What's new

Misogynist Pick-Up Artists Touring the World: Julien Blanc and his ilk

nice gaijin

Resident Realist
Moderator
Donor
8 Aug 2005
6,874
2,834
337
I don't often make new threads, but I'm a little surprised this hasn't appeared on the forums yet.

Some background, I find this interesting but you can skip it if you want
During my travels, I came across a copy of "The Game," by Rolling Stone writer Neil Strauss, about how he went from writing about a (then) small community of "pick-up artists" (which they abbreviate to "PUA") to becoming one of them and building a massive, lucrative community around using manipulative "approaches" to attract women, until the community he helped build pretty much imploded on itself. It's a compelling narrative and an interesting, quick read if nothing else, but it really gave me a lot to think about the dynamics of attraction and confidence. I even recognized some "plays" that had been used on me before… now THAT was a revelation.

Something that drew empathy was that Strauss, like many men, was timid and lacked confidence, and lamented his inability to attract women. His experience as a PUA made him more confident and allowed him to bed many women. He and the other leaders of the community took these approaches and created "workshops" to "help" similarly awkward guys overcome their awkwardness, for a price. They taught them scripts, gave grooming tips, but most importantly, took them out and forced them to chat up strangers and build confidence in approaching people and not being too fazed when they get turned down. Soon, there were several clans of PUAs that had congealed around the workshops, recreating themselves as clones of their mentors. The approaches were compiled like playbooks for a football team, ranging from simple ice breakers to elaborate choreographed approaches. Approaches were traded and shared, incorporating elements of psychology and even hypnotism.

But as you might expect, as time went on, their interactions with women lost meaning until it all devolved into a numbers game. This game, by definition, objectified women as targets for these approaches. In fact, aspiring PUAs were instructed to approach women they weren't interested in to bolster their confidence, inure them from rejection and hone their "skill." Eventually, this reshaped their perception of the world, where all women were prospective targets, potentially vulnerable to the right kind of manipulation. The failed attempts were shrugged off and quickly forgotten, and the successes were hailed as a testament to the efficacy of their craft. This is the "if it works at all, it must be worth it" attitude that I've heard from the apologists catcalling and other forms of street harassment. There's really no other word for it than misogyny; the whole point was to ignore or minimize the humanity and intelligence of women, and use various means to manipulate them. This isn't about attracting a mate, it's about bedding as many disposable partners as possible, or even just seeing how many phone numbers they could collect.

Ultimately, the community broke apart when PUAs stopped respecting even each other's humanity (shocking twist, I know!) and started breaking their own rules; using manipulative techniques on each other, competing for the same targets, and forming smear campaigns to discredit members they wanted to get rid of. One of the most divisive players in this drama went by the moniker "Tyler Durden," who started using forms of minor assault to approach women. Strauss described him as a sociopath who didn't recognize the humanity in his targets or his fellow PUAs; everyone was just an object to be manipulated. He used backroom politics to oust PUAs he saw as a threat, and finally the community splintered. Then the approaches themselves started to suffer from their own popularity, leading to a saturation point where women began to recognize the same old tricks being attempted on them. Once they knew they were the targets of manipulative techniques, women were better able to defend themselves, rendering the approaches ineffective. This is where The Game leaves off.
This brings us to today:
Although the house that peacocking built had collapsed, these guys haven't gone away, and there are still many men out there desperate enough to spend their money to learn how to approach women. It seems that the "teachers" that still offer these workshops come from the less scrupulous schools of pick-up artistry. Namely, the ones who actively and admittedly objectify women, degrading them in the hopes that it'll trigger a favorable response. Owen Cook (AKA Tyler Durden, the aforementioned sociopath) started a company called Real Social Dynamics (RSD), offering PUA workshops for about $3,000 a head. One of his associates is Julien Blanc.

This video popped up on my Facebook feed a couple weeks back, and I've since seen a deluge of posts and articles on this guy and his tactics (for lack of a better word). I've been collecting links as they've appeared, so I could share them somewhere. The original video that garnered attention was put together by a Japanese youtuber (msdoom99), who took Blanc's own clips and added Japanese subtitles so people in Japan could see what he's saying about Japan and Japanese girls. It's pretty vile. There's even footage of him accosting women in clubs, on the street, and even a convenience store clerk.



