Amazon selling book that promotes rape

diddlybit

Well this is horrifying. According to this book, apparently 'no' is actually a foolish little thing called "Last Minute Resistance". The only term I for this is sick. Ladies should also note that the right to say no is a 'problem'.

Link to book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00HSOF5ME/ref=tsm_1_fb_lk#_

And this enlightened blurb:

Are you sick of getting a hot girl back to your place, excited at the prospect of ****ing her, only to come up against last minute resistance when you go to make your moves…?

Maybe you go to kiss her but she pulls away. Maybe you reach to undo her bra, but she pushes your hand away…

Maybe you’re already naked and all she has on are some thin lace panties soaked with her pussy juices. And yet for some reason, when you go to take off this paper-thin barrier between her wet pussy and your eager dick, she STILL stops you! Over and over again…

You get frustrated and think “what the **** is this girl’s problem!?” And no matter what you do or how you try, you just can’t overcome her resistance. So quite naturally, you get annoyed and give up. Maybe you even go to sleep with this hottie laying right next to you.

It’s almost like the universe is mocking you by making you lay right next to the girl you want to **** so badly but can’t. One sleepless night later, you haven’t made love and you’re left feeling drained, defeated and — let’s be real — like a bit of a loser…

She walks out the door and you’ll never see her again. What a waste. After all, you did ALL that work to get a girl alone in the first place and then you couldn’t seal the deal. It stings the ego and it’s torture for your sore dick and aching balls.

But believe it or not, this situation happens to countless guys just like you all the time. Guys who are actually pretty good with women but still haven’t mastered the art of “closing”…

Believe me, I know all too well how irritating and embarrassing this is. This frustrating scenario used to plague me, too. And it has cost me sex more times than I care to admit.

But these days I rarely run into this dreaded Last Minute Resistance, or “LMR” for short. And in the rare cases that I do encounter it, I cut through it like a hot knife cuts through creamy, yellow butter.

And I’m about to show you how you can do it too…

In this detailed eBook and collection of real life case studies that are years in the making, I share the little-known mindsets and techniques that I and other extreme players have found to be consistently effective at breaking through a girl's last minute resistance to sex AND preventing it!

I've been writing angry email all week and Amazon just got added to my list. Absolutely disgusting that they could stock something like this.

Link isn't working for me, perhaps they've already removed it?

diddlybit

Amazon have pulled it already. There's an article on the Huffingtom Post on it (Trigger Warning):

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/31/last-minute-resistance-lmr-vincent-vinturis-legitimising-rape-warning-graphic-material_n_4702356.html

Were amazon selling it themselves or was it a third party through amazon?

diddlybit

A Kindle edition was available?

bronte

Apparently the author gives advice on that "return of kings" site.

Faith

diddlybit wrote: »

Amazon have pulled it already. There's an article on the Huffingtom Post on it (Trigger Warning):

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/31/last-minute-resistance-lmr-vincent-vinturis-legitimising-rape-warning-graphic-material_n_4702356.html

Words fail me.

diddlybit

diddlybit wrote: »

A Kindle edition was available?

I don't know how that works with regards to amazon and third parties but I would have thought only amazon sell kindle downloads directly. I may be wrong. At least they've removed it now.

I want to look more into this before I comment too much, but on the face of it, it looks like a rape handbook.

This man writes for Return of Kings, which says just about everything you need to know about him.

The 'blurb' is disturbing in the extreme, but sadly his mindset is increasingly all too familiar.

GalwayGuy2

I think you can safely say it's a rape book :eek:

meeeeh

Political correctness gone mad. I wonder if anybody contacted them about this book.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=mein+kampf

I don't want to do Goodwin, it is just the first book that came to mind. There are plenty others. It's fashionable to be outraged about every idiot. He will sell more books now than he ever would if he was just buried somewhere among other self help and similar dross.

pampootie

meeeeh wrote: »

Political correctness gone mad.

In this case I really don't think so. The quote at the top of the Huffington post article is vile

Wibbs

meeeeh wrote: »

It's fashionable to be outraged about every idiot. He will sell more books now than he ever would if he was just buried somewhere among other self help and similar dross.

This. In a big way and it's got nada to do with "political correctness". Is this book beyond daft? Yes. Is it dangerous? Potentially yes it is. However flagging it on twitter/facebook/blogs et al, will just serve to increase the potential readership and traffic to such sites.

