to fuck you. There is no cheat code. There are, however, a bunch of things you can do, regardless of your gender, to help you feel more comfortable in social situations, to get over social anxiety, that will help you present yourself as an interesting person who is worth talking to and maybe even fucking. I want to fuck my boyfriend because I think he's interesting and awesome in too many ways for me to list here. And he wants to fuck me because he genuinely likes me, the whole and complete me, not simply my tits, ass and vagina.
Look, I am a chick who's a deep introvert and can be very awkward. I like nerdy stuff that isn't in the mainstream. When I was younger I would NEVER start a conversation with someone I didn't know, male or female, because why would they want to talk to me? And it bothered me. I felt very alone and isolated. So I taught myself how to talk to people. It was hard and occasionally scary and confusing and sometimes I looked like an ass, but it was so worth it. Because now, a good decade later, the way I see myself and the way I present myself are much better aligned.
If Ken really wants to help men be "able to actually approach and talk to women and be direct with women" then he is going about the wrong way. Because women are not "mysterious creatures" any more than men are. Women, like men, are people. Complex, interesting, frustrating, contradictory people. We are vast. We contain multitudes. We are NOT a mystery to be solved or decoded. And until Ken and the other PUA really understand that, they will never be able to "kill the stigma against men's "seduction" advice once and for all."
While I'm used to disagreeing with Maria's articles by now, I'm seriously disappointed in Choire and Balk for giving Hoinsky this platform.
That a (presumably) bunch of (presumably) lonely (presumably) men raised the princely sum of 16 grand to absorb this Wisdom about how to connect tells you all you need to know about modern romance.
You guys the Oatmeal dude has now endorsed this piece and the fake Will McAvoy dude retweeted him approvingly so I think we can now say scientifically that the people defending this piece are wrong.
@barnhouse I hope he does get it better now and that he does better in the future. But frankly I find the idea that women don't understand how firm a "no" needs to be rather insulting. The reasons why many women find it difficult to articulate that "no" have nothing to do with us not understanding that it needs to be firm. Trust me, when I'm faced with a pushy guy who keeps saying, "Aw, c'mon," even after I've tried to politely turn him away, I recognize that, regardless of whether he truly doesn't understand or is choosing to ignore my attempt at a rebuff, I'm going to have to be more explicit. I don't think any woman in that situation is thinking, "golly gee, maybe if I just keep giving him that tight-lipped smile and averting my eyes, he'll suddenly magically get it!" The problem is that as a guy gets pushier, it seems more and more likely that if you push back (by saying no firmly), his reaction is going to be calling you a bitch (at best) or getting violent (at worst). Whether or not he means to be, a guy who keeps pushing is intimidating to any woman. So a woman in that situation has to make a calculation - do I just keep trying to signal I'm not interested and hope he gives up or someone else comes to my rescue, or do I risk verbal and possibly physical abuse (depending on the situation) by standing up and saying no? Ultimately it doesn't matter whether or not the pushiness is coming from a place of true cluelessness - intent isn't magic. No one needs to understand the need for a firm no - we need to get to a place where men aren't pushing women to have to give them a firm no, and women can feel safe delivering that firm no in any circumstances. We are most definitely not there yet.