Blanc pretty much embodies the most misogynist aspects of The Game, choking women, forcing their heads to his crotch, and berating them publicly. In the video, he brags to a room of hopeful players about how easy it is for him to get laid in Japan through his forceful means, and encourages them to do the same.

Here's some images of him with his hands around women's necks. In the photos he's repeating the same gesture as he does something inappropriate, which was described by Strauss as a technique designed to elicit a Pavlovian response that "this is a good thing, this is okay." He knows this is NOT okay, and to me the gesture is an admission of guilt.
grid-cell-13466-1415155910-7.jpg
grid-cell-13466-1415155911-10.jpg


He's posted the following chart on domestic abuse with the caption "might as well be a checklist"
enhanced-12050-1415056305-11.png


After the subtitled video was released by msdoom99, a woman in DC started a petition for venues to cancel RSD's workshops and for their web servers to take down their material:
Sign the Petition

Buzzfeed picked up the story on November 3rd
American Pick-Up Artist Who Teaches Manipulative Techniques Faces Australian Boycott

The Guardian followed the next day
Julien Blanc, the 'female attraction' expert, glorifies sexual violence. The fewer seminars he holds, the better | Somayya Ismailjee

Jake Adelstein of the Japan Times chimed in on the 5th. I can imagine how a long term resident of Japan can be outraged to be grouped together with Blanc. The next day, Jake posted to Japansubculture, repeating some of his japantimes article but also including some important additional info: the possible crimes Julien Blanc committed (and encouraged others to commit) in Japan
Let's ensure no happy returns to Japan for this vile 'dating coach'
The difference between a pick-up artist & getting picked up for crimes in Japan.

Addicting Info (from the looks of it a very liberal site) and Foxnews (a very conservative one) both posted about this, both including a video of Owen Cook (AKA Tyler Durden, the founder of RSD) recounting a time he forced sex on a girl
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/1...ault-women-now-hes-getting-a-lesson-in-karma/
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/1...-coach-under-fire-after-video-details-graphic

Another Guardian article from the perspective of a woman who has been approached by misogynist PUAs.
Women, beware this PUA army of sleazebags, saddos and weirdos | Hadley Freeman

She also talks about Dapper Laughs, which is apparently a semi-satirical PUA alter ego of a British comedian, Daniel O'Reilly. I hadn't heard about this before, but this link has some videos, including one where he tries to backpedal on the "character" he created, claiming he thought it was harmless. He's clearly suffering for his folly, but it raises a good question about the nature of satire.
Dapper Laughs on Newsnight: 'I did not realise that I was causing a problem'

Australian news outlets detailed how protestors disrupted Blanc's workshop in Sydney, and despite a schedule for other workshops, Julien and his assistant ended up fleeing the country (article also contains video)
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-...-in-rape-scandal/story-fnh81jut-1227123101152

Japanese, Korean, and British immigration authorities have been alerted to this guy, although it's unclear whether they can or will take action and refuse him entry if he tries to visit. Korea has stated they're prepared to deny him entry (http://www.koreaobserver.com/korea-to-deny-entry-to-pickup-artist-julien-blanc-24586). Canadian immigration has already stated that they can't bar someone entry for their views alone, but IMO if he's promoting crimes against women, that should be grounds for expulsion. Maybe at some point it'll get through to Blanc and his associates that they need to move on.

sigh…
Personally, I find this guy repugnant, not only for the way he treats women, but that he makes a living by encouraging other men to think and act in the same way. This sense of entitlement is one of the core causes of a lot of violence against women (The case of Elliot Rogers comes to mind). I'm happy to see that the response is overwhelmingly one of outrage, and his income is being disrupted as a result. But this guy is just an easy scapegoat, when the true danger is the mindset itself. My biggest hope is that women everywhere learn not about Julien Blanc, but about the approaches these guys use and promote to harass women, so they can recognize what's happening and muster the courage to call them out for it.

What are your thoughts?
 
