>
 |
| Actual logo for Gunwitch’s “The Way of Gun” |
A creepy, gun-loving pick-up artist (PUA) guru whose “technique” for charming the ladies is just one small step away from actual date rape has been arrested for allegedly shooting a woman in the face.
And, no I’m not making this up. Allen Reyes, known in the “seduction community” as Gunwitch because of his love of guns, apparently got into an argument with a 20-year-old woman at a party in his hometown of Klameth Falls, Oregon. This woman is now (at least according to the latest news report I have managed to find) in critical condition at a local hospital with gunshot wounds to the face. (See here for more details, and here for Jezebel’s take on the subject.)
The man known as Gunwitch, arrested Monday, is apparently quite gun-obsessed. On his website, he notes that he’s “an avid hand gunner.” One of his PUA audio tapes is called “The Way of Gun” and — especially creepy in light of the charges he faces, the logo he chose for it features an actual gun and, well, see the picture at top right.
Gunwitch has never been what anyone would call a “nice guy.” His slogan? “Get laid, not liked.”
Unlike many seduction gurus, Gunwitch doesn’t recommend a lot of gimmicks or clever opening lines or subtle techniques of manipulation. His “technique” is simplicitly itself: lurk around in places where lone women tend to congregate, and when you see a woman who makes you horny, don’t wait for your boner to go away, just get into a “dominant” frame of mind and start pestering her. Then, if she shows anything that looks like interest, ISOLATE her and work your magic. If she doesn’t seem interested, don’t give up, keep pestering her until she gives in or bluntly rejects you.
He goes through his technique in more detail on his web site. Let’s look at some, er, highlights.
So where’s a good place to meet the ladies? Aside from the old standbys — coffee houses, the gym — Gunwitch recommends lurking around the magazine racks:
I like the magazine racks at dept stores, where I can stand there and wait ’til some Cosmo magazine reading hottie comes into what feels to her like your space, and feels like she’s approaching, then boom I’m on it “so what ya reading?”
Learn a thing or two from someone who knew how to get the ladies “isolated” quickly: Ted Bundy:
ANYWHERE you see them you must imagine having sex with her, visualize it, feel the desire and lust. ALWAYS do this as soon as you see a woman you find attractive and eventually the state you will go into when seeing a woman will be one of -sexual- state, rather than panic or fear of meeting her. This makes approaching random lone women easier. Ted Bundy, the infamous serial killer/sociopath didn’t feel fear or panic when he saw a target. He felt rage, sexual perversion and desire to kill, hence NO fear to approach them, of course wanting to have sex isn’t the same thing, but its still more effective than feeling fear or confusion about your desires and direction.
Don’t worry about invading her personal space. In fact, make sure you do:
Since you aren’t gonna be seductive or sensual standing 2 feet away from her, you need to be within 6-8 inches of her.
Even though you’ve just met her, don’t be afraid to start groping her:
Touch her. Since touch is the first step in getting her comfortable with you as a sexual creature, you want to sneak this in slowly. A good progression is: hands, arms, lowers back, upper back, face (while whispering something to her) and hair, then thighs (hand placed but relatively stationary), and upper legs.
Don’t take no for an answer unless she really really means it:
I commonly get snubbed, the cold shoulder … or overall rejected with the women I have sex with right away, but I just persist and eventually things take a turn.
And remember, get her alone as quickly as possible:
ISOLATE. You cannot have sex with women in public or in front of people with any consistency. If that’s your bag, try it with women you are already in a relationship with. You have to get her alone with you. ANY opportunity to isolate BEFORE going into sexual state should be taken as well of course.
If she’s with friends, stalk her like a panther stalks his prey until she is alone:
At a bar, when you see a group and want one of them, WAIT for her to leave the herd, wait for her to be coming out of the bathroom (not IN as she may have to piss bad), wait for her to go to the bar to get a drink, wait for her to be ALONE to approach, and then try to keep her from her friends.
And don’t give up:
Of course if a girl NEVER goes into sexual state for a long period of time, you just try to isolate her anyway and “make the ho say no”. NEVER eject. Always either get either a lay, or a rejection.