The site yer man writes for eggs this stuff on for just that reason. Their previous two efforts that went global on a wave of tweeted collective breast beating and ire were articles entitled(something like) "Reasons to go out with a woman with eating disorders" and Short haired women are emotionally damaged". The Onion type stuff, if it wasn't so daft from guys who think pocket squares will turn a saddo into a lothario. Jayzuz. :rolleyes:

But oh did sections of the interweb catch ablaze with righteous indignation and even outright bald aggression and threats towards these eejits. OK, understandable on some level, though overreaction also springs to mind*. Why respond to idiotic guff? Worse why advertise it when doing so? Their site saw a huge jump in hits and new signups. So they "won" pretty much.

They know it too and happily admit to this in the comments and their forum. On the shorthaired article, I quote;

Every short-haired girl in America will read this article within the week, and some will re-consider their behavior. It's closing in on 2,000 comments with over 15,000 Facebook likes, even though not a single mainstream blog has written about it. They blacklisted us to prevent our popularity, but as you can see, their tactic has not worked. I truly believe the information and ideas that ROK contains is destined to spread, no matter what our opponents do.

Apparently the eating disorder article brought down their servers they got so many hits. All this from a now online "famous" site/forum with about the same number of posters/contributers as The Ladies Lounge.



TL;DR? If you see offensive crap online, ignore it. If you see a major vendor pushing offensive crap, quietly report it. Only step it up a gear if the hosting site doesn't respond. Don't go tweet/FB like crazy as some sort of "community of the outraged" and spread the link to the article. Because when you do that you may as well call yourself an unpaid advertising shill for the offensive crap. Ignore it, like it should be ignored. Then it will fade away. Sadly hacks looking to fill newspaper space will keep on highlighting and advertising this guff.











*on the shorthaired guff piece some of the comments were crazy, many along the lines of "FCUK YOU, I'm gonna cut all my hair off and then CUT YOUR BALLS OFF". Yea, kinda letting the side down on the overreaction stuff there. "I'm gonna shave my head just to show a stranger on the internet what's what". Way to look like proving their stupid point. :rolleyes:

Femme_Fatale

meeeeh wrote: »

Political correctness gone mad

Huh?

It's fashionable to be outraged about every idiot.

It's "fashionable" to use the phrase "Political correctness gone mad" at every opportunity, even when incorrect. And it's disingenuous to pretend not to see people's point when they're angered by a person/book like this.

Ignoring it is a good idea, but at the same time, it's not going to stop the handful of impressionable people who will be influenced by it and think the guy's a "legend" or whatever.

Wibbs

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Ignoring it is a good idea, but at the same time, it's not going to stop the handful of impressionable people who will be influenced by it and think the guy's a "legend" or whatever.

It's gonna reduce the size of that handful of people for a start. The second the professional objectors stick their oar in on facebook or wherever and the likes keep a coming and the links back to the offending article grow on twitter it's affecting a helluva lot more people

meeeeh

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Huh?

It's "fashionable" to use the phrase "Political correctness gone mad" at every opportunity, even when incorrect. And it's disingenuous to pretend not to see people's point when they're angered by a person/book like this.

Ignoring it is a good idea, but at the same time, it's not going to stop the handful of impressionable people who will be influenced by it and think the guy's a "legend" or whatever.

Political correctness was the wrong expression, I prefer short text when I'm typing on the phone and it was the laziest expression to use.

Maybe I should say it is like shooting fish in a barrel. It takes hardly any effort to be outraged and discredit an idiot who wrote the book. It also makes those who complain feel good that they've done something for the cause when in fact they just drew attention to a book that otherwise everybody would ignore.

Femme_Fatale

It's also just expressing their opinion - I don't like the way merely doing that, sometimes gets referred to snidely as "Righteous indignation", "Faux outrage" etc.

But ye make fair points too. I just thought of Katie Hopkins and people blowing a fuse over her - when that is exactly what her aim/purpose is; and it is exactly why she gets invited onto chat shows.

Wibbs

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

It's also just expressing their opinion - I don't like the way merely doing that, sometimes gets referred to snidely as "Righteous indignation", "Faux outrage" etc.

I agree FF, but sometimes it is just that, faux outrage, a feeding frenzy of collective (with a hint of attention seeking) competition for how outraged one can appear to be, egged on by facebook, bad journos and the like, highlighting and drawing attention to the very thing they want ignored. It's like a mob mentality at work and not far from the mob mentality at the other extreme that equates women as mere sexual items to be figured out, used and discarded. Like I say that "book" has now gotten huge free advertising on the back of this and likely more buyers when yer man just offers it on the relevant sites. The reaction will put money in his pocket. Why reward trolls? Boards has the right idea on that front. We're advised "do not feed the troll", ignore them, report them on the quiet and they'll be deleted. A far better policy IMH.

