Please explain PUA "rape"

Post Reply New Topic

From what I've seen in a few discussions on here, the people here seem to have this belief that a PUA successfully seducing a woman (ie getting her attracted to him) is rape. In other words, what this is basically saying is that women are incapable of making rational decisions and it's not their responsibility if they choose to go along with a PUA's seduction and consent to have sex with him afterwards.

Surely you must be outraged at this, right?

Do you also think that a woman wearing a revealing outfit, or doing something else that turns men on, is raping a man? Because, that idea is no more ridiculous and outrageous than what I just described above.

I don't support PUAs, but I by no means think they're rapists or any other kind of criminal, and I certainly don't think women should not be held accountable for willingly going along with it.

Rape is sex without consent, but in this case it was done with willing consent. Consenting to sex then regretting it afterwards doesn't mean you didn't consent in the first place.

First, what's a PUA?

Second, I don't think either gender wearing provocative clothing equals rape, but it is usually selfish. Some women tempt men with how they dress in order to seduce them, and some men are just as guilty with women. Personally, I can't stand that behavior; women are so much more than objects in my heart.

Completely agree Zebru. I don't understand the PUA mentality, but if consent to intercourse is freely given at the time, then it's not rape. The woman has the liberty to withdraw her consent at any stage and the man MUST respect that decision. To classify 'regret' as 'retrospective rape' is to trivialise the offence of rape.

I say this as a feminist by inclination, and would be interested to hear arguments to the contrary.

Who said it was rape? Links to the post/s, if you please.

If they're obtaining sex under false pretenses/misrepresenting who they are, that's a douchebag move, but I wouldn't call it rape.

Sociopaths(ASPD) are notorious for being both pick-up artist womanizers and also rapists. Maybe that's what the OP is getting at.

I just saw a video that is a PSA from out of New Zealand. I bet this is what he's referring to, as it closely resembles that.

It's not a pick-up artist. By the laws in my State this would be rape.

-o Both A and B are intoxicated
-o A initiates sexual contact with B
-o A and B have sex

Under the laws of most states in the U.S., A is technically guilty of rape, regardless of gender.

I think it's ridiculous. I guess you have to draw the line somewhere. I just hope this doesn't get out of hand. Or doesn't get out of hand in the U.S.


It's a long watch, and you unfortunately have to watch the whole thing. They pepper it with facial expressions from the various actors and are thus attempting--succeeding in 99% of the population--to control the viewers reaction and attitude. In a courtroom, none of that would be available.

This is idiocy. Someone has an agenda in motion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUj2OHLAG3w

Seducing a woman is not rape.

I thought we were talking about psychopaths using their PUA skills to lure potential victims, so they can rape/kill them.

Not that I consider myself raped, but saying "No" to these pricks is like beating your head against the wall. They pressure and pressure and if you try to get away they follow you and block you in so you can't escape and keep putting on the pressure for you to say yes.

Hence why the moment someone enters my personal zone without my permission I get hostile. No man or woman is worth losing your dignity over.

I would agree that when you physically restrain a person it no longer becomes seducing.

I'll say what I said in the other thread:

There's no clear divide between "consensual" and "rape". It's a spectrum. Things like pressure, trickery, and certain forms of coercion start to move the slider from the "consensual" end of the spectrum to the "rape" end.