Simply disgusting.
I came across a petition to cancel hotel resevations for his lectures as well as stay in Australia, and from that I noticed another (the Japanese one mentioned in Thomas' post) and signed it, also shared it with friends on FB.
 
I find this guy repugnant, but maybe not for the same reasons as most of you.

My core problem with him is that he is going to make the dating game a lot harder for us all, in particular us white guys. He is drawing much too much attention. He is rocking the boat. He is going to get a lot of Japanese women absolutely spooked.

Now I would not, could not act as he does or at least claims to do (a few videos does not convince this is his standard MO). That said, I am not going to jump on the bandwagon that all or even most Japanese women are absolutely horrified or turned off by this sort of behavior. Experience observing does seem to indicate otherwise for at least some. (might get attacked for saying that, but...) But the thing is, I would not act this way because there is no real way to know which girl will respond positively to this and which will be traumatized or supremely embarrassed. Some women are pretty randy and some rather like a man handling. Some really respond to very over-confident, obnoxious guys, especially if they have gotten their name in the paper and are raking in cash giving seminars and whatnot. I don't think its too smart for any of us to deny that.

But going back to my earlier point, this guy is going to put a lot of women on guard, including the women who like obnoxious guys. As this story gains press, women who like obnoxious guys will be put on the spot right along with obnoxious guys themselves. And this will redraw the line of how much confidence and physical methods we can use to draw a woman to us. Where physically pulling a woman onto a dance floor might have had a profound effect getting a girl to like us, it may now be viewed as just plain old assault by all, including the girls that it once had a profound effect on.

Another thing to say is that having women too aware and wary of us men and even our more mild tactics is never good for us, and often not even good for women, if it can be said that dating is good for women at all.

All that said, I would never sign a petition to have his reservations cancelled. That is outrageous in itself. Its very dirty. Its not the right way to go about challenging him.

I think it might have been possible to simply have him arrested for inciting illegal behavior (assault).
 
One more thing; this use of misogyny confuses the hell out of me. The definition of misogyny is a hatred of women. I don't get the feeling that he hates women or does this simply or mostly to hurt them because of his hate.

What I see is a very one-sided and selfish love of women, especially their bodies. Its not misogyny. Its just being a self absorbed reckless freak. I won't even insult pigs by suggesting he is one.
 
Blanc's obsession with sex and control, to the point that even a convenience store clerk has to put up with his assault, reduces women to objects of lust and targets of a canned approach. These techniques are born from (and appeal to) the minds of men whose failures in dating have led them to resent women for their ability to say no, and attempt to take that away from them. In my book that is misogyny. If someone uses violence against women without informed consent, it's not because they love them--either on a personal level or as a whole.

Some women may respond favorably to confidence or persistence, but there's a level of "reading the air" that needs to be done beforehand. If you're worried about traumatizing a girl for a bid to win her affection, maybe it's not worth the risk?
 
Blanc's obsession with sex and control, to the point that even a convenience store clerk has to put up with his assault, reduces women to objects of lust and targets of a canned approach.

I just need to point out that women ARE objects of lust, same as men. I guess I can take your use of the word "reduced" to mean that that becomes ALL they are, and that is where I have an issue. We are all more than that. I just don't like it when it sounds like being an object of lust, in itself, is a bad thing. In fact, I think its possible that LeBlanc and his ilk may well be victims of the idea that women never are sex objects, and that has led them to this insanity.

These techniques are born from (and appeal to) the minds of men whose failures in dating have led them to resent women for their ability to say no, and attempt to take that away from them.

Perhaps. But I see this as simply a reaction to continued failures, and not necessarily a resentment of women. After so many failures, many of them realize they need to change, and of course, they do. For many, this is a 180 degree change, and if their previous way netted success of near zero percent, surely a 180 degree change will be more successful? Well, it might seem so on the spot. More thinking might make them realize its not necessarily true.

Of course some of them might have come to resent women, not for their ability to say no, but for so many having said no. Yet, they still desire women. At best, that is a love/hate relationship and not pure misogyny.

