Attention Moniker & Beastie

[_Gadianton]

Le'ts just say, many posters here, including ones I like, this isn't anything personal, ughhh...how do I put it, can be really hard to watch at times. Kind of like how one might feel embarrassed for a speaker during sacrament meeting. Let's just say I think the teachings of Leykis could help many here better understand themselves, understand their own self-deceptions, understand what they really want, and understand better how to acheive what they want.

[_marg]

Le'ts just say, many posters here, including ones I like, this isn't anything personal, ughhh...how do I put it, can be really hard to watch at times. Kind of like how one might feel embarrassed for a speaker during sacrament meeting. Let's just say I think the teachings of Leykis could help many here better understand themselves, understand their own self-deceptions, understand what they really want, and understand better how to acheive what they want.

I do agree with you that he has some basic good advice for men. But I'm not sure it pertains to the issues in this thread. He pretty much from what I understand tells men to look after their own self interests and avoid being used or taken advantage of by women. I think he would think it okay to use a woman for self interests and to not worry about what her feelings are. So I don't think Leykis is teaching men to respect all women irrespective of their attitudes with regards to sex. I don't think treating women with respect is even an issue that Leykis thinks men should be concerned about.

[_Bond James Bond]

Le'ts just say, many posters here, including ones I like, this isn't anything personal, ughhh...how do I put it, can be really hard to watch at times. Kind of like how one might feel embarrassed for a speaker during sacrament meeting. Let's just say I think the teachings of Leykis could help many here better understand themselves, understand their own self-deceptions, understand what they really want, and understand better how to acheive what they want.

I hope I'm not one of these guys. Although I fear many people feel sorry for me.

[_Gadianton]

Then again, you've only listened to a small amount of what the professor has to say. Everything you've said so far to an extent is true, some of your "basic points" are themes that come up most often. But there is definitely more to it. It is true that I'm a little off topic here because I'm including both the harrassers and a large number of the "respectful" who are merely the other side of the same coin. In fact, I would venture to guess, some of these posters at issue have been both, are both. in real life probably more of the cowering "respectful".

So I don't think Leykis is teaching men to respect all women irrespective of their attitudes with regards to sex

Of course he's not! The funny thing is, the result you're looking for would just sort of "pop out" if these guys would first and foremost, quit "respecting women."

[_marg]

Then again, you've only listened to a small amount of what the professor has to say. Everything you've said so far to an extent is true, some of your "basic points" are themes that come up most often. But there is definitely more to it. It is true that I'm a little off topic here because I'm including both the harrassers and a large number of the "respectful" who are merely the other side of the same coin. In fact, I would venture to guess, some of these posters at issue have been both, are both. in real life probably more of the cowering "respectful".

So I don't think Leykis is teaching men to respect all women irrespective of their attitudes with regards to sex

Of course he's not! The funny thing is, the result you're looking for would just sort of "pop out" if these guys would first and foremost, quit "respecting women."

I'm confused Gad but I often don't follow your train of thought, maybe you could pm me and clue me in, if you don't think it should be posted.

[_Gadianton]

I have to be very clear that none of what I'm saying is due to any "behind the scenes" knowledge I have of recent events, I know nothing. My comments come merely from following the board, there are only so many posters here, and so on.

Simply put, "respecting women" is more often than not a tactic to get the sexual attention of women. When it don't work, and it almost never does --> problem. While "assholes" who know what they want can be rude, it's a little more under control and fleeting. It's a numbers game, nothing to flip out over. A true "asshole" doesn't need to drag out a situation, isn't looking for "revenge" --- that's all for the guys with "feelings" and love and respect for women. For an "asshole" there are no perfect snowflakes, it's a numbers game, which allows for quite a bit more of an ability to "let it go", not obsess, and also follow some rather strict guidelines that Tom draws out about not dating coworkers, not hitting on women at the office and so on. So you can kind of see how the desired effect of women being left alone, free from harrassment comes about in interesting ways.

[_marg]

I have to be very clear that none of what I'm saying is due to any "behind the scenes" knowledge I have of recent events, I know nothing. My comments come merely from following the board, there are only so many posters here, and so on.

Simply put, "respecting women" is more often than not a tactic to get the sexual attention of women. When it don't work, and it almost never does --> problem. While "assholes" who know what they want can be rude, it's a little more under control and fleeting. It's a numbers game, nothing to flip out over. A true "asshole" doesn't need to drag out a situation, isn't looking for "revenge" --- that's all for the guys with "feelings" and love and respect for women. For an "asshole" there are no perfect snowflakes, it's a numbers game, which allows for quite a bit more of an ability to "let it go", not obsess, and also follow some rather strict guidelines that Tom draws out about not dating coworkers, not hitting on women at the office and so on. So you can kind of see how the desired effect of women being left alone, free from harrassment comes about in interesting ways.

Oi Vay, I'm lost..I'll think about this over night. It's the last line I'm confused about.

[_Gadianton]

The last line just recaps what I said in the paragraph that those being conspicuously respectful are often just using a tactic, one that can easily backfire and result in a messy situation. Those who have really become students of Leykis will, not out of any pretended or sincere respect for women, leave pursuits of women alone in many situations, like work, because it will only detract from their other goals (there are no exceptions because no woman is special enough to make an exception for, same fish exist in other ponds). In situations where they are allowed, per Tom, to make advances, or rather to make themselves the person they need to be to get the advances (such as pretending to be wealthy or advertising they are wealthy) then they make their play, usually not drawn out excessively since there is no time to waste, and if it doesn't work, move on to the next one.

The result is that the true "assholes" are far less threatening to women, and while a women might get one or two measured propositions, it ends at a rejection because there is no point in continuing something that won't lead to the sack. Further, there is no point in a true "asshole" wasting his time making fun of, poking, prodding, conspiring against, or continually making "insincere" advances as a kind of entertainment. It's far more likely that someone doing these kinds of things does have sexual interest. He almost without question would not seek out this same kind of "entertainment" and game playing with someone he finds or believes to be is very unattractive. That's the litmus test.

[_Imwashingmypirate]

I have more smechsual power than you all put together!!! LMAO.

[_GoodK]

My argument has only been that based on posts if someone presents themselves as sexually liberal, not likely to be offended by a proposition, it is not unreasonable for any male or female for that matter to pick up on sexual cues and act on them. There's nothing wrong with that. And I do believe based on my perception of what was written on the board that cues were given, that's the other argument I've made.

I don't believe we are simply talking about a proposition - nor would I describe what I've heard to have happened as indicative of a sexual liberal. Either that or I must be the sexual equivalent of the Colloque Walter Lippmann.

Again not really Eric. Leykis is basically advising guys from what I can gather by my very brief exposure, to not get taken in by girls using sex to trap a guy for selfish purposes. And that a guy should focus on establishing a career first and foremost before worrying about developing a serious relationship, for his own best interests and actually that of his future family should he have one.

Like Dr. Robbers already mentioned, the teachings of Leykis go far beyond the "forty dollar limit" or the "three date rule" - he talks a lot about sexual harassment. Just this past Monday his show was about why men shouldn't go to their company Christmas party, and it had everything to do with sexual harassment. The 97.1 free fm website is down right now, otherwise I'd link to a podcast of it.