The site from where it originates has grown in online status out of these controversies. I certainly had never heard of it before the online reaction to it and I like perusing the smellier parts of the interweb every so often. I could point to sites of a similar nature, though significantly more dodgy, misogynist stormfronts as it were, but they remain low traffic areas, unvisited save for a really small core of sad fools. It's when the mainstream decides that one site or another(on any dodgy subject) is worthy of attention then those same sites get dragged into the mainstream and the danger comes when they start to look mainstream, even when their numbers are tiny(the main content providers to RoK are maybe 10-15 people*). The interweb is a great tool for tools, if the rest of us aren't careful about how we respond to them.

But ye make fair points too. I just thought of Katie Hopkins and people blowing a fuse over her - when that is exactly what her aim/purpose is; and it is exactly why she gets invited onto chat shows.

Exactly. Pretty much the same deal going on here IMH FF



*since the first mass reaction to it came up I've read through the site and forum. The latter is maybe a couple of hundred blokes with a core of about 30 and while it most certainly contains material I had WTF moments about, a lot of it is mostly blokish pub banter, style tips, exercise, job stuff, lifestyle etc. So even within that ecosystem the numbers of truly WTF stuff is tinier again.

IvyTheTerrible

It bothers me that people think I shouldn't object to something I disagree with because it "gives it publicity".

So everytime I see something I don't like, I have to shut up and let it carry on?

BonsaiKitten

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

It bothers me that people think I shouldn't object to something I disagree with because it "gives it publicity".

So everytime I see something I don't like, I have to shut up and let it carry on?

Except that what Wibbs said was...

TL;DR? If you see offensive crap online, ignore it. If you see a major vendor pushing offensive crap, quietly report it. Only step it up a gear if the hosting site doesn't respond. Don't go tweet/FB like crazy as some sort of "community of the outraged" and spread the link to the article. Because when you do that you may as well call yourself an unpaid advertising shill for the offensive crap.

So if you want it to stop, the best bet is not to give it any publicity and just ignore it. Chances it'll go away, the internet is full of people seeking attention any way they can get it. If that way doesn't work, they'll probably try something else.

If it's a vendor promoting offensive crap, by all means report it. People going "OMG YOU GUYS, SIGNAL BOOST THIS!" or whatever on twitter etc are giving the product/article/whatever more attention. More attention, more clicks on the link, more revenue for the site/purchases of the book/donations. And all through people acting as unpaid advertisers for it.

It's like the time that Pick Up Artist had a Kickstarter for a book he was writing. Yeah, there was drama and outrage about it, but he hit above and beyond his final target iirc. So he got exactly what he wanted.

By all means, be offended, people have the right to be offended and to say it to others. However, it just might be exactly what the person who created the material wants.

IvyTheTerrible

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

It bothers me that people think I shouldn't object to something I disagree with because it "gives it publicity".

So everytime I see something I don't like, I have to shut up and let it carry on?

I know.

All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.

E.Burke.

I'm torn between depriving this guy and his ilk of the oxygen of publicity, and being told I'm wrong to voice an opinion loudly enough to be heard in case I'm suspected of faux outrage or professional levels of offence-taking, which is also a way of silencing dissent.

Standman

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

It bothers me that people think I shouldn't object to something I disagree with because it "gives it publicity".

So everytime I see something I don't like, I have to shut up and let it carry on?

It depends on your motivations for voicing your opinions I reckon. If you really believe your opinion is going to contribute to the greater good then fire away. The point that some are making is that sometimes people voicing their opinions in these circumstances does more harm than good.

The famous quote 'evil triumphs when good men do nothing' is nice to trot out to make a point, but does anyone really believe in this instance that it is at all relevant? It seems like the evil is triumphing a lot more since the 'good men' have started speaking up.

Wibbs

Quoting Burke? In a case of a tiny number of interweb gobshítes that have only come to a significantly wider audience because the twitisphere and facebook blew up in expressing outrage linking back to the article? I would paraphrase Standman's sentence and say evil is getting a lot more attention and ad revenue since the 'good men' have started speaking up.

Candie wrote: »

I'm torn between depriving this guy and his ilk of the oxygen of publicity, and being told I'm wrong to voice an opinion loudly enough to be heard in case I'm suspected of faux outrage or professional levels of offence-taking.

OK then C, let's step back and look at this objectively. What would be the end result of choosing option A or option B?