You know, one aspect of this that really pisses me off is that if the western guys involved were handed so many failures, it was at the hands of western women. So why even think twice about coming here and taking it out on Japanese women? Or even feeling the need to make a change then target Japanese women? Just coming to Japan is ALREADY a change. They could score with Japanese women just by going to the right bars or clubs and no need to be obnoxious at all.

And frankly, if they wanted to take out their frustrations on American women, I would be more understanding, although not truly in their camp. Nice guys truly finish last in America, and American women, not each and every one, but as a group, have made sure that is the way it is. But the flip side is, that is a reaction to American male behavior. Its quite a conundrum. But, the point is, Japanese women don't deserve this $#!T.

Even Japanese women who go to America don't deserve it.

Some women may respond favorably to confidence or persistence, but there's a level of "reading the air" that needs to be done beforehand. If you're worried about traumatizing a girl for a bid to win her affection, maybe it's not worth the risk?

I don't know if anyone can really read the air and know whose head to grab and shove toward their crotch in a club the first night they meet. There may be a step by step process of steadily using more mild activities to ensure a woman will respond positively to such an action in a club, but I sure don't know what that process would be. I just cannot even see how it would be worth it to even figure that out the first time one meets a girl.

I have forced women's head to my crotch before. But never in public. Its always been in private and after we have already been having sex for a while and I have a sense of what she is good with. Point being, its not necessary to do that stuff to get laid. First you get laid, then you build up to stuff like that if you want it. In fact, doing such things in a club I think is more hindrance than help if the goal is to get laid.

In my book that is misogyny. If someone uses violence against women without informed consent, it's not because they love them--either on a personal level or as a whole.

I don't know exactly what you mean about informed consent, but these consent issues tend to get me a bit annoyed. The definitions wind up getting too narrow and too PC to be of any practical use to anyone. For example, you don't ask if you can hold someone's hand usually. You just try it. As for sexual violence, I have learned the hard way that asking pretty much never works. I like a bit of domination and SM, but if you got to ask, it turns a masochist off. Think about that. A truly submissive woman does not want to be asked all the time. Its showing her way too much respect and that is not what she wants IF she is submissive. Its another conundrum really. How do you separate the types? How do you find the lines of tolerance in each individual woman? Fact is, even the woman herself cannot usually tell you these things with precision. Some really can't tell you anything but no, even if at heart they like a whole bunch of stuff they never tried yet.

My only solution is to take it slow. Pretty much any woman is good with straight sex. So do what it takes to get straight sex, and for Pete's sake, just take solace in the fact you are getting laid. If you want something beyond that, build up to it. If all men did this, then even the women who like it rough and like to be treated like meat would learn to play along.

And if she does not like or won't do what you like? You dump her and move on to the next.
 
Last edited:
I just need to point out that women ARE objects of lust, same as men. I guess I can take your use of the word "reduced" to men that that becomes ALL they are, and that is where I have an issue. We are all more than that. I just don't like it when it sounds like being an object of lust, in itself, is a bad thing. In fact, I think its possible that LeBlanc and his ilk may well be victims of the idea that women never are sex objects, and that has led them to this insanity.
I see things differently. People are not inherently objects of lust; what the are is a human being, certainly capable of inspiring or even inciting lust, but they aren't a soulless doll to be used and discarded. Objectification is when you ignore the other person's humanity and think of them as just a plaything to satisfy your wants, without care or concern for how it may affect them. This is expressed in many ways: it can (and often does) happen quietly in one's head, or it can be vocalized as a form of street harassment, or it can escalate to physical abuse or assault. I'm not shaming lust itself, but how we deal with it is entirely within our control. Blanc's approach encourages men to take a callous approach to their targets' humanity, turning off their empathy and taking what they want without regard to whether their victim is a willing participant. He's basically training men how to be sociopaths, selectively towards women, and that is NOT COOL, bold and all in caps.

Of course some of them might have come to resent women, not for their ability to say no, but for so many having said no. Yet, they still desire women. At best, that is a love/hate relationship and not pure misogyny...

