Asian Male-ism I: PUA and Female Objectification
36 Responses | Leave a Comment »
I’ve been getting flamed recently. It’s nothing new, of course, I get flamed all the time, but this time is perhaps a bit different because the issue happens to be one which we likely won’t solve entirely over the web, plus it happens to be flaming by people whom I actually like. In this case, my flaming is over what some regard as my endorsement of Pick Up Artists on my first PUA podcast here, my second podcast here, and my endorsement of a site that one poster described as a “sausage fest.” I’m getting flamed because of sexism on some of these sites (though I’ve never posted on any of these sites), and also because I didn’t condemn some sexist language (which I didn’t notice) used on the 44s. One member said that I was promoting “sexism” to prop up Asian men. Another called out my “ignorance.” I’ve been called other things as well. Though I don’t intend to get people angry, I know that it sometimes happens.
For the record, I don’t endorse PUA. I consider Pick Up Specialists Kwak and William to be friends, but I’ve neither supported nor condemned what they do. I think the both of them are great guys, and I welcome the opportunity to keep in touch with them as they grow as activists and people, but I’m not a PUA, nor have I ever sent any business their way, at least not intentionally. However, I do post about these PUAs, and I do post about sites where some PUAs hang out because I believe they are doing something that has elements of potential. They may not be doing everything right, but there is potential, and they’ve helped some people achieve what many of us take for granted. The idea of teaching Asian men confidence is a good thing, and these PUAs are on the ground doing it, even if there are problems in their approach. With the exception of Kingstonism (and I’m sure most of you have followed that debate), I’ve rarely flat out condemned anything. I’ve never condemned Falling For Grace, even though I think we need variety outside of the “regular” AF/WM themes. I’ve never condemned ModelMinority, although I think some of the guys on that site are crazy. I’ve never condemned 8 Asians, even though they hate debate, which I love. I even promote the politically smart reappropriate.com, even though I usually hate Jenn’s and James’s ideas about Asian men. I’m relatively liberal when it comes to OPM (Other Peoples’ Movements), and so I always try to see the positive in every endeavor that Asian Americans take upon themselves. Unless I see something blatantly unethical, I usually don’t issue any blanket condemnations.
I acknowledge that many PUAs objectify women, and I’ve voiced my opposition to such objectification. My whole “roundtable” with APB was about how I thought a “high brow” approach would nullify the need for a “low brow” approach. I still believe this is the case, but given our lack of funding, our current lack of a network, and the entrenchment of those academics who promote the status quo, right now it’s just a pipe dream. I think it was William who said, “That all sounds high and mighty, but what can we do now? The answer, for some of these men, is to learn how to approach women. It’s low brow, tacky, goofy, aimed at an unusually crazy group of men, and ultimately not entirely fulfilling, but it’s something. It teaches men to be open with women, even if they’re total assholes. At least it’s honest. A lot of these guys happen to be complete assholes to begin with; the PUA just makes it come out. Of course, having a movement that would turn assholes into gold would be nice too, but that kind of thinking usually takes place among people who are more established and past the basics of just learning how to approach women. Think about it–if you find a man who is afraid to approach women and has had few conversations with women, how can anyone expect him to be smooth, considerate, or respectful? If a man has no contact with women over his whole life, I’d say that you should expect him to be an asshole.
Now we could bypass PUA with education. Deep education renders tacky PUA obsolete. However, without that network in place combined with the intellectual capital to say something of substance and supported by financial funding, change cannot take place now. Right now, the “high brow” people need to create that network, build on that intellectual capital, and better learn how to finance and make the system work. We can talk to people and educate people in the meantime with those we touch personally. It’s a long process. In the meantime, we shouldn’t outright condemn people who are trying to work at a lower level because, well, they’re at a lower level. Oppose sexism, and oppose their sexism, but don’t oppose the idea of men learning to approach women because it doesn’t turn men into sexist assholes; it just brings sexist assholes into the open. It also brings nice guys like Kwak and Albert into the open. People don’t see this, but there are some positive lives being changed here, including women. How would Kwak’s girlfriend ever have met Kwak unless he had been taught to “approach?” PUA ultimately is based on openness even if there is no badly needed moral component. It’s not activism, but people are having basic needs met. Think of it as a temporary fix for men who are stunted in emotional growth. It’s not our highest or best goal, but it serves some people as a temporary fix, and it does make positive changes, even if it empowers jerks.