Take option B. Voicing opinions has led to huge publicity for a tiny bunch of nobodies on the interweb and will have increased their online earnings to boot. Worse I'll bet the farm it will have caused far more naive/stupid/sectionable[delete as appropriate] men to sign up to the daftness and buy the books. Therefore the risk of some gobshíte buying/reading this "LMR" book and actually raping someone because his previous misreading of clear signals of NO has been translated into YES has increased with all the attention. It also makes this tiny group look like a much bigger deal among modern male philosophy(we have sekrit meetings) than it actually is.

I'll quote again the guy who originated the site

They blacklisted us to prevent our popularity, but as you can see, their tactic has not worked. I truly believe the information and ideas that ROK contains is destined to spread, no matter what our opponents do.

I'd have said "I truly believe the information and ideas that ROK contains is destined to spread, on the back of what our opponents do"

Take option A. Well... nothing happens. A tiny group of people in one corner of the interweb continue to circlejerk their "theories" and sell books to each other.

Which option is better for society at large?

There is the option C that Diddlybit took in this particular case, which is to register a complaint and if enough complaints are lodged the book gets removed and that's fair enough. Kudos to Diddlybit.

That said their previous daftness such as "short haired women are emotionally damaged", then just ignore it entirely. It's all it deserves.

meeeeh

Candie wrote: »

I know.


E.Burke.

I'm torn between depriving this guy and his ilk of the oxygen of publicity, and being told I'm wrong to voice an opinion loudly enough to be heard in case I'm suspected of faux outrage or professional levels of offence-taking, which is also a way of silencing dissent.

How much flourishing was there exactly before the campaign to take of the book?

And it does amuse me a bit that this was the only offensive book Huffington Post found on the Amazon.:D Maybe we should start compiling lists.

Femme_Fatale

This is one of the rare occasions when I agree with that Burke quote being used. I think what Candie is saying is that while she agrees ignoring it is a way of not giving this guy what he wants, it doesn't sit well to say/do absolutely nothing in reaction to it either.

I think maybe if the "Just ignore it" advice wasn't so dismissive and sneery and like a blanket scoffing at any criticism of something like this at all, it would help.

Daftendirekt

Surely having the book pulled from Amazon is a very successful outcome for those who kicked up a fuss about it (assuming that is why it was pulled)? It's absolutely not true that there's no such thing as bad publicity, and it's even possible that other retailers might be reluctant to stock the book having seen the reaction it generated. If you were an author, would you prefer to have your book in Amazon's catalogue, selling quietly but consistently, or would you prefer the short term surge in web traffic and subscriptions by curious visitors?

It's also not correct to assume that the controversy generated by something like this will always work in the author's favour. Sure, you do run the risk of unwittingly promoting the very thing you're objecting to, but you might also manage to turn otherwise neutral parties against the author.

Wibbs

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

This is one of the rare occasions when I agree with that Burke quote being used. I think what Candie is saying is that while she agrees ignoring it is a way of not giving this guy what he wants, it doesn't sit well to say/do absolutely nothing in reaction to it either.

Why doesn't it sit well though FF? There is an awful lot of nonsense, sometimes dangerous nonsense proliferated on the web. The nonsense that ends up getting mainstream attention(and possibly an increase in interested parties)usually does so because of a reaction to it, if not an overreaction to it. Now in the case of this particular "book"(Gutenburg is spinning as we speak) I well understand the reaction and can see it as entirely warranted.

However reactions to previous articles/opinions expressed by this small group most definitely strayed into the overreaction camp(Obviously IMHO). The short haired women are screwed up one in particular. Thousands of people went apeshít over a clearly daft opinion piece by one gimp on the internet(and his tens of sheepies who agreed). The comments on the article, the comments on the "author"(very loose term), indeed including death threats towards him FFS(very liberal altogether) were massively out of proportion to the daftness expressed. There were long winded(sometimes bloody odd) rebuffs on twitter, facebook, youtube and blogs etc. To the degree that a disinterested observer may well be mistaken for thinking the gimp had a point with many of the commenters. Well basically because some of them were as nutty and divorced from reality as the original piece.

That's the other problem with the unfiltered interweb. The Nutcases(tm) of all ilks tend to rise to the top and garner the most attention and often support. Nutcases(tm) tend to be attention seekers so this shouldn't be surprising. Taking the above example, this gives the impression that a large cohort of men are knuckle dragging misogynist gobshítes that take exception to short hair on women and a large cohort of short haired women are apparently batshít crazy histrionics. The danger with the online world is that the abnormal seems the norm, because there they are on the 'Tube and the 'Book and the Twit(clue is in the name) getting thanked and re dispersed. The iEquivalent(tm) of the emptiest cans make the most noise. The reality couldn't be further from this online state of affairs. Make no mistake the vast majority of people don't even register this guff even on the periphery, but if one is too deeply immersed in the online world it sometimes can be hard to realise this.