You know, one aspect of this that really pisses me off is that if the western guys involved were handed so many failures, it was at the hands of western women. So why even think twice about coming here and taking it out on Japanese women? Or even feeling the need to make a change then target Japanese women? Just coming to Japan is ALREADY a change. They could score with Japanese women just by going to the right bars or clubs and no need to be obnoxious at all.

And frankly, if they wanted to take out their frustrations on American women, I would be more understanding, although not truly in their camp. Nice guys truly finish last in America, and American women, not each and every one, but as a group. have made sure that is the way it is. But the flip side is, that is a reaction to American male behavior. Its quite a conundrum. But, the point is, Japanese women don't deserve this $#!T.
Maybe for some guys, a change is needed, but the answer is and will always be more, not less empathy. I also find it incredibly tone-deaf to teach these techniques (which are inappropriate by any civilized standards) without any regard for cultural context. I wonder how it would go over if he tried to hold a workshop in Saudi Arabia... The point is, NO woman deserves this.

I don't know exactly what you mean about informed consent, but these consent issues tend to get me a bit annoyed. The definitions wind up getting too narrow and too PC to be of any practical use to anyone. For example, you don't ask if you can hold someone's hand usually. You just try it. As for sexual violence, I have learned the hard way that asking pretty much never works. I like a bit of domination and SM, but if you got to ask, it turns a masochist off. Think about that. A truly submissive woman does not want to be asked all the time. Its showing her way too much respect and that is not what she wants IF she is submissive. Its another conundrum really.
Informed consent implies an established relationship where both parties understand what is happening, and know what the boundaries are. What you do with your partner behind closed doors is between the two of you, and it's up to you to communicate those boundaries. I'm not going to bring BDSM into this because 1) I don't know much about it and 2) this thread isn't about fetishes or masochism. I think we both agree that walking up to a stranger and treating them like a submissive is totally inappropriate, even if they are into that in private, and even if you KNOW they're into that in private.

To paraphrase Louis CK, I'm not going to rape someone on the off-chance that they're into it.
warning: graphic language
 
"Maybe for some guys, a change is needed, but the answer is and will always be more, not less empathy. "

Empathy never got me laid. Ever. I did much better for having less.

I learned that women talk a lot of talk they never walk. Empathetic guys just don't do very well. Jerks do better, although I think there is an even better middle ground.

As for your explanation about people being sex objects or objects of lust, I can't quite get a handle on your opinion. It seems you are wavering a bit. Like it or not, people are objects of lust, inherently. Its up to us to be intelligent and responsible enough to see more.

"To paraphrase Louis CK, I'm not going to rape someone on the off-chance that they're into it."

For many reasons, one of the big ones being the law.

But there are so many situations that are not remotely that stark.

"Informed consent implies an established relationship"

As much as I agree this guy is advocating things way too extreme, there is a problem in jumping to "an established relationship". How does one get there exactly? How did one learn the boundaries? There are going to be misunderstandings, and lately in the world I see a lot of intolerance for male mistakes and misunderstandings, although I am certainly intolerant of this guy's ideas.

The thing is, I don't think its easy to dismiss his ideas and I see a danger in pretending it is easy. I think a care needs to be exercised that I predict, won't be. A fine example is that petition to get his reservations banned.

"He's basically training men how to be sociopaths, selectively towards women, and that is NOT COOL, bold and all in caps."

I find it hard to believe that anybody could be so poorly brought up as to take stock in his ideas to the point of becoming a sociopath. But just because I have trouble believing it does not mean its false. I am wondering how many men in the audience will go on to be convicts.
 
"To paraphrase Louis CK, I'm not going to rape someone on the off-chance that they're into it."

What he said exactly was "You think I am just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you are into that $#!T?" I think there important nuances in the exact quote.

Also the story illustrates the misunderstandings and difficulties of achieving that "established relationship".

I once met a girl several times who did the exact same thing to me. Signalling like mad, kissing heavy, then pushing my hands away. But she never said she wanted me to just force it. So I didn't. No woman is worth the risk to my job, reputation or freedom.
 
"Maybe for some guys, a change is needed, but the answer is and will always be more, not less empathy. "

Empathy never got me laid. Ever. I did much better for having less.