For those who dislike the PUA approach, the solution is to continue building education. We do this by educating, sharing (online), and talking (real time–I still don’t think there’s a substitute for real time communication.). Build the networks. Learn the system. Get practice doing work. Obviously we can accomplish much more, but we need to work at it.
More about this later. Hopefully I can speak a bit about the male issues vs. female issues from a male perspective in the next installment. In the meantime, share your thoughts.
Leave a Comment »
Share
Entries (RSS)
wlee815
12:00 pm | Aug 15, 2008Dear Fighting 44’s members,
I would like to extend an invitation to all of you to tell me WHAT YOU REALLY THINK about the contents of my website (www.betterasianman.com), what my views are, and what I do in my personal life. I’m inviting you to do this– that’s why I have included all kinds of highly personal and very detailed information about my past, as well as my motivations for doing things in the present.
You are welcome to contact me in any of these ways:
1. Add your comment here on this board.
2. Email me at editor@betterasianman.com (all feedback will remain anonymous unless you specifically request to be identified, as per my privacy policy posted on my site).
3. Talk with me directly on the podcast this Sunday. Instructions for how to dial in are at http://www.betterasianman.com. It’s on Sunday at 2:00pm ET.
Seriously, let’s just talk. It’s much easier.
-William
King4aDay
2:29 pm | Aug 15, 2008Hey there, jaehwan, good article.
I’m looking forward to part II
I have voiced a few personal concerns myself, about the whole PUA issue. It’s not that I have any problem at all with certain Asian guys becoming more confident or becoming more assertive as daters. I would honestly like to see that happen, if it is truly needed, and I wish them the best. I believe that a world where everybody stands on equal footing is a more stable world, even in dating.
However, as I mentioned, I have some reservations about methodology and core philosophy when it comes to the PUA movement. I have noted that you have many of the same reservations, and have both written about them as well and spoken of them in PODcasts. So I totally get that you’re struggling, like most of us, to fairly weigh both the positive and negative implications.
But here are my concerns:
1) The very term “Pick Up Artist” has rather sexist connotation.
Here is the Wikipedia definition:
“A pickup artist, commonly abbreviated PUA,[1] is a term used to describe a man who is skilled in meeting, attracting, and seducing women. The use of “pickup” in this context, slang for making a casual acquaintance with a stranger in anticipation of sexual relations.”
And this is from urbandictionary.com:
“1, PUA
Pick Up Artist. A master in th eart of picking up babes.
Exaple - Vinni Cogniti slept with four chicks last night! He’s a true PUA.
Such a philosophy further advances the historically oppressive concept of women as sexual objects rather than as intelligent and unique individuals who’s worth that exceeds that of their use for sexually gratifying men.
So if an individual or a business adopts a title or business name that has clearly sexist implications, how is that any less onerous than a business or individual who adopts a moniker that is racially offensive? So why the tolerance of one and not the other?
2) Sexist content and connotations in many PUA websites. I don’t want to prolong this post with a plethora of quotations from the various PUA sites. But suffice to say, many (if not most) PUA sites compound the initial insult toward women by broadly categorizing “what works on females” and “how females think,” further assaulting their status as INDIVIDUALS. These gender-based generalizations become much more offensive when invoked in the overall context of using women as sexual objects, due to the past historical abuses of women by men.
3) Honesty. When certain PUA sites post false composite photos and pass them off as genuine and proof of the validity of their paid services, it worries me. It speaks to me of their character and honesty as businessmen. How am I to be assured that only the photos are dishonest? How about the all the endless stories of sexual conquest? How about the pages of testimonials? Are they real, or just “necessary alteration of reality” in order to pay the rent?
4) And finally, if something purported to be the absolute epitome of attracting women, ends up pissing off all the women… hello??? Is this mic on? Trust women to tell you if something doesn’t work with women. They’re a lot more reliable than Photoshop.
jaehwan
2:43 pm | Aug 15, 2008King,
I mostly agree with what you’re saying.(I don’t agree with all of point 4, but I’ll comment on that in part 2 or 3 of this series.). I agree with you that the photos look funny too, but I was referring to honesty in stating feelings. Again, I’m agreeing with you, but I’m treading slowly because it’s a complex issue.
I look forward to writing part 2.
