A PUA, living the dream. And by “living the dream” I mean “being a dick.”
Cheating is jerky. But this picture is still hilarious.
Here’s the bravely anonymous alpha blogger behind “Danger & Play ~ An online magazine for alpha males” explaining “Why You Should Cheat on Your Girlfriend.” I’ve bolded my favorite bit:
Haters will tell you to, “Man up! Break up with your girlfriend if you’re not happy.” They are missing the point. You want to have your cake, and to eat it too. Steady, reliable pussy and the occasional strange is the best of all worlds.
Cheating is a lot of fun, and it’s something I highly recommend. It’s way more exhilarating than bungee jumping, and few things feel as good as banging your girlfriend on the same day you banged some strange.
Cheating keeps your game tight. The best way to regulate your girlfriend is knowing you can bang chicks as hot or hotter than your girl. Well, when you cheat, this isn’t hypothetical. It’s reality.
Somehow I’m guessing there’s a lot more “hypothetical” than “reality” going on in this guy’s posts.
You don’t want an exclusive relationship? Fine. There’s no law saying you have to be in one. You can date casually and non-exclusively. You can have an open or polyamorous relationship. There are a lot of people out there in relationships, yet happily fucking other people outside of them. They’re just above board with it.
But that’s not what’s going on with our PUA friend here. With his talk about “regulat[ing]” girlfriends, he seems more interested in fucking over his girlfriend (assuming such a creature really exists) than he is in fucking strangers (sorry, “stranges”).
That’s not “Game.” That’s just being a dick.
But, hey, Nietzsche! He’s BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL! Or, as he puts it in a comment, “Shame and guilt are beta.”
You know, if you have to go around telling everyone what an Nietzschean ubermensch you are, you’re probably aren’t much of a Nietzschean ubermensch.
Posted on October 17, 2011, in alpha males, beta males, douchebaggery, men who should not ever be with women ever, PUA. Bookmark the permalink. 961 Comments.
Broseidon: Yeah, we are sometimes nasty on here just for teh lolz.
…but I’m a little surprised you decided to tell us that in this comment thread. Do you think we’re being unnecessarily hard on someone who thinks secretly videotaping their partners during sex is a smart thing to do?
Therefore, if a dude can get sex in other places, suddenly a woman has no power over him.
One does wonder why the MGTOW don’t simply decide to have sex with EACH OTHER and cut females out of the loop completely, a la the political lesbianism of years ago.
And I find it hard to believe that we’re really crediting Brandon with honesty here. He only videotapes partners to make sure he isn’t accused of rape? Oh, of course that’s the real reason. It’s not so he can jack off to them later, or to feel like he put one over on the bitch, or so he can put a copy up on his website if the bitch cheats on him.
A video isn’t really going to help against a false accusation – “Yes, I had consensual sex with Brandon, but then he turned off the camera and raped me, saying there was no way I’d ever prove it!” But he knows that.
For one thing, now all the US founding fathers are apparently no longer rational minded! Let’s be honest, they were pretty insulting to King George. :p
“One does wonder why the MGTOW don’t simply decide to have sex with EACH OTHER and cut females out of the loop completely, a la the political lesbianism of years ago.”
Because in addition to their other wonderful attributes, they’re homophobic as hell.
(Though Ami *has* mentioned one gay MRA on occasion, so perhaps they exist as well.)
Because in addition to their other wonderful attributes, they’re homophobic as hell.
But they’ll never admit that. It might suggest they need women.
Late to the party, but what the everloving fuck?
Brandon gives me the heebie-jeebies. I really, really hope that Ashley is inflatable (and that that’s why Brandon trusts her and doesn’t need to secretly videotape her).
Brandon, please just don’t interact with people anymore if you have to violate their rights just to feel safe. I know, you don’t give a shit about others, but there is a lot in it for you as well!
For example, the probability of being falsely accused is pretty much zero and there is no need to consider other people’s autonomy or feelings! Doesn’t that sound awesome?
On a positive note: Ami is indeed awesome :D U jelly, NWO?
Well, whatever reasons Brand have in mind… they are still wrong because he does something without the consens of someone else and that is violation of privacy.
