'Pick-up artist' banned from the UK

[Frankster]

My gut reaction is that the country lets in all sorts of people with offensive ideas all the time, what makes this person different?

Well the difference is he clearly acts on them and with no shame or discretion. Vid with japanese girls in particular made my blood boil as the guy was taking advantage of others being too nice and just being an all round collossal prick.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Banning him to a remote island which inhabits only wildlife wouldn't even be good enough.

 

[Dagda Mor]

They should allow him entry into the country, but only if he agrees to be neutered. Maybe use the Ludovico Technique afterwards for good measure.

 

[Dizchu]

Sounds like a publicity stunt to be honest.

Look, if it were legal I'd advocate deporting every likeminded individual from any landmass, exiled to the goddamn arctic with only each other for warmth and to use their shitty pick-up artist tactics on (assuming they wouldn't try it on with the Inuit). But all that this ban will do is toss this guy like a hot potato to another country to deal with. The guy should be arrested.

 

[Dagda Mor]

Banning him to a remote island which inhabits only wildlife wouldn't even be good enough.

They tried, but the UK turned him away. *ba dum ch*

Anyway, people need to stop telling Julien Blanc to curb his libido.

Instead, people need to teach women how to say 'no' and then stick with their decision.

Well that's victim blaming if ever I saw it. Seriously, you're being pretty gross. Let's apply that line of thought to something a bit more serious, like actual rape and murder--"People need to stop telling Ted Bundy to curb his libido. Instead, people need to teach women to carry a firearm at all times and be ready to use it."

 

[Parasondox]

Instead, people need to teach women how to say 'no' and then stick with their decision.

Or maybe people shouldn't pressure women into saying "yes" and get angry and call them a slut or prude for saying "No" to sex and trying to make them feel bad about it or psychologically scare them? I dunno, maybe that would help too.

 

[Kathinka]

Banning him to a remote island which inhabits only wildlife wouldn't even be good enough.

They tried, but the UK turned him away. *ba dum ch*

Anyway, people need to stop telling Julien Blanc to curb his libido.

Instead, people need to teach women how to say 'no' and then stick with their decision.

If it was just him running his mouth, I'd be there with you. However, him touching and kissing girls against their will, that is crossing the line. I feel like he needs to be told to cut that shit out at that point.

 

[giles]

If it was just him running his mouth, I'd be there with you. However, him touching and kissing girls against their will, that is crossing the line. I feel like he needs to be told to cut that shit out at that point.

If he commits a crime he should be punished for that. Why is it that he apparently has these videos of molesting people but there are no charges? Idk something doesn't add up. Manipulating people into doing things they originally didn't want to do is disgusting I agree, but it's also basically marketing in a nutshell. Sleezy sales gimmicks are only "abhorrent" when it's about fucking. Is the line really just "sex"? Really, western world?
Deal with his actual crimes as they come up, don't just deny him a visa because he's an asshole. That's just... weird.

 

[Kathinka]

If it was just him running his mouth, I'd be there with you. However, him touching and kissing girls against their will, that is crossing the line. I feel like he needs to be told to cut that shit out at that point.

Because once a person has been touched or kissed the no longer have the right or capability to say 'No, GTFO'?\

As has been stated before, if the man has no criminal record then this is discrimination, pure and simple.

Now who's the victim?

I don't know. It's just my personal feeling that getting physical with anybody against their will is going too far. If some guy I never met before tried that on me, he'd sure as hell get maced. Of course you can tell him to GTFO after he did it, but by that point it's already too late.

 

[maffgibson]

Quite frankly, passage into another country that is not your own is by NO MEANS a right. It is a privilege.

This is why many immigration policies require even temporary visitors to provide proof that they can support themselves financially: individuals are allowed into foreign countries because the foreign countries believe that they will benefit from the individual's visit: be it from them spending money, forming trade links, teaching their citizens, and so on.

Based on this individual's previous behaviour, he has not demonstrated that his "teaching" will be positive in the slightest. Furthermore, he has boasted of sexually assaulting women on the streets of other foreign countries.

The Home Office is COMPLETELY within their right to deny him access. From everything that has been seen, he will only have a negative impact during his visit.

Any claim of "Oh, he hasn't been convicted of anything, he can do what he likes", only has validity within his home country. It is a privilege to earn, not a right to remove.

 

[Kathinka]

I don't know. It's just my personal feeling that getting physical with anybody against their will is going too far. If some guy I never met before tried that on me, he'd sure as hell get maced. Of course you can tell him to GTFO after he did it, but by that point it's already too late.

And that would be perfectly within your right. As would filing rape/sexual assault charges against the person if they persisted.

Personally, I agree the guy's a sleezeball. But he's not some magician. Nor is he above the law.

Yeah, OK, I can get behind that.

Hmm now I wonder why he hasn't been investigated for sexual assault yet. I'll have to do some more researchs.

 

[maffgibson]

Quite frankly, passage into another country that is not your own is by NO MEANS a right. It is a privilege.

This is why many immigration policies require even temporary visitors to provide proof that they can support themselves financially: individuals are allowed into foreign countries because the foreign countries believe that they will benefit from the individual's visit: be it from them spending money, forming trade links, teaching their citizens, and so on.

Based on this individual's previous behaviour, he has not demonstrated that his "teaching" will be positive in the slightest. Furthermore, he has boasted of sexually assaulting women on the streets of other foreign countries.

The Home Office is COMPLETELY within their right to deny him access. From everything that has been seen, he will only have a negative impact during his visit.

Any claim of "Oh, he hasn't been convicted of anything, he can do what he likes", only has validity within his home country. It is a privilege to earn, not a right to remove.

If he was attempting to enter the country on a work visa (as he probably was), then you're absolutely correct. I used to help international post-doc fellows fill out their paperwork for U.S. work visa applications. They really do have to prove a lot of things before being allowed to enter and work in this country. I imagine the U.K. is similar.

Thanks for the corroboration on that point: I struggled for a bit to try and work out whether my logic was just my hatred of this sort of person wearing a nice suit.

As it is, this is a very different situation to, for example, if he was banned from a city in the US (to my understanding, he is a US citizen) despite not having been convicted of any crime, fair enough. As a citizen of that country, he can wander around it as he likes. But other countries have no obligation to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Lieju]

Or maybe people shouldn't pressure women into saying "yes" and get angry and call them a slut or prude for saying "No" to sex and trying to make them feel bad about it or psychologically scare them? I dunno, maybe that would help too.

Well, I'd much rather be called a "prude" than submit to having sex with someone I don't like.

When did women suddenly become incapable of making their own decisions and walking away from bad situations? When did they stop having to take responsibility for their own actions?

And women should be allowed to make those decisions without being pressured.
And those 'bad situations' shouldn't exist in the first place!

 

[Frission]

No really sympathy for him, he sounds like a real piece of work. As someone above said, passage into a country is not a right.