Other 44s:
Feel free to post your thoughts here or e-mail them to him. It’ll also be cool if people call William. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again–if you do decide to call William on the podcast, know in advance that William is open and respectful while on the air. He’s not encouraging calls in order to beat or humiliate anyone. He’s wants to hear opinions, and dialogue is what we need.
uRB4N
3:47 pm | Aug 15, 2008I have something constructive to add…
The site and it’s design is a horrible mess. There are redundant links, horrible picture placement, and poorly organized structure.
nightshade
12:52 am | Aug 18, 2008Sigh. No one was flaming you. I didn’t listen to the podcast and have no idea what your stance on PUA is and I really don’t care. If you think our argument was about PUA…sigh. Nevermind. I’m not going to even bother because it’s not worth it because you simply want to be right.
HurricaneSteve
5:07 pm | Aug 18, 2008I know little about the inner workings of PUA but I think the objectification worries are a bit overblown because not everyone is after a “quick lay”. The whole reason for PUA is because unless you fit a certain height or look, it can be very difficult to get women to talk to you in the first place. If two men approach a woman they’re interested in at the same time, have similar personalities, social status, etc, except one is taller, the taller one will win every time because of the high importance placed on a man’s height. Basically the window for a short or not so good looking man is much smaller than for the taller or good looking guy. This disadvantage is amplified if you are an Asian male because of all the stereotypes that are immediately involved.
Yes, PUA does objectify women but the reasoning is that women can be just as prejudiced, if not more so at times. I do applaud the women out there that are open minded enough to find a shorter man more attractive than one that is taller, but the fact remains that this is very rarely the case and a “nice personality” will not be enough.
As for the “putting white women on a pedestal” deal, I may be wrong on this but typically AM’s will seek out AF’s first before any other race. The problem is that a good portion of the time the AF’s are not attracted to the AM, or they find men from other races more attractive. So with few if any AF’s left the natural thing to do would be to find the next largest dating pool which would be WF’s so if they find favor with WF’s, of course they’re going to think highly of them. Either way the whole situation is *bleeped* up.
jaehwan
8:02 pm | Aug 18, 2008HurricaneSteve,
Agreed, dude. I think that was what I realized when meeting Kwak–they’re not all looking for the quick one shot deal. Many of them just need guidance in coming out of their shells.
The only thing I might say is that for some of these guys, it’s not physical. Kwak isn’t short, and William seemed pretty tall. They’re both decent looking guys.
Thanks for addressing the topic. It’s an interesting one. I definitely have more to say about this.
tokyolovestory
12:05 am | Aug 19, 2008HurricaneSteve,
I disagree.
The objectification worries are overblown? So referring to people by number based on their level of “attractiveness” is not a problem? It doesn’t make you shape your thoughts to believe that all people of a certain “rank” in your spectrum of beauty are the same and one can easily replace the last because “hey, they’re only women?” The whole reason for PUA–according to you–is to make up for the lack of socially valuable assets. And how do you make up for it? If PUA is just a set of social skills to make yourself better able to relate to others, they would teach you to relate to women as people, not targets.
The taller man will “win?” “Every time?” This is not a GAME–though I guess PUAs think so–and there is no guarantee of any of these things you state as “reality” and “fact.”
If I were to say, “Well, it’s alright for me to think white and/or light-skinned non-white men are the most attractive because that’s what men think about women,” does that solve any problems? “They did it first!” only works on the elementary school playground so leave that puerile mess at home.
By the way, I don’t agree with this insinuation you’re making that AMs are finding white women attractive because they’re having such success with them.
SoulSnax
11:51 am | Aug 19, 2008We should make a clear distinction between PUA in general, and BetterAsianMan in particular. There is no doubt that PUA, in general, leads to sexist objectification of women. But from what I’ve seen so far on the website, BetterAsianMan takes more of a holistic approach to personal development for Asian-American men. BAM’s approach happens to include a focus on sexual empowerment with the aim of fulfilling other women’s desires in a reciprocal relationship.
HurricaneSteve
2:58 pm | Aug 19, 2008tokyolovestory,
Although I don’t agree with the “rating system” that some guys give to women, I think you’re discounting just how equally superficial women can be. If a guy is shorter and/or not as handsome as a woman wants her man to be, she is not going to give him the time of day unless there is something absolutely spectacular about him. From what I can tell, PUA is supposed to help give the disadvantaged guy a chance by trying to compensate for the weaknesses that most women will be unforgiving of. The reason why they’re “targets” is because most women will turn them down if they were just being themselves based on the reasons listed above. Is it PC? Absolutely not. But it’s also not fair that there’s such an importance placed on height and other factors that men can’t control. Like I said it goes both ways. Social dynamics when it comes to attraction and dating are absolutely cutthroat. People will do anything and everything within legal reason to get what they want. It is not an arena that’s meant to be for social progression and political correctness.