I find it creepy that he somehow he think he justifies that here in the thread.
I am still unconvinced that this is the best case scenario if all he cared about was to be sure that nobody can accuse him of rape falsley… what about these women who read this thread and have slept with him? They will have completely justified reasons to sue him?
+11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
I know, right? Priorities. They got them all wrong.
How very DARE you be rude to someone who thinks there is nothing wrong with violating their partners’ autonomy?
@Kollege:
1) I don’t really care if I give you the heebie-jeebies. I am not responsible for your feelings.
2) Ashley is not inflatable and I find it hysterical that everyone here thinks she is.
3) The stats about FRA’s are all over the place. Some as low as 2% while others as high as 60%. So to say it probably will not happen is you trying to appease me with your wishful thinking
So… you violate people on something you actually have no proof it’s an actual issue in such a numbers that it would even remotely justify violating people’s lives and privacy?
Nice…
While you’re all absolutely correct about the moral and ethical reasons that Brandon’s “secret videotape” idea is wrong, I just can’t get over the “commit a crime to avoid being accused of a crime” thing. In NYS, videotaping someone without their knowledge when they have a reasonable expectation of privacy (i.e. – when they’re out walking the street, no. When they’re in the bedroom fucking, yes.) is a Class D felony. A felony that you’re confessing to by turning in those tapes. That’s a 1-2.5 year sentence. Doesn’t seem like the best strategy to me.
@Seraph: I would rather incriminate myself and serve 1-2 years if I avoided spending 8-10 years instead.
Brandon has stated before in this thread that he thinks honest consent is possible. He just thinks the majority of women are incapable of it.
Brandon, where do you get your idea that rape is prosecuted in such high numbers that this could be even remotely justified?
I mean… I am now reading statistics and they are a fac cry from the picture you are presenting us. So.. care to elaborate?
There’s a way to serve zero years in prison, but only manginas can do it.
It involves only having sex with people you trust, and if you don’t trust any women, you don’t have sex with any women!
What’s happened to the men that you’ve know who were falsely accused of rape Brandon? I mean, if 60% is a remotely credible statistic (And 60% of what, precisely? Accusations or men who’ve been accused?) then you must know more than one.
And again, while you defend the “hypothetical” practice of illegally videotaping sexual encounters without consent, you continue to justify this on a by what you believe to be the considerable likelihood that you will be accused, falsely of rape. Yet you claim that you have never done this and that, prior to now, despite your casual sexual flings, and the fact that you regularly engage(d) in sex with women you don’t trust you’ve never done anything to verify a woman’s consent in a fashion that might be admissible as evidence in a court of law.
I find that strange.
Brandon, I have an assignment for you.
Tell Ashley, with whatever spin or priming or prepping you want, that you think it is ok to videotape women you have sex with without their consent, to protect yourself from false rape charges.
If you cannot do this, then you know exactly why it is so wrong to do so. If you are right about how likely women are to accuse men of rape, then it should be easy to justify.
So how about it?
The tapes won’t get you off the rape charges. Even if they were admissible, they would only incriminate you further. And that’s only if the accusation ever happens, which is way less likely then you being convicted of a crime you would actually be guilty if went you ahead with this stupid, monstrous, immoral and entire ass-backwards plan.
I think Brandon is confused about stats (surprising, no?). He seems to think that it’s 2-60% of *all men who have sex* who are falsely accused of rape. So, every time Brandon has sex, with perhaps the exception of the pneumatic Ashley, he stands an up-to 60% (because of course he believes the MRA version) chance of being accused of rape.
Kirby, I know you’ve been gone for a minute but please know that when Brandon tells Ashley about these discussions her response is usually some sort of giggle and complete agreement with whatever Brandon thinks. Also, she gets turned on.
FYI.
Really? He said that? Links, because I have obviously missed that?
Eneya: That was many moons ago, during a thread where the subject of dirty talk vs. disrespectful talk came up. Brandon was defending calling someone a… whore maybe?…with the fact that it got Ashley hot in bed.