I learned that women talk a lot of talk they never walk. Empathetic guys just don't do very well. Jerks do better, although I think there is an even better middle ground.
Empathy doesn't promise to get you laid. Empathy connects you with other people in a way that manipulating them can't. We might have differing definitions of success.
As for your explanation about people being sex objects or objects of lust, I can't quite get a handle on your opinion. It seems you are wavering a bit. Like it or not, people are objects of lust, inherently. Its up to us to be intelligent and responsible enough to see more.
I think the core of our disagreement is that you are saying that people are objects of lust from the get-go, and I am saying they are made into objects of lust through objectification, through the thoughts and actions of others (regardless of gender). I think that human beings are far more complex than their sexuality, and that it's just one layer in our composition (I'd say we agree on that, based on your previous comments). Laci Green does a better job of explaining the process of objectification and how deeply ingrained it is in our culture


There's nothing wrong with inciting lust and I'm not admonishing anyone for having lustful thoughts, but what happens in the eye of the beholder when they see other people only for what they can get out of them? Empathy decreases, and this gives rise to techniques designed to manipulate people into giving them what they want. This is what sociopaths do: they lack empathy and they manipulate people. When I say Julien Blanc is teaching men to be sociopathic towards women, I'm saying he's encouraging them to think of women as a commodity: to disregard what they may want or think, to take what they want without regard to their target's intelligence or dignity, or to try to twist it from them through manipulative or downright forceful means. I'm not saying he's turning men into psychopaths, but he's promoting psychopathic behavior.

As much as I agree this guy is advocating things way too extreme, there is a problem in jumping to "an established relationship". How does one get there exactly? How did one learn the boundaries? There are going to be misunderstandings, and lately in the world I see a lot of intolerance for male mistakes and misunderstandings, although I am certainly intolerant of this guy's ideas.

"To paraphrase Louis CK, I'm not going to rape someone on the off-chance that they're into it."

What he said exactly was "You think I am just going to rape you on the off chance that hopefully you are into that $#!T?" I think there important nuances in the exact quote.

Also the story illustrates the misunderstandings and difficulties of achieving that "established relationship".

I once met a girl several times who did the exact same thing to me. Signalling like mad, kissing heavy, then pushing my hands away. But she never said she wanted me to just force it. So I didn't. No woman is worth the risk to my job, reputation or freedom.
I wasn't very clear on "established relationship," but I meant it very loosely. As in, an established relationship implies communication and understanding between two or more parties. What I was saying is that there's no informed consent when there hasn't been any communication or understanding prior to the act. That's what makes grabbing a woman uninvited a form of assault; even if it's intended playfully, a woman has a right NOT to be accosted by a stranger. There's clearly a lot of grey area and I'm not saying that it's cut and dry and all men who initiate physical contact with women should be locked up; there are a lot of variables that add up to indicate whether an advance is welcome or not that's a part of "reading the air," as I said earlier. And yes, it's difficult sometimes, and yes, there's lots of grey area--both your and Louis CK's anecdotes are testament to that, but it doesn't seem like either of you regrets exercising restraint in the name of better judgment. I had a friend once tell me in Korea "here, seven "nos" means "yes." I'm not willing to play that game either.
 
@nice gaijin Tough topic. I think we agree on more than we disagree on.

And I will say that I am not in the best frame of mind to explain myself now, nor in previous posts. My freedom of speech is being effed with (outside of this thread) and it really freaking pisses me off. So if I reply it will be after a break and hopefully involve better formed posts.
 
Thank you @Mark of Zorro, I appreciate your candor and I agree we probably agree on most points, we're just coming at the topic from different angles. I look forward to further discussion.

I'm still surprised at how few are willing to chime in on this.
 
Looks like the UK has singled Blanc out as an undesired presence, and has stated they won't be letting him visit. I dislike how the term "guru" has been misappropriated by western culture, but that's a whole other discussion.

Looks like he apologized when he left Australia as well. It's hard to imagine a context for his statements that would make them any more acceptable, and at this point it looks like his public image is already irredeemable. Now he's backpedaled on himself, like a sheepish child who was caught behaving badly. Once again, light is the greatest disinfectant.

