So at this point you presumably all know about James Franco’s less-than-successful attempt to text his way into the pants of a 17-year old fan — which, if it wasn’t just a publicity stunt for his latest movie, which happens to be about a creepy teacher preying on a student, was pretty creepy for real.
You might have been struck by the, er, bluntness his approach, which could be summarized as the “I’m James Franco, are you technically of legal age in New York State, can I get you alone in a room with me right now, no I’m really James Franco, really” technique.
But what you haven’t seen yet is an analysis of Mr. Franco’s TEXT GAME by a recognized expert in the field. And by expert I mean our new friend Christian McQueen, the Alpha Playboy with the Obviously Fake Name.
Mr. McQueen asks the timeless question: Was Mr. Franco’s TEXT GAME desperate or just direct?
To some it may seem like he’s being ‘thirsty’, but is he really? Or his text game actually the type of game that high value men use?
After going line for line through Mr. Franco’s conversational gambits with the wary teenager — which, you may recall, not only failed to convince her to come to his room but also created a bit of an embarrassing scandal for him — McQueen concludes that Franco’s game was …. “solid.”
No, really.
You see, when you’re James Franco, you can just go ahead and behave like some dude straight out of the CreepyPM subreddit, because you have “so many options, that [you] can go Ultra-Direct in [your] text game and many players who are on a great level utilize this.”
Don’t bother with small talk. Don’t bother with charm. All you need to do is state your famous name, determine if she is of legal age in the state you are in (and she was, in New York), and then proceed to work out the logisitics. And BAM, you’re in like Flynn. (Though one imagines that the real Erroll Flynn actually tried to work some personal charm into his approach with women.)
McQueen sums it up for us mere mortals:
[H]is ’game’ was not ‘thirsty’, but simply Direct. While not great, it was solid.
He is a celebrity, so it’s less about him using Game and more about him asking questions as though they are completing a transaction. She gets to fuck a celebrity and he gets her pussy. Simple.
Yeah. Except that none of that happened and now a guy who could have slept with any one of literally millions of enthusiastic volunteers over the age of 18 is now the poster boy for celebrity creepiness.
He could have been smoother and possibly gotten the bang, but he probably does not care.
Yeah. Unless this is all a publicity stunt, I’m thinking that he probably does care just a little bit now.
This is classic I Don’t Give A Fuck Game.
When your value is high and your time is precious, you don’t give a fuck if she rejects you. This is Next Level.
Well, if by “Next Level” you mean “an approach so crude and creepy that it not only squicked out the 17 year old fan that it was directed at but also millions of female fans who’ve now seen the texts online.”
He put out minimal effort to prove it was him, which was understandable considering she doubted it was him, and when she balked, he ejected quickly.
I guess he’s got a point here. It would have been even worse if Franco had stuck around and tried to pressure the fan to see him.
Remember gents, when your Game is tight and you have High Value, you can go Direct. Men of High Value don’t have time to be wasted. You may get rejected immediately, but you also won’t waste time with girls just seeking attention and validation.
You may, on the other hand, be exposed on the internet as a creepy predator. But I guess Men of High Value don’t care about that, which is why Franco didn’t go on Live With Kelly and Michael shortly after this broke to apologize for it all. Oh wait. He did.
Huh. That doesn’t sound High Value at all.
As insults go, “My stock-photo fake marketing persona is handsomer than you!” really isn’t all that devastating. Or true, especially when said gravatar is wielding a foot-long cigar and looks like he just stepped out of a community theater audition for Guys and Dolls.
Such as good spelling, proofreading, subject-verb agreement, honesty, wittiness, emotional maturity, and not charging $30 for fashion tips you could get for free by checking a John T. Molloy book out of the library.
Based on these clues, I conclude that Professor McQueen did it with the blow-up doll in the conservatory.
Oh dear.
If he’s going to present himself as resembling his icon I feel that he should at least offer us a quick song and dance routine.
Huh.
Does Christian McQueen realize he’s just re-posting, in a 30 dollar book, advice already available for free in the Manosphere?
vs
and
from http://manboobz.com/2014/02/05/attention-seeking-manosphere-douchebag-offers-how-to-guide-for-abusive-boyfriends/
You know, I’m going to take a break from the internet for a few days, because I can remember “Oh hey, didn’t Matt Forney say something TERRIBLE that is like this other terrible thing?” but apparently I can’t remember most of my calculus.