Brandon, I don’t trust you to not get my consent, turn off the camcorder, and then rape me (do acts I did not consent to, or do things in a way that injures me, or refuse to stop when I’m in pain), so would it be cool with you if my burly friend stands in the closet while we have sex?
Of course, here I’m doing you the courtesy of asking. Would it be cool with you if my burly friend is SECRETLY in the closet while we have sex?
They weren’t. The final straw that forced their hands was being prevented from butchering Indians, which they were pretty happy to do in general. A significant minority were theocrats. They thought, as an aggregate, that freedom didn’t apply to the poor, to PoC, to women. This worship of them needs to go away.
Yes, easily
Or… would you mind if I cary a microphone/camera hidden somewhere in my clothes/lingerie/jewlery just in case as well?
I mean, fuck, if I’m a juror at a rape trial, and the defense offers a video that the accuser didn’t consent to being in as evidence she freely consented, I’m voting to convict.
No, I’m mentioning it in relation to you *taking the video without consent*. You’re an idiot; as I said, this is doable, you just have to be willing to have less sex because a non zero number of people who would want to sleep with you won’t let you take video of you. But you can be ethically secure, *actually use hte tape in court* (Protip: Illegally obtained evidence can’t be used in a court of law), and have sex.
You do realize that the illegal videotape isn’t admissable evidence, right? To the extent you actually have to worry about an accusation of rape that isn’t true (You don’t), this isn’t actually a cure.
@Nobinayamu and Holly:
Whelp, I’m out of ideas then. How do you explain empathy and morality to someone who simultaneously thinks that one person liking something means it’s ok to do it to everyone, and is fine with breaking the law as long as it mitigates a small chance of false accusation?
Back to the op, I think someone else mentioned that PUAs view women as masturbation aides. That’s… pretty much correct according to this guy. Also, women are cake.
The comment section is fun too.
Oh block quote, why you treat me so?
Well, Brandon: Even assuming that you are such a great computer specialist that the government’s contractors will be completely unable to reach the files without your password — the courts can always use the power of contempt to force you to give it to them. That’s an indefinite jail term.
Zombie Jeebus, I am so fucking tired of people treating this alpha/beta bullshit like it’s an actual thing. Especially coming from lying poseurs like this dangerandplay moron.
Well, as others have pointed out, this won’t actually help. But leaving that aside, it wouldn’t be just 1-2 years. Once you turned in your covert video, the police would get a warrant to search the rest of your video library, at which point you would be serving 1-2 years for each incident of taping without consent, not to mention the exposure to lawsuits.
Seriously, man, you haven’t thought this all the way through.
I should add: My burly friend in the closet may or may not be jerking off (since you don’t know he’s even there, obviously you won’t know whether he’s jerking it or not) and he may or may not be getting off to the specific idea that he has power over you and he’s humiliating you. He may or may not share what he’s seen with anyone he likes, including painfully private details about your body and sexuality.
But don’t worry, he’s mostly there to protect me against rape! Everything else is just a side benefit, and like I said, you don’t even know whether he’s enjoying those side benefits or not.
I will reiterate, because it doesn’t seem to sink into Brandon’s skull: saying you can prevent the government from getting the rest of the videos by just not giving them the password is equivalent to saying that you can prevent the police from searching your house by not opening the door.
@Daphne B.
Spiking her drink with Metamucil? Fireside chats over a warm cup of senna? Yelling “Take your fiber, bitch!!!” during sex?
Who knows, these folks have strange fetishes.
No, no it isn’t. She is a human being with just as much value as you. You aren’t special to us, or to the rest of the world. Even if you are advocating egoism, then she has every right to try and punish as much as possible for violating her interests by taping her. Egoism, however, fails horrifically when put up against game theory and most actual social dynamics.
Also, Brandon, you have yet to address my point. The credible statistics put false rape convictions at comparable or lower rates than false murder or robbery convictions. Do you track your every movement so as to provide yourself with an alibi for these things as well?
In addition, if your taping of people is not a violation, why do you not inform people about it beforehand? After all, you could only agree to let people into your house/have sex with people after you notify them that all interactions will be taped. Your suggestion that you care more about having sex with someone by secretly violating them and breaking the law than you do about doing neither of those things by getting consent but possibly making it harder to find partners is rapey.