If AM’s were having success with AF’s, why would they look elsewhere? If WF’s are shunning AM’s as bad as AF’s are, why would they be attracted to them? There’s always exceptions to the rule but for the most part why do you think an AM who is happy with AF’s would find a WF attractive?
HurricaneSteve
3:20 pm | Aug 19, 2008jaehwan,
You’re right, it’s not all physical. From what Kwak told me, for AM’s it is a way to “catch up”, especially if you grew up in a traditional household. I can only speak for us Koreans but if your parents were the typical hard working type, not only did they know nothing about social dynamics in America but they also hindered personal development necessary for males to become men in this society. Yes, Korean parents do a good job of instilling a strong work ethic which is very necessary, but they make you dependent on them for too long and disallow experiences that don’t have the highest rate of success. The philosophy behind APB’s PUA is understandable. Not everyone is going to like it but it is a powerful tool for those who know how to utilize it.
SoulSnax
10:06 pm | Aug 19, 2008A flat-chested chick
Told me, “If you were taller,
I would marry you.”
tokyolovestory
2:24 am | Aug 20, 2008HurricaneSteve,
You make it sound like it’s the exception in PUA that they use this rating system. From what I’ve seen of these guys’ blogs, they refer to women this way quite often. Don’t try to downplay it; this is what they’re TAUGHT by the system. And like I said, the whole “they did it first!” argument is juvenile and hinders progress. You’re talking to a real life woman who DOESN’T engage in that kind of behavior so that ragged and overused excuse is not going to work with me.
Your reasoning for why women are called “targets” makes absolutely no sense. It’s not even half an excuse, much less a legitimate REASON. It’s not FAIR that there’s such an importance placed on height and other factors that men can’t control? How about a woman’s tits and ass, or her face? In that sense, the playing field is absolutely LEVEL, if not tilted in your favor. Cut the whining.
If dating is not an arena that’s meant to be for social progression then PUA is DEFINITELY not activism–so all that useless blathering about how it’s to raise the social value of Asian men, etc, was nothing but hot air. Which is my opinion anyway, but you just illustrated my point.
If AMs were having such amazing success with WFs, wouldn’t we be seeing more AM/WF couples? I dunno about you but I don’t see them all that often. They’re rare enough that when I do see them, it catches my eye.
kwak76
4:24 am | Aug 20, 2008HurricaneSteve,
Hey Steve how’s going? How’s Nebraska?
Couple of words. I agree with most of the stuff you say but when we were in NYC I didn’t go too much in dept about what I understood about PUA with you.
Quick history lesson.
There is a community of PUA that do objectify woman. The reason behind is that any time sex is involve there will be some sort of objectification. PUA did not objectify woman as a reaction to women prejudice to us.
One of the biggest reason why PUA will never go mainstream is biggest there is a sexist element in it. I won’t deny this.
With the term ‘target’ was created I think from Mystery. Allot of PUA jargon was created by Mystery. Mystery is one of the founding fathers of PUA. On a personal note I don’t agree with all of mystery tactics.
However, that was in the beginning phase of the PUA community . Just like with any community there is some growth and different school of thoughts.
PUA like Juggler and even a mature Sean Messenger had a different message which I agree with. Show genuine interest in people and talk to them as people and not targets. Juggler mentions to approach everyone guy girl every body. I agree with this.
kwak76
4:41 am | Aug 20, 2008tokyolovestory,
That’s the thing. Asian men are not having success with white woman and in some cases even with Asian woman. Shoot I live in NYC and I still meet a fair number of Asian guys who are just plain dateless. Not all but a fair number.
I personally wouldn’t go so far as to call PUA as some sort of activist movement for Asian men. I’m not sure if Will believes in that. I have to ask him next time.
But PUA can teach guys practical steps to get off their butts and be pro-active with their lives to better it and to better connect with people. Can there be something better? Probably but so far I haven’t found it.