Did I mention that you shouldn’t give up? If you’re making out with her and she doesn’t want sex, just keep pressuring her until she says yes:
[S]ometimes, she’ll say “I don’t know you enough” ect. When this happens don’t get mad or upset ect. Just say, “I understand” or “ok, this is nice though huh?” then go back to necking and making out. Eventually go back in for the sex, if happens again say “I understand” and go back in for more kissing and making out, and repeat until it goes through. Hell even if she never gets ready, what have you got better to do than make out with some hot little number? You’ve got no real “make the ho say no” style of getting a close or getting a rejection to work with at this point, as she already has said no but MAY change her mind.
Just remember not to actually rape her:
DO NOT struggle or tug or bear weight on her at this stage, as that is considered rape. Use persistence not force, and you’ll be ok.
Somehow I don’t have a lot of trouble thinking that the allegations against him might just possibly be true.
On the discussion forum for his “Witching Hour” podcast, though, while many of his fans seem genuinely shocked by what has happened, at least some of are defending him, or otherwise making light of the shooting.
One started a topic called “Shoot to Kill,” and declared “Thats my man.”
Another chimed in with a little ditty:
Shoot to kill, Klamath Hills
too many podcasts and too many pills yeah!
Shoot to thrill, pickup skills
Jerkin off to Barry Kirkey gonna fire at will
(Barry Kirkey is another PUA guru who has done podcasts with Gunwitch.)
Still another offered this take:
Im sure Gun has a perfectly good reason for shooting that girl in the face
This last comment struck some on the message board as utterlly hilarious.
I’ll update this, or perhaps do more posts, as the story develops.
Big thanks to the Man Boobz reader who alerted me to this story.
>Booboonation – Oh come on. Lorena Bobbit lops off a man's penis and is heralded as a hero. Women abuse men every bit as much as men abuse women – Davey-poo here got into a big argument about with Paul Elam a while back, which you can read about all you want. "Men do this type of thing DAILY." If you honestly believe that the average man (or even MRA for that matter) thinks it's okay to walk up to a woman and shoot her in the face, you're seriously misguided and delusional.
>Deezee: Gunwitch was not a "fringe element" in the PUA subculture; he was sort of a big deal, and his "teachings" were widely distributed and discussed. Given that he (allegedly) SHOT A WOMAN IN THE FACE, I would assume that virtually all human beings would find this troubling, as indeed most PUAs on his site and elsewhere seem to do. I said nothing about MRAs at all in my post. Also, by the standards of most people in the world, the entire MRM is a "fringe element." And yes, Deezee-poo, I would encourage anyone to read my debate with Paulie-poo; there's a link in the sidebar under "further reading." It makes very clear that while wmen indeed do commit abuse, some of it quite violent, they do NOT "abuse men every bit as much as men abuse women."
>Okay, seriously, where are all the feminists heralding Lorena Bobbitt and Valerie Solanas as heroes? Sure, there might be a few crazies out there who still take the SCUM Manifesto seriously (though you sure as hell won't find any of them on the major feminist sites) but Bobbitt? As far as I can tell, some (not all) feminists defended her when she was on trial because she was suffering from severe PTSD as a result of her husband's abuse, but I've never heard anyone call her a hero. Anyone who did so on Jezebel or Feministing would probably be banned. This guy, on the other hand? Like David said, he's far from a "fringe element". It looks like his ideas were taken very seriously by a lot of people. And while I'm glad that most MRAs are condemning his actions, I'm also not terribly surprised that many think he was justified. Wasn't there a post just a few days ago about a guy who thought that killing "skanks" was hilarious and awesome? Love your blog, David, but I think the comments here might be a bit much for me.
>I don't follow the PUA culture but it seemed like the reaction to Gunwitch even among them wasn't all that favorable. As Dave pointed out, "MRM" is fringe in and of itself, so we're talking about a fringe PUA guru, PUA itself being the fringe of a larger fringe movement. The fringiest of fringe! And yet people still go off saying "oh, the average man must think this is okay, they do it daily." Take a reality pill and get some perspective.Bobbit: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2010/12/28/exp.nr.int.lorena.bobbitt.cnn?hpt=C2
>That people, even a small number, have followed this guy's advice is mindboggling.
>Because never in the history of feminism have women sat around and talked about shooting men in the face (or completely killing them off entirely). Huh? I don't know anyone who does this. But here you have evidence of MRAs celebrating an attempted murder, simply because they have reason to believe the woman in question might make them want to have sex, which causes self-hate and loathing. That some woman somewhere says something out of line doesn't implicate us all, but that you can't post something like this without bringing a bunch of misogynists down to celebrate killing (or attempting to kill women) is telling.