@NWO and other MRAs whining about drinking, here’s a good guideline to determine if a person is too drunk to consent, ask yourself, “Would I let this person in their current state drive my car?” If the answer to this is no, that is a pretty good sign the person is too impaired in judgement to give genuine consent. Now, NWO, I know you prefer your partners too young to be allowed to legally drive, but as that is being a creepy pedo (oh, so sorry ephebo…child molestor), I will not address that issue.
PS. Ami is awesome.
“Yelling “Take your fiber, bitch!!!” during sex?”
Protein. Take your protein. =P
I read a case in law school in which several men picked up a woman in a bar after she had had several drinks and passed out. They drove to a desolate place and took turns having sex with her. All this time, she remained completely unresponsive. Some time after having sex with her, the men realized that she was, um … dead. To make a long story short: an autopsy eventually determined that when the woman passed out in the bar, it wasn’t because she was drunk, but because she died (from a rare congenital heart condition that killed her instantly). When those men picked her up, she was already dead. They had sex with a corpse.
So there was good news and bad news for the crazy kids. The good news was that they didn’t commit what would otherwise have been rape, because you can’t rape a dead person, hurray!! The bad news is that fucking a corpse is still a crime that carries a prison term, not to mention ewwwww.
Beyond the “ew” factor, this case is an extreme illustration of how some men are willing to exploit a woman’s drunkenness as an opportunity to rape her: they were perfectly willing and eager to have sex with a woman who was so utterly unresponsive, she might as well have been dead.
Holy crap Amused! That is horrifying, on several levels.
Can we expect Brandon to come in and start explaining how, being immune from social expectations and prejudices, he doesn’t see anything wrong with sexxing a corpse since by definition it’s now an object and so it can’t be inappropriate as nobody’s rights are violated?
Umm, Brandon, if you are ever accused of rape and your response is:
“Of course it was consensual! Here, I have video. What was the date again?” and proceed to comb through your doubtless meticulously organized index of videotaped sexual encounters, you are going to be a hell of a lot more of a suspect than the guy who just says “Whaa? Me? No, it was totally consensual!”
I mean, the 2nd response is ordinary dudebro denial. The 1st is just serial killer territory. The only people who are *that* scared of rape accusations are, you know, RAPISTS.
Also adding my vote to Ami’s awesomeness. Ami, you are one awesome cupcake.
@BlackBloc: Ya, not advocating having sex with a corpse. That is just disgusting.
I think Brandon already thinks that about all non-Brandon entities. The rest is just the buzzing of so many flies.
Tone Troll is concerned about tone.
Duely noted.
“‘Yelling “Take your fiber, bitch!!!’ during sex?”
Protein. Take your protein. =P”
Yeah. That’s an interesting use of the word “fiber”.
Brandon : @Cassandra: Depends on how you do it. If I was filming in my bedroom and we are both on my bed naked and I said “Are you ready?” while trying to initiate sex and she said “yes” that’s consent. That isn’t reasonable doubt, it is her giving me the go ahead. The video is just evidence to prove it.
Continuing text messaging girls and keeping her responses acts as further proof that it was consentual. If I texted her “I really enjoyed last night” and she said “ya me too”. Then that is further proof of what the film already said.
No, to both. They are, at best, circumstantial evidence (and likely to be effective at their aim; to defeat a rape charge), but they don’t prove consent. Take the texting. Unless she is refusing to reply at all (which people are socialised to not do), and she has any sense of the amibivalence NullPointer alluded to, then the most likely response willl be the white lie.
As to the first, unless the entire evening is taped, there is no way to know what level of pressure (be it psychological or chemical), may have been used before the “proof” of consent occured.
And then we have the summa of Brandon (which, shock of shocks, matches what many have been saying) @Dracula: I have committed crimes before (smoking weed, underage drinking, etc…). I tend to not really give a shit if something is illegal or not. I only take my morality and risks into account.
In plain English, “Fuck you Jack. It’s all about me.”