Alas.
Christian McQueen is a marketing concept and a sham, not a real person, and it must be sad to waste your life on this kind of stuff.
As opposed to us men, who don’t pay any attention at all to communication. Reading for comprehension? Psssh, what’s that?
This is perhaps the most spectacular failure at Looking Cool I’ve ever witnessed.
This advice is a hoot and a half! He thinks he knows the mind of women so well, but he’s utterly clueless.
First, we’re adults. when we desperately want to fuck we don’t call up our honeys and ask if they want to “hang out”. If we’re Jones-ing for your cock, we’ll let ya know. If you say “Not tonight”, the rational conclusion to come to isn’t that you are cheating. Men do turn down sex because they just don’t feel like or have time for sex. That’s a thing that happens in the real world. Women know how to take matters into their own hands too. We can still get off on our own.
If you aren’t in a monogamous relationship, and these PUAs don’t seem to be interested in monogamy, she can always just go out and fuck someone else. She couldn’t order in a booty call from you. That doesn’t mean you are the last person she can call that night. If her phone still works and she’s still horny, why shouldn’t she just call up someone else? She’s not your girlfriend. Women do not imprint on the last penis they saw. You may be good in bed. OK. So are alot of people. No matter how creative a lover you may be or how physically gifted, you are not unique. You are not and will not convince her that you are the only source of orgasms in the world. If you want her to want to see you again, you have no choice but to actually grow a personality and hope for the best.
I’d feel sorry for the schmoes who waste their money on these ridiculous books if they weren’t buying them because they want to find a way around a woman’s agency so they can use her as they see fit. If they think attracting a woman is like training a hamster, they deserve to be bilked out of their cash.
Also Lilli Fugit doesn’t care about adult men preying on teenage girls and obviously doesn’t care therefore about how rampant sexual abuse of teenagers by adult men is and how sexualised teenage girls are in society and how fucked up that is?
This is a story, because it shows just how acceptable we as a society consider the sexualisation of teenage girls and how normalised predatory male behaviour towards them is and how little society cares about men who are creeps.
So yeah, fine, don’t care. But I do, and anyone who gives a crap about the welfare of teenage girls does.
Newsflash, I am 1 million percent done with arseholes trying to defend or excuse Franco’s behaviour and dismiss the abuse adult men inflict on teenage girls.
I’ve always wanted to run this question past a roomful of women from a variety of backgrounds. How many of you found that the really aggressive, scary sorts of harassment and attempts to get you to do sexual things that you had expressed no interest in at all dropped dramatically as soon as you were visibly an adult? Not that it ever completely goes away, but I feel like looking back, a. there was significantly more harassment when I was a teen than when I was 18+, b. it tended to come from men whose age was greater than mine by a much more significant degree, and c. it was much more aggressive, both physically and verbally. What’s interesting about that is that at 18 I moved to London (so, theoretically a more dangerous environment) and started dressing in a much “sexier” and more eye-catching way, and yet the harassment was both less frequent and less scarily aggressive than when I was younger.
Basically I think it’s about perceived vulnerability, and tween/teen girls are very specifically targeted for reasons that have nothing to do with their relative conventional attractiveness.
*Raises hand.* Like a switch was hit the moment I graduated high school.
I think you’re absolutely right, and many female friends of mine (most of whom are native Londoners, like me) have said something similar at some point.
It’s darkly amusing how many men told the 14 year old version of me that I “look so grown up, are you sure you’re not 18?” If they really thought I was 18 they wouldn’t have approached me in the first place.
@historophilia, I am with you on that! I have been avoiding reports and comments on this in the media, after my click on the “apology”, exactly because I can’t bear to look at society basically egging on adult men to sexually harrass teenagers.
@ cassandrakitty
I have noticed that correlation, that the harassment has dropped off over time. I’m not sure if it’s my age or appearance (I still get mistaken for a college student even though I’m in my 30’s) or the fact that I have a car and live in an urban suburb where I drive most places, and when I am out walking I have my two (adorable and super sweet) pit bulls with me (not for protection, just for walkies, but ya know).