I think maybe if the "Just ignore it" advice wasn't so dismissive and sneery and like a blanket scoffing at any criticism of something like this at all, it would help.

It's not any criticism FF. Not at all. It's the mob revving each other up, with ever more ire and with increasing hysteria while helping the cause they seek to berate criticism that makes zero sense to me. Goes for many interweb "campaigns" fought on facebook and twitter(irony not lost there). For me anyway it's akin to some down and out, or generic tool throwing insults at me in the street for having a beard or I dunno the wrong clothes or face or whatever, just because I fell into his or her blurry and moronic field of view. I give it no personal or intellectual energy. Why should I? Why should a complete stranger's views hold any power over me? When they have no power over me, unless I freely give it, they don't know me and frankly I don't care to know about them at all.

Daftendirekt wrote: »

Surely having the book pulled from Amazon is a very successful outcome for those who kicked up a fuss about it (assuming that is why it was pulled)?

That part I'm well behind. What the OP Diddlybit(and others) did was the right way to draw attention and fight such ballsology. Like I said before kudos to Diddlybit. I'm merely saying that picking ones battles is often the best way to win.

It's absolutely not true that there's no such thing as bad publicity, and it's even possible that other retailers might be reluctant to stock the book having seen the reaction it generated. If you were an author, would you prefer to have your book in Amazon's catalogue, selling quietly but consistently, or would you prefer the short term surge in web traffic and subscriptions by curious visitors?

That's more like offline thinking though D. Yes amazon is a huge stage for selling, but it ain't the only one. Retailing eBooks has many many "local" outlets and I have no doubt that some of those local outlets will be now only too happy to put this up on their eShelves because of this publicity. Hell the guy running ROK has a shedload of his tomes available to download directly from his site and a meagre number of others who would support his general views and it seems he's selling. So much so, that between his site advertising/clicks and his ebook sales, he's able to afford to swan around the world "gaming" women, blogging about it and then selling ebooks with such charming titles as "Bang Ukraine". Clearly penning erudition Johnson would be proud of. Not*. Well to be fair, though his subject matter is a minefield of WTF moments, he's easy enough to read, though Sammy Beckett ain't losing any of his eternal sleep over it.






*Actually having perused some of his blogs, I was interested in what seems to be a large element of vicarious fandom with his followers going on. I was also interested in him and his journey(and to be fair he does outline it). He was an awkwardly featured**, science nerd, locked in a 9-5 cubicle, enslaved to his credit rating, knocked back in adolescence by the local ladies, who had an epiphany. Which was "this is a load of bahollocks". So far so good. I'd be with him there and many of us would. It's where he took that epiphany is where it gets a tad dysfunctional. Especially with regard to women. He fell into the rookie error of the "grass is greener". We see that here on the forums where "Irish women are ugly" mindset is strong among too many. Foreign fields are better etc. Yea... Actually, No. Just as every taxidriver in the world will happily tell you the weather is shíte, politicians are all crooked, he will also tell you that the local women are bitches and [insert nationality here] women are soooo much the better. This meme is so strong worldwide, that at this stage I'm beginning to think it's an evolutionary adaptation to make sure we get it on with a more diverse gene pool.:D Does it make for good copy when juiced up for the target audience? Oh sure. But is it actual reality? Eh no. No it's not and I say that as someone who has been in relationships with more "foreign" ladies than Irish.


** Not Moms apple pie enough. Too dusky. BTW I'm a fully admitted dopey looking bugger at the best of times so good luck with any of his supporters suggesting I'm an ugly bastid. I'm well aware of my own shortcomings thanks very much, but I do welcome tips to improve my lot. Surgery might a good suggestion, but I'm well ahead of ye there. Not liposuction though as I'm slim enough.




PS Femme_Fatale, loving the Devils Avocado sig

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

OK then C, let's step back and look at this objectively. What would be the end result of choosing option A or option B?

Take option B. Voicing opinions has led to huge publicity for a tiny bunch of nobodies on the interweb and will have increased their online earnings to boot.

I was looking at it objectively.

If this was a book about bombing mosques, murdering babies, a manual on how to commit an armed robbery, or even a burglars handbook with all the tricks of the trade, would anyone suggest we ignore it and leave them get on with it because it's only a few of them?

Why silence disapproval of a book promoting rape? I'd rather they get more traffic because people are making it clear how wrong it is, than foster an atmosphere where even a tiny minority can pretend its normal because nobody is saying otherwise. Does that make me faux outraged or attention seeking?