@Null: And there is the kicker…you wouldn’t want me to have leverage over her. And by leverage…I mean “Can actually prove she is full of shit when she said ‘He raped me!’”.
Or perhaps when you want another round, and she’s not interested, “Hey, look how much you liked it last time… I’ll bet I could show some people who’d be really interested in it….”
Yep, no way to abuse that secret tape. No possible way a person could use it as leverage that wasn’t based on a defense to rape.
@Elizabeth: For one, if the cops are looking for weed, they can’t take anything that isn’t weed or looks like weed. A flash drive doesn’t look like weed.
Again we see Brandon’t brilliant grasp of the law. A search warrant tends to be vague, so as to give the best lattitude for related objects. If it was specifically limited to, “marijuana”, you’d be in the clear (becaus of that over specificity talked about before). But a good warrant will say something on the order of, “Marijuana, paraphernalia and any other evidence of use, distribution, purchase or sale.”
At which point that flash drive becomes seizable.
Oh look, Brandon still hasn’t answered my question. Worried about looking like a hypocrite, Brandon?
To be fair to Brandon: good encryption is pretty much proof against run of the mill searches. Bruce Scneier thinksTrueCrypt is good defense.
The thing is, and it’s the important part (and why the folks with child porn tend to get bagged), you have to encrypt everything, always.
When all is said and done, Brandon can probably avoid the taping rap, if he’s willing to take a conviction for obstructing justice. Depending on the situation it can be pretty hard to avoid. If the computer/drives were taken as part of a different investigation the DA has a lot of leverage in terms of how the case (and so the severity of the obstruction charge) is built.
But most people aren’t as thorough in the ways they use encryption, and that’s the weakness. They have things that aren’t encrypted mixed with things that are, which makes the cops suspicious.
@darksidecat; I am not saying she doesn’t have value, just that my safety is more important to me than her feelings.
I protect myself from other crimes as well. I don’t hang out or communicate with criminals so I can’t be “guilty by association”. I protect myself from robbery by keeping important documents, money and other valuables in a safe. I also lock my door when leaving my house.
We all take precautions to avoid negative things happening to us. Can we protect ourselves completely? no. But we can do a few things to minimize it happening to us.
It seems that the people here just think I should
1) not have sex unless I trust someone, even though trust can be broken and happens all the time. Also trust is a pretty intangible thing…unlike actual data which is very tangible.
2) Not gather evidence to protect myself against a FRA. As if I should just come to the court with no way to protect myself or have a defense.
Unless someone can give me some tangible ways to protect themselves from FRA’s without bullshit crap that is impossible to prove (e.g trust, love, and other assorted feelings). I am going to think the best way is to create a paper trail as the best way of protection. That can be video, text messages, email, voice recordings, etc…
Brandon: The most obvious advice that people are giving you here is that you don’t protect yourself from FRA in a way that involves you committing multiple crimes. Beyond that, if you are that worried about FRA’s, then don’t have sex, period.
“Unless someone can give me some tangible ways to protect themselves from FRA’s without bullshit crap that is impossible to prove (e.g trust, love, and other assorted feelings). I am going to think the best way is to create a paper trail as the best way of protection.”
Wow. Forget not thinking True Love exists… Brandon doesn’t think basic human connections exist.
Actually, now I’m wondering how Brandon treats his friends and family members. Love and trust are just bullshit concepts for people who don’t understand how to protect themselves, right?
Reminds me a scene from The Fifth Element:
“Where is the robot to pat you on the back?”
He also needs to look at recent Supreme Court rulings, because the 4th amendment is being chipped away. Indiana’s supreme court (Barnes v State of Indiana) recently ruled that a citizen does NOT have the right to block a police officer’s illegal entry into his home. Their rationale for this is that such illegal entry can be dealt with through the courts after the fact.
And the US Supreme Court recently ruled (Kentucky v King) that the smell of marijuana is enough to allow a warrantless entry into a person’s home. This stems from a case in which a suspect fled police by entering an apartment building. As the cops went door to door they smelled marijuana and entered the apartment of a random guy who was NOT the suspect they were looking for.