I mean it’s so easy to say just be confident but that is the end point. Humans need a way to grow and change. For me at least through PUA I was able to find that. Right now I am teaching one other guy some of my steps.
evil_FUX
4:53 am | Aug 20, 2008I found some of my shit through D and Ken Wilber, no joke.
SoulSnax
10:29 am | Aug 20, 2008tokyolovestory: you keep bringing it up, so why don’t we really address it… How about if, instead of using the term “target” PUAs used the term “candidate”? would that make you happy?
HurricaneSteve
11:28 am | Aug 20, 2008tokyolovestory,
Are ratings the exception? I don’t know, I haven’t read any of the blogs you mentioned (if you have a few links I’ll definitely check them out), but regardless that’s something that just about everyone does in their heads anyway–they’re just being more definitive about it. Some guys/gals are more attractive than others and it’s natural to want to attract the best looking mate possible. She may not engage in PUA type behavior, given the differences between women & men, but she’s after the same thing everyone else is. Are you saying that most women DON’T want the most attractive man they can get that fulfills their list of wants and desires? It’s human nature.
Chest bumps & backsides (sorry I’m at work and need to keep the language relatively clean) can change over time through clothes, exercise, and if necessary, surgery. Faces are a bit more difficult but very few women are so unattractive that the right hair and make up won’t make them at least average. Height however, is something that does not change, ever. Even an overweight woman (unless she is absolutely obese) who has on a flattering dress and has her hair done nicely will attract more members of the opposite sex than a man who does the same and is of shorter stature. So no, I don’t believe the playing field is even.
What it comes down to is dating is about selfish choices. Yeah, AF/WM pairings can be harmful to the AA community but if their needs are being fulfilled, they don’t care. If you’re starving and have a crumb of bread, and someone next to you is even worse off, chances are very high you’re not going to give up your crumb if that’s all you have. PUA by itself is not a tool for activism for the AA community, but it can help AM’s who are on the bottom of the food chain socially and that in turn can help the progression machine churning. It’s just one of many things that might help.
Let me clarify my view on the AM/WF issue. Obviously AM’s are not having widespread success with WF’s (or anyone else for that matter) but I don’t know who brought up the idea that AM’s preferring WF’s over AF’s was a universal thing either. From what I can tell, the AM’s who prefer WF’s are few in number and one of the big reasons behind it are because they’ve encountered a number of AF’s who outright reject AM’s. This in turn leads them to look outside the race and if they find success with a HF, BF or WF, of course they’re going to prefer them and talk highly about them. You keep saying that the retaliation mentality is a juvenile thing but that’s human nature. When you’re at the bottom of the barrel, you don’t fight fair, you fight to simply get on equal footing. I don’t think you can fault them for trying something different, as anti-activist as it may be. AF’s are higher than AM’s right now in just about every category and while some AF’s like you are doing what you can to change things, the fact remains that it’s simply not enough.
As the Joker said, people are only as good as they’re allowed to be. When the chips are down, they’ll eat each other alive…you’ll see.
jaehwan
12:12 pm | Aug 20, 2008Tokyo, Steve, Kwak, Soulsnax, and others,
Thanks for your input! I’ve been writing and re-writing Male-ism II, and I’m going to be publishing it pretty soon, so hopefully I’ll be able to address my take on some of the issues here.
Steve:
I have to agree with Tokyo here. Men can overcome height with money or skill. I present to you People’s Exhibit #1, Ms. Juju Chang and Mr. Neal Shapiro:
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/abc/another_baby_boy_for_chang_shapiro_70281.asp
Would this go through if she weren’t beautiful? Probably not, because powerful guys like beautiful women. Would this go through if he weren’t loaded? Probably not, because he’s…um…not handsome. Not even racial colonialism would be enough to make this hookup fly!
jaehwan
12:26 pm | Aug 20, 2008Okay, compassion time. Mr. Shapiro isn’t ugly, per se, because it’s all in the eye of the beholder. But on a societal scale, he’s not at her level, whether we’re talking about standards here or in another part of the world. So I think Tokyo is right about an uneven playing field between men and women in general. (I’m not bringing race into the equation in this statement.)
Dialectic
1:47 pm | Aug 20, 2008I want to chime in here and say that Hurricanesteve’s points are generally correct, but he has not framed them properly. His perspective is partially developmental, but ultimately cynical (which is fair, because a lot of people have this perspective).