>@radicalbookwormAfter the Bobbitt incident the German feminist Alice Schwarzer wrote an article about the case, in which she stylized Bobbitt as a role model. Quotation:" Eine hat es getan. Jetzt könnte es jede tun. […]Amerikanische Hausfrauen denken beim Anblick eines Küchenmessers nicht mehr nur ans Petersilie-Hacken. " "One woman did it. Now every woman could do it. […] American housewives don't just think of chopping parsley anymore, when they see a kitchen knife. "Alice Schwarzer is a feminist icon in Germany. She is in her 60s now, but is still the most popular and influential feminist here. Only recently there was a followup article in her magazine, something like what is Lorena Bobbitt doing now.
>I think the problem a lot of MRA/PUA advocates have is that they cannot really distinguish people from the group (which is pretty funny in light of your most recent post, Women Are… Part 6). The person is the whole and the whole is the person. Anything done by one person represents the whole, and anything done by the whole represents the person. A single woman represents all of womanhood, and you can use the same PUA techniques to pick up any woman. One criticism of the MRA/PUA movement is that they don't see women as individual people, but I'd actually posit they don't even see other men as individual people. They are all representatives of the collective. So a group of MRA men posting support for the shooting is equivalent to one Lorena Bobbit. What Lorena Bobbit did is a stand-in for what all women must want to do, and if one other woman supports her, it's exactly the same as the group supporting her. Therefore, the men who are supporting Gunwitch are equivalent, even though there are numerically more of them than there are of Lorena Bobbit and her one friend. Because each man is part of the collective whole, you count them as one single instance of support. If ten men express support for Gunwitch, they are still representing the collective animus and it's no different than if five or fifteen men expressed support. It's all about the group mind and the collective. Collectively, to their mindset, all women oppress all men. There are no deviations or outliers. One woman oppressing one man can be extrapolated to apply to the whole. One man oppressing one woman can also be extrapolated to apply to the whole, but now the wholes are equivalent. This is the only explanation I can think of as to why MRAs dig up extreme examples and post them as blanket fact, while dismissing members of their own group acting violently. 1=1, 5=1 and 100=1.
>@ Amanda Marcotte – I remember the delightful "feminist" girls at my school talking about the subject all the time. This is a servicable if dated repository of misandry and vitriol from certain sectors of the feminist movement. No different than, say, focusing on the fringe of the MRA like our friend Dave here.
>Dave – did one of my comments get caught up in the spam filter? I don't want to double post.
>"Deezee: Gunwitch was not a "fringe element""—DavidUm, no. He was an extremist person doing an alarming and extreme thing. Typical pick up artists do not normally engage in such graphic and shocking criminality, but you already know that . . . right?I suspect a few posters here are going to demonize PUA because of it. Oh, well. Carry on.
>"That people, even a small number, have followed this guy's advice is mindboggling."—MI don't know much about about his branch of PUA but I suspect it wasn't fixated with brutal violence and murder.People can say truisms and dispense armchair wisdom and still be unsavory and even sociopathic. There are countless examples of this.
>Deezee, the comment is unblocked now.
>Your fallacy of logic Tuquoque does not make the argument invalid.Just because someone..somewhere somehow has done something does -not- make that this situation is alright in -any- capacity.Go back to school. Take a logic course. It could only do you good.
>"Therefore, the men who are supporting Gunwitch are equivalent, even though there are numerically more of them than there are of Lorena Bobbit and her one friend."—LVvSApparently, you don't remember when the Bobbit incident happened. Lots of people were supportive about it. There were even feminsts that proclaimed, "Now, do you get it?"I've even argued with posters *recently* that appeal to popularity with this—that people were behind her gruesome action so she must be in the right. Gunwitch and Bobbitt committed sick crimes, to be succinct about it.
>"I don't know much about about his branch of PUA but I suspect it wasn't fixated with brutal violence and murder.People can say truisms and dispense armchair wisdom and still be unsavory and even sociopathic. There are countless examples of this."Yeah I was talking about his pick-up techniques. They're vile.