It's a rape book. If people voice their disapproval and it gets more hits because of it, at least the disapproval is out there. Say nothing and that plays it's own part in making it seem not that bad.

Like I said, I'm torn.

meeeeh

QUOTE=Candie;88812899]I was looking at it objectively.

If this was a book about bombing mosques, murdering babies, a manual on how to commit an armed robbery, or even a burglars handbook with all the tricks of the trade, would anyone suggest we ignore it and leave them get on with it because it's only a few of them?
[/QUOTE]
Sometimes we list them among popular classcs. or read them at mass.

newport2

Candie wrote: »

I was looking at it objectively.

If this was a book about bombing mosques, murdering babies, a manual on how to commit an armed robbery, or even a burglars handbook with all the tricks of the trade, would anyone suggest we ignore it and leave them get on with it because it's only a few of them?

Why silence disapproval of a book promoting rape? I'd rather they get more traffic because people are making it clear how wrong it is, than foster an atmosphere where even a tiny minority can pretend its normal because nobody is saying otherwise. Does that make me faux outraged or attention seeking?

It's a rape book. If people voice their disapproval and it gets more hits because of it, at least the disapproval is out there. Say nothing and that plays it's own part in making it seem not that bad.

Like I said, I'm torn.

Agree. It's difficult to ignore this:

"
In an essay entitled “When Her No Means Yes”, Vinturi reveals women say “no” to him in one way or another “on a regular basis”.
“Yet somehow, when it’s all said and done, the woman is invariably happy that I don’t listen to a single word of protest she uttered; that I barrelled through her resistance nonchalantly and drove the ball to the basket. Women RESPECT this sexual insistence even if they aren’t acutely aware of it.”
"

Shocking stuff.

Protest and generate publicity or keep stum and allow stuff like this to be sold on sites like Amazon? I genuinely don't know.

Surely openly stating that a woman means yes when she says no can't be legal? It's up there with stupidity and incitement of someone saying that gay men like being beaten up, so feel free to do it.

diddlybit

Wibbs wrote: »

TL;DR? If you see offensive crap online, ignore it. If you see a major vendor pushing offensive crap, quietly report it. Only step it up a gear if the hosting site doesn't respond. Don't go tweet/FB like crazy as some sort of "community of the outraged" and spread the link to the article. Because when you do that you may as well call yourself an unpaid advertising shill for the offensive crap. Ignore it, like it should be ignored. Then it will fade away. Sadly hacks looking to fill newspaper space will keep on highlighting and advertising this guff.

I can honestly understand the arguements for ignoring material like this especially as it draws attention to the author. His business might improve, but honestly, if you would purchase a book endorsing 'No-really-doesn't-mean-No', you have some f*cked up morals before you came across any articles or brought it to your attention. Unlike other books that are deemed contraversial, sales can improve as people read them out of curiosity. I can't see this happening in this instance, as no ethical person could purchase it knowing that it was supporting a creep like him.

In the instance of bomb manuals, books on racial purity, guides to extortion and this case a rape manual, the mentality to blow people up, commit hate crimes, extort or rape exist before the book ever ends up in their hands.

Ignoring something like this is apathy, a passive acceptance of that the world is messed up and the issues are too complicated to address. A book like this may be insignificant, but it is a reflection of societal issues that victim blame and bullying, result in low reporting of rapes and a culture that has developed in which filming rape and posting it online is a way to get social media kudos. We can wait for one huge injustice related to rape to be reported in the media, but one thing will not change attitudes to rape overnight, it will only elucidate that our system is broken.

The trivialisation of rape and the culture of victim blaming is so pervasive, that everything and anybody that imparts this message must be taken to task.

Wibbs

Candie wrote: »

I was looking at it objectively.

If this was a book about bombing mosques, murdering babies, a manual on how to commit an armed robbery, or even a burglars handbook with all the tricks of the trade, would anyone suggest we ignore it and leave them get on with it because it's only a few of them?

Pretty much yes. Report the book to the vender? Yes, but actively promoting the book to a wider audience? Not so much, or at least I'm not so sure.

Why silence disapproval of a book promoting rape? It's a rape book.

Is it though? Genuine question C. Has anyone here read more of it beyond the Huffington post article? I haven't. I am NOT defending it. No bloody way, but I am asking is; is it a well dodgy and irresponsible take on the grey area that can occur with sex and implied consent from time to time*, or is it actually advocating rape? It's still objectionable BTW.

If people voice their disapproval and it gets more hits because of it, at least the disapproval is out there. Say nothing and that plays it's own part in making it seem not that bad.

Like I said, I'm torn.