First, the entire idea of objectification is not well-defined or well-understood. It ultimately comes down to not being able to relate to someone, his/her thoughts, feelings, joy, suffering. When you can’t do that, that someone is an “object” in your eyes.
If you can relate, and if you do relate, then even if you’re judging everything about them, looks, personality, intelligence, ability, you’re not really “objectifying” them.
Secondly, people tend to think of judging physical traits as being “objectifying” but they don’t apply the term to judging psychological traits. This is somewhat arbitrary and unfair: even if you’re judging someone’s personality, you’re still judging. That personality is an object in your judgmental eye. That personality, like that body, is not entirely under that person’s control, and even if it were, why should you get a pass for judging that as attractive/unattractive or acceptable/unacceptable? That person is ultimately a being who deserves compassion and not judgment (this is ultimately the argument of the standard anti-objectivist).
Third, “dehumanization” or “objectification” is ultimately a misnomer. Except in the case of regression, humans generally don’t dehumanize someone or make someone an “Other.” You can’t “Other” someone who was never part of the Self in the first place.
Development involves the widening of identity: as you grow as a person, as you mature from being egocentric to ethnocentric to worldcentric, you learn to relate to more and more people and things. Development is actually a progression of increased “Selfing” and diminished “Othering,” because you start off as a single self in a world of “Others” and you gradually decrease those Others. The conception of “race,” seen as harmful now, was actually a huge breakthrough in “Selfing” because it allowed high densities of unrelated people to relate to one another and live together peacefully. This is how tribes merged into nations.
And this goes into Hurricanesteve’s point about the Joker (awesome movie, btw, best comic book adaptation ever, but the dialogue was imperfect). What the Joker says about the selfishness of people is a point a lot of people agree with, but it’s not quite the whole story. The way development works is people will do what they can to survive; there is nothing wrong with this. If you put a bunch of bad options in front of someone, they’ll pick a bad option. (The outcome of the boat scenario was unrealistic, but putting that aside, it was still a shitty outcome, and not necessarily morally superior, because is it really better to have both boats get blown up, particularly since none of them chose to be in that situation?)
The way we view morality and society now, people only had bad options up to about the mid-20th century. But people from the past wouldn’t have seen their options as particularly bad, evil, or immoral: they were doing the best they could with what they had, and if we view them as selfish, racist, sexist animals now, it’s only because we have the privilege of coming from a better society that they helped build.
If it comes right down to it, is it wrong to put your own welfare before a stranger’s? Is it wrong to put your family’s welfare before that of another family? We don’t typically consider these behaviors “selfish” in the traditional sense, but they certainly are “self-centered” and that’s ok, because that’s how human beings work.
This also prompts us to build better societies and develop better morals, because we don’t want to be trapped in a world with a bunch of shitty “if it comes down to it” options.
HurricaneSteve
3:17 pm | Aug 20, 2008Hey kwak, glad to see you back on. Things are going well enough here, I spent the last couple of weeks entertaining some friends of the family from Korea and I also start classes next week and will hopefully be done in May. Then I’m home free and can start paying back my loans! How about yourself?
You’re right, I said some things about PUA that I didn’t completely understand. There is a misconception that it’s all about a quick lay when that’s not always the case. Giving men a shot of confidence when they have little of it is what it’s about.
HurricaneSteve
3:33 pm | Aug 20, 2008jaehwan,
Indeed, with enough skill and/or money men can compensate for their glaring flaws but I still believe that it is easier for a female to get close to the ideal woman type than it is the other way around. The required amount of skill for someone 5 feet tall to be as attractive as someone a foot taller is incredible, whereas a female who is overweight just needs to change her appearance a bit and lose some weight and will have far more men knocking at her door than women for the short guy.
Could Shapiro have found a woman like his wife if he wasn’t a millionaire? Yes. I’ve seen enough real life Shapiros with less money to provide evidence of this. His ethnicity does make a big difference. If he was still rich his wife wasn’t as beautiful? Probably not but men that are rich have a significant advantages and are rare to begin with so this is more the exception than the rule.
THX1138
9:13 pm | Aug 20, 2008Re: Neil Shapiro and Juju Chang.
