the only difference between sexual harassment and courtship is weither the woman is interested in the man

the exact same behavior in the man she is attracted to she will describe as romantic, while from the beta this same behavior will get him being called a creep and threats of being accused of sexual harassment

Spend your energy figuring out what I’m trying to say rather than on increasingly elaborate ways to dismiss it. Your allergy to criticism is how I know the omega still lives in you. It is your worst fear to be called out on this; no wonder you can’t stand to face the possibility.

Stop regurgitating web links and videos, forget your idiosyncratic experiences and observations, and use your brain. If it really were so “hard … [being] a beautiful girl,” she wouldn’t purposely max-out her visual advantages, like I said above. Those kind of women (and men) — if you knew them — do indeed develop “repeatable and effective methods against infatuation, whether that is through disguise, isolation, or protection.” Woe is me, all this attention from all these losers! Like they never saw tits and ass spilling out of a tube-top and miniskirt!

Infatuation is more than tallying the number of pick-up attempts in a half-hour. If a girl is awkward at neutralizing her biggest fans, then she never had the quality of attention you think she does, regardless of quantity. Experience would have forced a solution. My comments were only tangentially about how well she (or he) fends off the herd. They were about the most efficient way men and women of highest-level magnetism deal with “creepers,” “fanatics,” and “stalkers,” the maintenance of which is the cost of doing business.

And the bottom line is, if you get a “fan” once or twice in your life, rudeness and abruptness may work — you can devote your resources to that occasional capital cost. You can directly handle every incident separately, rather than developing a system that works. Hence your and RappaccinisDaughter’s erroneous idea that scaling up the rudeness works. Well, it doesn’t work because being curt is negative attention, the acknowledgment that the stalker has gotten under the object’s skin. The fanatic regards such a reaction as an acknowledgement of intimacy; positive or negative is irrelevant.

However, if infatuation/attachment happens with just about every person you meet, you have to develop assembly-line efficiencies to handle the volume. That’s where your rising-beta mindset falters, for lack of imagination. Killing them with kindness raises your status from B+ approachable to A+ untouchable — i.e., the infatuated intuits on their own that they’re “not good enough” for you — and the problem takes care of itself, especially when easier alternatives exist for them. If you are petty instead, the infatuation can turn dark and vengeful. So rather than neutralizing the attention, he or she simply turns it negative, and perhaps amplifies it.

That is the dynamic unless the stalker/creeper has an artificial steroid-boost of self-esteem (or liquid courage), which is why entitled fat women are more persistent than the average male in pursuing their untouchable crushes. Men simply are forced in this feminist culture to be more self-aware. Like princesses raised for entitlement, Game and PUA training (and the simple sexual aggressiveness of men) also helps dull this awareness for self-esteem purposes. That gives them access to the most untouchable members of the opposite sex — low self-esteemers disqualify themselves from the A+’s and aim for the B’s instead, leaving the field to the courageous approachers. The “unapproachable” tens are approached with confidence, she is not used to the herd-crush, and unlike her sister sevens and eights, she is in uncharted territory, ripe for plucking. As long as you can overcome her well-honed anti-infatuation defenses.

Those are the basics. If you are ready for the advanced lesson, then we can talk about how all women are at best visual B+’s and only acquire their “untouchable” status after a personal interaction. Celebrities are not always the most beautiful people, but they acquire depth and untouchability because we see them perform and read their personal interviews. We don’t know whether the striking girl at the bar is an 8, 9, or 10 because we have no intimate access from a distance. She could have funky teeth, raspy voice, obnoxious personality. She could smell. She could have three black kids from three men.

This is where the PUA article of faith, that a woman’s attractiveness is 97% physical, is permanently misleading. The error distorts your philosophy up and down, making it more beta than you have the wit to admit. The highest attractiveness includes the whole package — physical, mental, historical, personal, and virtuous — but you reduce ranking to a single (albeit important) criterion because you have no tools to deal with that last 30-40% of non-physical magnetism. Hence all the crowing about fucking “HB10″ sluts, and hence all the preposterous claims that every woman is a secret whore waiting to be coaxed into the open by a magic show.

You exaggerate the value of your conquests to confirm your one-dimensional approach, when in truth, the highest-level women are out of your reach. What’s a self-respecting PUA to do? Redefine the criteria of woman so that landing high numbers of relatively easy lays becomes the peak of manly accomplishment. Now place him in the echo chamber of “the community,” and simple observational logic ceases to pertain. Logic itself becomes omega! Indeed, the only “reason” for anyone would disagree is because they are asocial shut-ins! QED! Weak weak weak.

Fool yourselves, fine. But stop corrupting others.

Matt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_exclamative_particles

Fortunately we’re both correct; I had had no idea that it also exists in Malay:

http://www.asian-central.com/stuffasianpeoplelike/2008/08/06/87-lah/

Sexual harassment statutes are enjoyed by two rival factions of women: young women who want to keep betas from hitting on them, and older women who want to keep the alphas from hiting on the younger women.

And “racist” is to white people.

Unfortunately – for her – it also attracts the attention of men who do NOT outrank her, and she will – reasonably – find this annoying, although it is the price to pay for being both attractive to begin with and then signalling availability by choosing the cleavage. What is NOT reasonable in the general case is to designate the label “creep” or similar to those who show her attention but are not attractive enough for her. In many cases, the designation of “creep” has nothing to do with truly offensive behavior, the test is “would she consider the same actions “creepy” from a man very attractive to her?”

Thor