>Booboonation said: "And to Richard, who thinks he's 'borrowing lines', your borrowed line about not caring addresses NO imbalance. There is no imbalance addressed with your comment about false rape, but I'm sure the original statement you are borrowing from DID highlight an imbalance."Nope. Not to my recollection. So I repeat, I won't give a rats ass about some woman cathing a buck shot facial until feminists care about false rape accusations. Random Brother
>"Yeah I was talking about his pick-up techniques. They're vile.—MVile is quite a word—I can think of more things that are truly repulsive; shooting someone in the face is. Trying to get convince someone to have sex with you is far removed from that. Of course, you'll probably mention the Ted Bundy quote. If he had never done anything like this that would be something not many would have made a big deal about.
>If he had never shot a woman in the face I would still consider his techniques vile. Honestly, Wytch, until you're on the receiving end of this kind of approach you have no idea how truly vile it is.
>"Honestly, Wytch, until you're on the receiving end of this kind of approach you have no idea how truly vile it is."—MSince you have no idea what I've been through, then you can't really make a clear statement on that, can you? But this topic really isn't about me or you. His techiques are "vile" to your perspective beacause of a reason you still haven't provided outside your own experience. Give a critique and we'll talk further.
>Deeze said to me:["Men do this type of thing DAILY." If you honestly believe that the average man (or even MRA for that matter) thinks it's okay to walk up to a woman and shoot her in the face, you're seriously misguided and delusional.] So, Deeze where did I elude to honestly believing the average man thinks it's ok? What's with you guys never DIRECTLY addressing a point? Stop changing the subject. Again, you miss the point and bring up Lorena Bobbit. Does this type of thing happen DAILY? NO if it did, I would be a SICK MF for saying, gee I guess there may have been a good reason, or whatever. There is not an imbalance against men the way there is against women. MRAs lie every time they say women are just as violent as men, or women abuse men just as much. You are just lying. Stop lying, you deserve no respect until you do. As far as the side controversy goes, I have never been the type to understand revenge, but as I get older I do understand wanting a person who does not value other sentient life, harms sentient life, kills life, or tortures life to have their OWN life suffer in some way, not as revenge, but it seems LOGICAL that people would not worry about said person or want them to LEARN EMPATHY the hard way, or any way. I seriously doubt every argument put forth here is "feminist" or representing feminist ideologies, whatever those are (meaning as if there are no controversies or tough issues). Prison rape is surely a human rights violation, and not "feminist" ideology to want that to happen to someone. I wonder why deeze is so hostile toward feminism with no real world evidence to support these kinds of irrational, emotional positions he takes. The evidence is clearly not on his side.
>His techniques are vile because they invade other people's boundaries. It's only a sociopath that does not get this and wants a fucking bar graph and a pie chart. Coercion is wrong, and taking advantage of the nature of many females fear of directly shaming a man, this is repugnant, and THIS is why men deserve to be directly SHAMED, because they think this kind of boundary degradation and coercion to get INSIDE another person's body is wrong. Do men want someone INSIDE of them? You may think, well I'm not a homosexual so no, but women are not attracted to every man. If we don't WANT TO it IS like homosexual sex to someone hetero, if you are NOT appealing, then you are NOT appealing.MRAs make me realize that men need to be shamed more, not less.
>*correctionThey think this kind of boundary degradation and coercion to get INSIDE another person's body is NOT wrong.
>yea…because one of the pillars of Pick Up Artistry is "Shootin bitches in the face"You're not a real PUA until you at least curb stomp a chickthat's how you move up the totem lvl 1: insult chickslvl 2: slaps/punch chickslvl3: GET FUCKING SERIOUS about beating bitches curb stomp that bitch!!!!lvl4: Shoot her in the faceRight now, I'm only a lvl 1, but some day…SOME DAY I'll get to Gunwitch's lvl
>BTW Dave, even if we disagree, props to running a site that has a pretty hands off commenting policy.Booboonation -If you don't understand how the statement "Men do this type of thing daily" could be interpreted as implying you believe average man think it's okay to do that type of thing daily, you need a crash course in phraseology.The "you're just lying" approach to refuting unbiased academic research is very cogent and well thought-out; your input is duly noted and certainly appreciated. Not that you'd care for rational arguments anyway – damn that patriarchy and its oppressive logic! Knowledge was a tool to oppress women!And since when did I have emotions? You clearly don't know me. 😉