It also may be because I moved back to the city. When I was at college in a very white-washed college town, it was super bad. I never went out to a bar or restaurant alone when I was living there, and even then it didn’t always help. Even had to defend myself (yay kung fu) twice. Once in broad daylight. Both were middle aged white men (all of the creepers I can recall were, maybe some a little younger, but none were the drunk college dude trope).
In the city, it’s never been worse than incoherent yelling out of a moving vehicle, and the last two times it happened the comments were “I love your dogs!” and “Where did you get those boots?” In bars and restaurants, whether alone or not, I’ve not had any problems. Had some lovely conversations with strangers, in fact.
I dunno. It could be my age, it could be the situation, could be a different environment, not sure.
More like Alpha Playboy Fairytales.
It’s times like this that I wish I knew a real “playboy” to debunk this shit. What these amateur wanna-bes can’t comprehend is that their disdain for women and their pathological and sophomoric need to punish all women because they’ve had their poor little feelings hurt gives them away. I highly doubt men living a real playboy life has to spend so much time coming up with faux game like these losers do. Then again, it’s all about fleecing other losers of their money now, isn’t it?
“Addicted to the dick”?? Is this guy kidding? My grandmother was right. “If you’ve seen one you’ve seen them all”. Sorry, your dicks aren’t special and addictive.
@Buttercup Q. Skullpants Love your posts; they always get a laugh out of me.
@Cassandrakitty, yes oh my goodness so much.
The amount of harassment when I wore school uniform vs. the amount that I got actually at the same age in my own clothes was a huge difference.
And it was absolutely usually from older men, and the harassment that I witness my teenage cousins get (who are very much visibly underage) is huge.
As well as the difference between being clearly a teenager and not being clearly one, these days, I get get virtually no harassment, except when I am visibly vulnerable in some way. So when I sprained my ankle and walked with a clear limp I got harassed and when I get harassment it always seem to correlate with my being ill and run down and looking it.
So what I take from this, is that part of the reason men target visibly underage girls for harassment, is because they are perceived as vulnerable. They are easy targets who find it difficult to deal with sexual harassment and are not likely to yell or fight back or in any way present some kind of challenge.
Men target teenage girls because they view them as easy meat, easy to manipulate because they are inexperienced, easy to scare into submission and they no that society will not castigate them for it because society hates teenage girls and suscribes to the “Lolita” myth that evil little sexual temptresses seduce helpless adult men who can’t possibly be blamed for wanting to have sex with them.
The way society treats teenage girls makes me want to go on the rampage with a bloody big stick.
Oh dog the attention I got when I wore my high school uniform outside of school grounds (complete with saddle shoes) was truly sickening.
Last time I got teenager-level harassment was when I was walking around all red-eyed and miserable looking because my cat had just died. Aren’t predators just lovely?
Remember when David posted that old painting of a older guy creeping on a young girl on a train who WAS IN MOURNING?
And for making you remember that, I am hereby atoning with a photo essay of a kitten growing up with two ferrets.
What I hate even more about “Lolita” is that anyone who thinks it’s a love story of a nymphet-seducer clearly never really read the goddamed book. (Though admittedly, it’s one of those books you have to read at least twice to get the entire story.)
Yes to everything you said Cassandra. At 33, street harassment is still not rare for me. It’s nowhere near the levels of I got between 14-25. I was a late bloomer and looked underaged until I was 19 or 20. There was absolutely no mistaking me for an adult at 14 or 15.
It’s really disgusting.
David,
Not sure if this is wise or not. But I did start writing again. So I offer some of the same synergy and symbiosis that you and I had in the past. However, given my experience of last August I set some ground rules in what I write and on how I will engage. I will not write about persons, especially “private persons”. And as the object of much personal attack, I refrain from ever doing so against anyone ever again. So I limit discussion to ideas, analysis, and interpretation of scientific papers, comment on articles in pop culture that I find in the web. Also my site has no comments, no monetization, no links to other sites for SEO. I write it. If people read it then fine. If not, then fine also. I am not trying to really forge a community and definitely not some sort of cult. I wish to stay on the high road as much as possible given the nature of the subjects I write about.
So if you wish to proceed in this sort of manner, let me know and I can give you link to something you can read.