And FYI, Brandon, it is conservative attitudes towards criminal justice that lead to rulings such as this, so don’t even try blaming feminists for this shit.
I feel as if something very bad must have happened to Brandon as a child. Abandonment, abuse, neglect. His lack of empathy and trust and his devotion to “his needs” are startling. I feel bad for him, in a way.
What I really feel bad about is his apparently lack of legal understanding. And his refusal to answer Cassandra’s questions is telling.
Jules
Brandon, putting aside for a moment the immorality of what you’re proposing, I remind you yet again that this plan of yours WILL NOT FUCKING WORK. IT IS A STUPID, IRRESPONSIBLE, DANGEROUS PLAN.
Brandon, suppose you went on a hunting trip off in some remote location with a friend. (I know you probably don’t have friends because they might, at any moment, commit some kind of crime against you, but let’s pretend.) Let’s say you’re hunting big game, maybe moose or elk, so you’re using guns that could easily kill a person. You’re out in the wilderness, looking for moose, and no one else is around.
Suddenly, you realize that your friend is holding a weapon that could kill you. You have no reason to think he would kill you; he’s not behaving in any kind of threatening way, but trust can be broken–it happens all the time. You, also, are holding a weapon that could kill someone, and you’re pretty sure that you could kill your friend in a way that would look either like self-defense or an accident.
Do you kill your friend? After all, your life is more important than his, and it would look like an accident, and he could snap and kill you at any time.
“I feel as if something very bad must have happened to Brandon as a child.”
Yeah, I don’t even know where to start with this. I’ve had great relationships and ones where I’ve looked back and realized how stupid I was, but he seems incapable of trusting *any* woman.
And having love and trust in your relationship is like going out without locking your door? I don’t even have a witty comeback for that.
Re evidence:
The tapes might be allowed, in fact they probably would be. The issue of “illegally obtained” (and so “fruit of the poison tree”), generally only applies to the state.
A persons criminal taping can be used as evidence in defense of an unrelated crime. It doesn’t, however, get one any immunity from the crime of illegally recording them. It would also be a stupid prosecutor who gets them admitted into evidence in a way that doesn’t create a confession to the illegal act of recording.
So you might beat the rape charge, but at the cost of a guaranteed conviction for the taping, which will probably also contain elements of a sex crime. So permanent sex-offender status would be pretty much a given.
Minsk: Gorb…
Gorb: Vat!?
Minsk: Gorb. Dis iz turnink into vun of dose plans…hyu know, de kind vere ve keel everybody dot notices dot ve’s keelin’ people?
Gorb: It is?
Minsk: Uh huh. And how do dose alvays end?
Gorb: De dirigible iz in flames, everyboddyz dead an’ I’ve lost my hat.
Minsk: Dot’s right. Und any plan vere you lose you hat iz?
Gorb: A bad plan?
Misnk: Right again!
From Girl Genius
@ Brandon:
In plain English: How would you feel if you found out your partner was videotaping you during sex without you previously knowing?
You know, if you’re so paranoid about rape that you have to video your casual encounters, then maybe you should just stop having casual encounters. I mean, who could enjoy sex under those circumstances?
Excuse me, I meant to say: “about false accusations of rape.”
“I mean, who could enjoy sex under those circumstances?”
I think Brandon is immune to this argument. If it meant something to him, he’d stop. Right?
And apart from everything else we’ve been telling Brandon, his recording scheme may not even work for its intended purpose. Unless he records himself all the time, 24/7, a woman hell-bent on making an FRA against him can always say he raped her seconds after that recording cut off; that he raped her in the elevator, on the stairs, in the parking lot. So at best, a tape would provide some evidence of consent that the jury may or may not regard as a source of reasonable doubt, but it wouldn’t be an absolute defense to a rape charge. So let’s recap: going to jail as a sex offender is a very high price to pay for somewhat aiding your defense against a rape charge.
Right, Amused. There’s no end to it.
What’s really disgusting about the tape situation is the fact that there’s been more than one gang rape case of teen girls in which their rapists video taped the assault and the case STILL ended up in aquittal. So this idea that the law is stacked against him on this issue is absurd.