TBH C I'm much more torn myself over this particular example of their online trolling. The reaction to it was understandable and warranted actions like complaining to amazon. On the other hand IMHO the reactions to their other trolling stuff was off the scale and vastly out of proportion.

The sad joke is this "LMR" guff has been doing the rounds of the "pickup artist" community since nigh on the get go. It's one of their major buzzwords. I remember reading of it well over five years ago and thought it well dodgy then, but I can't recall where it reached the wider mainstream like in this case and my concern would be a polarisation occuring where more dopey men think it's "just the feminazis whining":rolleyes: and rather than being objective will buy into this along with all the other manosphere stuff. EG one of their own forum members take on it;

Vincent's article was about the grey area that exists between, "I want to have sex with you, but I'm uncomfortable/don't want to feel like a slut" and "I don't want to have sex with you."

If anything, the article helps guys obtain consensual sex by making them aware of the grey area.

I may be way wrong here, but I don't think this guy quoted is advocating rape, indeed I suspect he'd genuinely flip at the suggestion, but he's hopelessly and dangerously naive about what a "grey area" actually is and where that naivety could take him and any potential victim of it.

*I've experienced this the (thankfully)odd time. IE back to their gaff, getting very hot and heavy, followed by "I'm not sure we should do this". Followed be me backing right off. Followed more than once with them escalating sexually after that, even stuff like "oh I thought you were into it/me". Wooooooo.....OK. Personally I require a definite yes, otherwise I'm out and would obviously advise other men to take the similar approach 100%. It's a no brainer. I won't play games, especially not potentially dangerous ones of that nature. If there's any sort of grey area just stop. If the other person thinks this is some sort of game and finds me less attractive because of my backing off then cool.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Is it though? Genuine question C.

Well...

“I’ve had situations where a girl is lying naked with me on my bed, still loudly proclaiming that we’re not having sex… Other times, I just forcefully removed the hand, stuck my dick inside, and she welcomed it eagerly once I was in.”

In light of the above, I'd have to go with yes.

TBH C I'm much more torn myself over this particular example of their online trolling. The reaction to it was understandable and warranted actions like complaining to amazon. On the other hand IMHO the reactions to their other trolling stuff was off the scale and vastly out of proportion.

I'm only talking about this book, voicing objections to it, and being accused of a)promoting it by doing so, or b)attention seeking by doing so.

I may be way wrong here, but I don't think this guy quoted is advocating rape, indeed I suspect he'd genuinely flip at the suggestion, but he's hopelessly and dangerously naive about what a "grey area" actually is and where that naivety could take him and any potential victim of it.

Which justifies making it known that it's objectionable, surely?

Wibbs

diddlybit wrote: »

I can honestly understand the arguements for ignoring material like this especially as it draws attention to the author. His business might improve, but honestly, if you would purchase a book endorsing 'No-really-doesn't-mean-No', you have some f*cked up morals before you came across any articles or brought it to your attention.

Not necessarily DB. People's morality is neither set in stone, nor does it come fully formed. It's very much a grey area and varies from culture to culture and over time. Take the target audience, men, particularly inexperienced naive young men, possibly socially inept. Such a person might be pretty moral across the board, but naivete/ignorance could easily have them buy into this BS as a truth. It doesn't necessarily mean they're fcuked up, it means they are easily swayed to act in a possibly fcuked up matter. The slicker the presentation, the more easily and the more people are swayed. History is replete with such examples, both on local and national stages.

In the instance of bomb manuals, books on racial purity, guides to extortion and this case a rape manual, the mentality to blow people up, commit hate crimes, extort or rape exist before the book ever ends up in their hands.

I would strongly disagree with this. Outside of actual born psychopaths the majority of people are a moral blank slate from birth, learning as they go. Our moral map varies over time anc culture. You and me would have a subtly different set of morals if this was say 1940's Ireland. We'd likely be more into victim blaming in rape cases for a start, likely more racist and homophobic with it. The Magdelene laundries didn't exist in some sort of moral vacuum. It was people like you and me that supported their existence, even if only passively. The quiet studious religious and moral kid turned into a suicide bomber through outside influence is a very common narrative. It's almost a given refrain after the event "but he/she seemed so lovely when I knew them".

The trivialisation of rape and the culture of victim blaming is so pervasive, that everything and anybody that imparts this message must be taken to task.