To be blunt, Neil Shapiro is fugly. But I guess all that money and power that he has makes up for it, in Juju’s eyes.
jaehwan
12:22 pm | Aug 21, 2008Well, guys who are rich are significantly more common than guys who are five feet tall, wouldn’t you agree? Wouldn’t you also agree that fat girls are significantly more common than guys who are five feet tall? Think about some of the people we’re discussing. Kwak is at least average height, maybe taller than average. William is fairly tall. Albert is very tall. APB claims to be 5′6, which is short, but not that short. The average Asian American guy, which is what we’re talking about, is taller than that.
In fact, they only guy I’ve ever met in the last five years who was five feet tall or under is Steve Novick, candidate for US Senator from Oregon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeOfqEhYU2A
He’s 4′9 with a metal hand, and he almost won the race! (His debating style was really crisp, and he probably would have won if he had had experience holding elected office.)
I think it’s hard for some people to lose weight.
So while you’re probably correct in saying that being 5 feet tall is a disadvantage, it doesn’t apply to most guys.
tokyolovestory
3:29 pm | Aug 21, 2008HurricaneSteve,
You’re going into extremes, but only selectively. A man who is 5′ or less is extremely uncommon (http://www.halls.md/on/men-height-o.htm). For men who are that height, the women who are in the same percentile for WEIGHT are truly overweight. Do you think women in that percentile for weight truly are able to attract that many more suitors than a man in that percentile for height?
tokyolovestory
4:21 pm | Aug 21, 2008However, as an addition to the above information, the chart is recording heights for “other” races. There was a chart separate for white, black, and Hispanic populations, respectively. So this information may include data from other populations, but is probably the closest to defining what is current in terms of Asian-Americans.
HurricaneSteve
11:11 am | Aug 22, 2008Losing weight can be difficult for some but it’s far easier than “growing taller”. I do agree that the gap between desirability of an overweight woman and a short man is not huge, but it is there due to biological reasons–men naturally pursue women. An overweight woman still has more potential to increase desirability than a short man, in my opinion.
That having been said, I’m going to change my stance on the PUA issue a bit. I’ll admit that when I wrote my posts I did not read any PUA blogs or read up at all about PUA other than what Kwak told me but after listening to that podcast on BAM I can see why many find it upsetting, especially women. The attitudes that the 3 men were displaying were pretty insulting and frat boy-like and I hope that the average PUA user isn’t like that. And while there are segments of the PUA community that aren’t all about objectification, what I heard was pretty bad.
I do like the fact that PUA can open more opportunities to meet women for AM’s but at the same time if it fosters this player lifestyle then there definitely needs to be other options for growth and progression.
Gereem
1:08 am | Feb 23, 2009hey what’s up guys, being an Asian man living in North America (Canada) myself who is a PUA I wanted to leave a comment on what you guys have been discussing here. I haven’t been able to read the entire section of comments because it’s too long but I have read a good first half of it.
First thing tho, I would very much like to disagree PUAs being labeled as ‘assholes’. I can see how this can be true because the PUA community teaches men to objectify women and adopt behaviors that can be perceived as jerks but I believe the majority of men that enter the community are usually the overly nice type of guys who for the sake of their niceness just can’t seem to get girls.
I myself was in this category, I had good grades, was extremely nice, and in general put women in a pedestal all throughout my life up till high school until I found this so-called ‘community.’ I was raised in a very hard working Korean family myself and was taught that good grades and hard work ethics was the most that mattered, but that really put me in a awkward position in social situations. I couldn’t relate to people all that well.
I think teachings from the PUA is definitely not the end goal that should be sought in personal development, but as an intermediate step to help those that are so socially out of place that they cannot get back up on their own feet (like how I was nearly three years ago), and having studied Mystery, Sean, and various dating gurus that that teach different perspectives on dating, I definitely agree that not referring to girls as ‘targets’ nor overtly referring to the number rating system is the most ethical and self-help-wise best approach as well, but I think it’s going change due to the nature of the community itself.
As for the Asian man issue, I think Asian men are being misrepresented in the media and there should be more awareness brought up about it. And I also believe the PUA community can definitely help with this just by educating Asian men how to be more socially normal and up to date. (ps: I don’t think just because some of these PUAs are using sexist terms and immature number rating systems will do so for the rest of their life. C’mon! the initial reason why these guys got into this whole stuff was because they felt socially awkward and was in desprate need of help to get rid of their inner wussines! lol, give them some love, they’re just like everyone else and in the end, realzing how how stupid their ego-based adventure was, will want to, in the long term, seek a long lasting, fulfilling relationship, and have a normal life instead of having to live their widowed life or unfulfilled life as they would have destined to be otherwise.