U.K. To Deny Entry To Controversial U.S. Dating Guru

Britain says it won't allow a controversial American dating coach to enter the country as his presence isn't "conducive to the public good."

[Fair warning: If you click on any of the links in this story, you will see offensive material].

The American in question is 25-year-old Julien Blanc. His Twitter profile says he is the executive coach for Real Social Dynamics, a dating advice company. Blanc was scheduled to make public appearances in the U.K. in February 2015.

Blanc often makes references that most people would see as racist and derogatory toward women, and appears to condone emotion and physical violence toward them. Men reportedly pay up hundreds of dollars for his dating advice.

Blanc's website offers services such as this: "Make girls beg to sleep with you after short-circuiting their emotional and logical mind into a million reasons why they should..." [We aren't sure what that means, either].

More than 150,000 people had signed a petition urging U.K. authorities to deny Blanc entry.

The British Home Office told media that it won't discuss an individual case, but a statement quoted by U.K. media said: "The home secretary has the power to exclude an individual if she considers that his or her presence in the U.K. is not conducive to the public good or if their exclusion is justified on public policy grounds."

The law has been used in the past to deny entry to people such as far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders and the late Fred Phelps, the head of the Westboro Baptists Church.

Earlier this month, Blanc had to end his tour of Australia after protests.

"This guy wasn't putting forward political ideas," Australian Immigration Minister Scott Morrison said at the time. "He was putting forward abuse that was derogatory to women and those values are abhorred in this country."

After his exit from Australia, Blanc told CNN he "wanted to apologize to people I have offended in anyway, it was never my intention and I just want to put it out there, I'm extremely sorry for everything that has happened."

He said some of the controversies generated by his online posts were "a horrible attempt at humor and, unfortunately, a lot of it also got put out of context."

Blanc's critics are also trying to deny him entry into Brazil, Canada and Japan where he was scheduled to host his dating seminars.
source: U.K. To Deny Entry To Controversial U.S. Dating Guru
 
Update: here's the CNN interview. This is the first and only public statement made by Blanc or RSD since this began to gain momentum

The subtext is "I never intended to get so much negative attention." After saying he's sorry and takes "100% responsibility," he says he gets positive feedback by e-mail and that "to be honest, a lot of our clients do meet their spouses on these programs." So, I'm very sorry but here's some unfounded anecdotal evidence of how effective these courses are!

This is sad and shallow; he's totally focused on how this situation has affected him, and missed the whole reason why people were offended by his "bad attempt at humor." At the end, he says he's re-evaluating everything he's "putting out," but that he still hopes guys sign up for his seminars. At best, he's going to change his tact publicly and be more careful, but I see no real remorse, no growth or increased understanding.
 
Minor trivia, but I'd be curious to see what the per-person cost of one his seminars/training courses was.

But there are probably intro and then rolls royce versions.... :eek:
 
A lot of the articles I've found placed the "workshops" at just under $3,000 USD, which is what's mostly being disrupted by the petitions to pressure venues to cancel his events. One of the more recent ones I've seen also mentioned a subscription for a web video series for just under $200, and some kind of in-person workshop for $500.

Value is in the eye of the beholder, and Blanc, Cook and their associates are just capitalizing on the desperation of timid, awkward men
 
Somebody wrote something brilliant in a message about rape. He spoke about a disrespect for women. And I was thinking that if misogyny were redefined as not just simply a hatred of women but, also possibly simply a disrespect for women, then I could understand the use of this term against Blanc.
 
I agree that `disrespect of women` is also a good way of describing this guy`s behaviour.

It seems that a lot of dictionaries still list the outdated definition of misogyny.
The Oxford dictionary however, changed the definition of this word from `Hatred of women` about 10 years ago to better define the word as it is now used.
`Disrespect` would be a good addition to the OED definition below.
misogyny
Line breaks: mis|ogyny
Pronunciation: /mɪˈsɒdʒ(ə)ni /
Definition of misogyny in English:
NOUN
[MASS NOUN]
Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women:
 
Back
Top Bottom