I'd partly disagree with this too. How is rape trivialised? Genuine question. It is taken pretty damn seriously by the vast majority of wider society. Take the case here in Ireland where the accused in the dock had a queue of local friends and family shaking his hand. There was a completely correct society wide uproar about that incident, that even stretched beyond to the wider world. A tiny minority of damned foolish people versus the rest of the country. Even his supporters for the most part blew away with the wind when he was convicted. Other rape cases I can recall that made the public eye had equally WTF responses from wider society. Is there a culture of victim blaming? Yes it most certainly does exist and should be consigned to the dark ages where it belongs, but I would argue it's nowhere close to the levels sometimes suggested.

Candie wrote:

In light of the above, I'd have to go with yes.

Yep I'm in full agreement there C.

I'm only talking about this book, voicing objections to it, and being accused of a)promoting it by doing so, or b)attention seeking by doing so.

For a start I certainly wasn't personally accusing you of anything. Dunno where that came from. I was discussing the wider implications, yay or nay regarding how is the best way to deal with such an issue. I'd still be of the opinion that the linking of this book/article across the web is or runs the strong risk of promoting it.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

For a start I certainly wasn't personally accusing you of anything. Dunno where that came from. I was discussing the wider implications, yay or nay regarding how is the best way to deal with such an issue. I'd still be of the opinion that the linking of this book/article across the web is or runs the strong risk of promoting it.

No, I didn't think you were.

It's the general characterisation that most people who would be vociferous in their objection would be likely to be attention seeking or offence-addicted.

I personally don't do facebook etc., and as such am insulated from the worst of the conspicuously offended exhibitionists. I'd be bemused to be lumped in with the 'like if you hate this' crowd.

Wibbs

Ah cool C. No I was definitely not suggesting you were up to that sorta thing.

IMHO the furore around guff like LMR and the like is somewhat akin to closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. Society needs to educate young men and young women from very early on about the personal, moral and emotional environment around sexual relations. Too often sex "education" is more about the penis goes here and this is what a condom looks like. If kids were exposed to and educated about things like consent this kinda "book" would have a far smaller audience, if any at all. Shít like this and the PUA stuff in general is IMHO 9 times outa 10 fostered by simple ignorance and naivety.

Femme_Fatale

Candie wrote: »

I was looking at it objectively.

If this was a book about bombing mosques, murdering babies, a manual on how to commit an armed robbery, or even a burglars handbook with all the tricks of the trade, would anyone suggest we ignore it and leave them get on with it because it's only a few of them?

Why silence disapproval of a book promoting rape? I'd rather they get more traffic because people are making it clear how wrong it is, than foster an atmosphere where even a tiny minority can pretend its normal because nobody is saying otherwise. Does that make me faux outraged or attention seeking?

It's a rape book. If people voice their disapproval and it gets more hits because of it, at least the disapproval is out there. Say nothing and that plays it's own part in making it seem not that bad.

Like I said, I'm torn.

This is the dilemma. I'm torn too. There's a book called To Train Up A Child - physical abuse manual, simple as: http://www.examiner.com/article/another-couple-found-guilty-of-murder-for-parenting-by-to-train-up-a-child

I'm all for not feeding the trolls, but there needs to be intervention if someone is actually being damaged by their lunacy.

People like Katie Hopkins: I just face-palm the crap out of myself at the way people are actually even acknowledging her, let alone engaging with her. But she won't go off and assault somebody on the basis of her stupid "views", so there's no need for intervention; ignoring is the perfect strategy.
This guy's handbook and the abuse book I've mentioned are a different matter though.

Femme_Fatale

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

This is the dilemma. I'm torn too. There's a book called To Train Up A Child - physical abuse manual, simple as: http://www.examiner.com/article/another-couple-found-guilty-of-murder-for-parenting-by-to-train-up-a-child

I'm all for not feeding the trolls, but there needs to be intervention if someone is actually being damaged by their lunacy.

People like Katie Hopkins: I just face-palm the crap out of myself at the way people are actually even acknowledging her, let alone engaging with her. But she won't go off and assault somebody on the basis of her stupid "views", so there's no need for intervention; ignoring is the perfect strategy.
This guy's handbook and the abuse book I've mentioned are a different matter though.

I saw the thread about that book a while ago...sadism disguised as christian values. Didn't a child die after the parents abused him or her as described in it? Awful stuff.

Katie Hopkins is hilarious, her opinions on Benefit Street (the poverty porn show edited to portray its characters in the most entertaining, if not accurate, light) are unselfconsciously side-splitting, complete with footage of Ms Hopkins in an apron brandishing a mop and bucket while pretending to clean a toilet.

You're right of course; the difference is she at worst irritates people. Mr LMR rapes people.

clairefontaine

Sadism has always been disguised in religious values. No shocker there.

Anyhow Wibbs is right. No such thing as bad publicity.