I know the PUA thing gets flamed a lot all the time by people who don’t understand it or already have socially normal lives and having never felt the need to really ‘learn’ about their approach to women, but I think, from the PUAs I have known up till now, that most are overly nice guys who just can’t help themselves, and although the PUA community will carry many of its wierd and immature characteristics for a long time to come due to its nature, that it has a positive intent behind it.
Well, I’ve been honest with my thoughts and I hope I have contributed to this discussion.
jaehwan
1:50 am | Feb 23, 2009Thanks for your contributions, Gereem.
I wrote this piece a long time ago (7 months, which is years in internet talk). Since then, I’ve come around to believe that PUA is indeed a wrong and misguided “solution” that creates far more problems than it creates. As I’ve mentioned to Will, APB’s system has a 100% failure rate when it comes to long term relationship. 100%. That’s a pretty big failure rate considering how many desperate Asian men have forked over $1,300. Not to mention the…um…ethical issues. (While I was dismayed by William’s conduct, the behavior of the other PUAs proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the problem is within the philosophy/institution.)
Anyway, as I mentioned, my views in this post are a bit dated. See my final thoughts on PUA here:
http://www.bigwowo.com/2008/12/the-post-pua-era-of-the-asian-american-blogosphere/
buttermilkwiseman
4:46 pm | Feb 26, 2009no offense jaewhan but i’ve changed my mind completely and I agree with Dialectic on this topic. You haven’t been waylaid developmentally so you do not have the requisite experience or the understanding that will make it extremely difficult for you guys to understand what it takes to grow when you are stunted.
Unless you yourself as well as others don’t just say to be confident, but actually craft a successful program which works and brings results by taking men who are hopelessly debilitatingly crippled by shyness with women and teaching them REAL courage by DOING, showing by example, and actively pushing them out of their comfort zones, like the PUA’s do out in the realworld and in the field. Just saying a bunch of words on the internet is completely ineffectual.
jaehwan
1:25 pm | Feb 27, 2009buttermilk,
No offense taken. I welcome the diversity of opinion.
But how do you know that I haven’t been waylaid developmentally? This idea keeps coming up again and again, with me, with Xian, with anyone else who comes up with a solution but is not part of the PUA system.
How do you know?
buttermilkwiseman
2:26 am | Feb 28, 2009“How do you know?”.
The proof is in the huge disconnect with the way you guys (and girls) talk about them, saying explicitly how sad and pathetic they are for doing what they do. It shows that none of you have the ability to relate to them or their desperation.
[rant]
I’ll clarify this time, the PUA’s are the only ones here who can craft a real solution, because they can physically take with their hands their students and put them in field situations where they approach pretty women in real life many many times. Because for someone who has NO EXPERIENCE with women, these kind of oppertunities come so rarely by themselves that it is worth every single fucking penny to drastically cut down what could have been a next to impossible learning curve on one’s own.
With PUA you are in essence paying someone to hold your hand and PHYSICALLY PUSH you into those situations that test SOCIAL ANXIETY and FEAR. These things can NEVER be intellectually taught with a worded solution over the internet, a working solution can only be taught in real life so no one including myself has the ability to make a working solution.
Overcoming these barriers is so extremely important for someone who is held-back, that at that stage even considering morality, ethics and other things becomes a an active impediment to making ANY sort of progress. With the way the mind works anyone can easily use morality, ethics etc.. as a way to mask their fear and rationalize themselves into staying within their comfort zone by doing nothing and subsequently stagnate miserably for years, decades, and learn nothing.
Everyone also has a mind and conscience of their own, and everything in life is transitory, just because someone takes a PUA course doesn’t automatically mean they’ll become an asshole PUA for life. It’s an unwarranted assumption.
[/rant]
jaehwan
3:26 am | Feb 28, 2009You’ve got us confused with someone else. I never said they were sad and pathetic for doing what they do. Not recently anyway. Nor did Xian or any other male regular on this forum. In fact, we all posted several posts and podcasts on PUA in order to give them space to explain their method. In the end, most of us were dismayed at the dishonesty, lack of ethics, and lack of respect for the opposite gender, not just by the leaders but by the general population of vocal students.
As for people who are so desperate that ethics go out the window–I wouldn’t use the word “pathetic.” I just think it shows moral weakness.