'Pick-up artist' banned from the UK

[Maze1125]

evil has ambition and talent to match.

There is absolutely no requirement for that in the word.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/evil

 

[Phasmal]

Again, without a conviction, i'm skeptical. I judge them for singling him out. There are a LOT of people who come into the UK, immigration isn't generally handled by one person making a personal judgement call, the revoking his license from up top means somebody went out of their way to keep this guy out, and i can see the logic in that, but it's the fact that such a personalized approach is being taken to immigration is what kinda doesn't sit well with me. His revocation isn't based on some checklist of criteria, it's based on somebody in the political system personally not liking him. That's the bit that kinda creeps me out, even if i agree with their personal decision.

No, it's based on a petition by British people sent to the government. That's not just `somebody not liking him`.

We don't want this guy here.

 

[Maze1125]

like "you have to have less than X amount of money, you can't be allowed in", i feel like that's a good way to set immigration.

In this case, it seems more along the lines of "i don't like that guy, he's an asshole, let's not let him in", and it's that personal approach to immigration that doesn't sit well with me, not the borders or restrictions upon said borders.

Right. So you think banning people from entering a country because they're poor is good.
But banning someone rich, but an utterly despicable person, is bad.
Lovely...

Again, every single country can do this and has done this.
As you just said yourself, the only difference is that you heard about this case and not the other ones. So why exactly are you judging the UK when the situation is the same in every country?

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

evil has ambition and talent to match.

There is absolutely no requirement for that in the word.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/evil

I think we're talking at cross-purposes: I wouldn't piss on this guy if he was on fire, but immersed as I am in the world of comics, games and old children's cartoons when people say to me that a person is evil (as opposed to an action) then the first things that pop into my head are your usual suspects. Which means when I see bottom feeders like this called evil I sort of laugh because it's largely and overblown reaction. He is a petty twat; a low life who is skirting criminality and despite what you might thing, this behaviour will catch up with him.

 

[wAriot]

What I don't understand is, if you have more than enough proof that this guy is a criminal, why not prosecute him? I mean, ok, the UK is in it's right banning him from entering, but he'll just go somewhere else where they don't care so much and keep doing his thing.

I don't think this is a proper measure to deal with people like him.

 

[Maze1125]

I respect a system of law a lot more than i do a group of opinions.

Where do you think laws come from?

And this is a law anyway. The Home Office has the legal right to ban specific individuals it they wish. That's one of the UK's laws.

 

[Colour Scientist]

I'd be quite pleased if no country let him in and he slowly sank beneath the rising waves while knocking on the border guard's porta-cabin door (because that's what borders look like). Glub glub glub.

He has a "bootcamp" scheduled in Dublin too but it looks like there's a similar petition telling him to fuck right off.

I'm not one for infantilisation and, in most other cases, I wouldn't be against someone just speaking but this guy is outright advocating sexual assault so yeah, I'd rather he didn't come here to carry out his Sexual Harrassment Bootcamp.

I'm torn, on the one hand it'd be cool for Ireland to follow suit and not let him in on the other hand wouldn't it be great to get a chance to piss in his beer? I mean we already know he'll definitely end up in Copper's so it'd just mean playing the waiting game.

Does that mean I'd have to go to Coppers?

You don't have to, I mean logistically it'd probably be easier for me to piss in his beer. Moral support/lookout would be nice though.

Okay, okay, fine.

I would suggest that while we were there, we should piss in the beers of all of the people engaging in unsolicited groping and ass-grabbing but I don't think there's enough piss in the world.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Disappointing thread. From the title I thought it was a real pick up artist, but turns out he's a perpetrator of sexual assault. Good riddance. Still, it would be an interesting discussion if a real 'pick-up artist' was deported, one who only taught verbal methods of seduction.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Trying to be appealing and charming to get sex is quite different from the kind I'm talking about. The kind where it's not about sex, but control and manipulation of the other person.

To one person a charming leg hump and to the next heinous sexual assault, we can split hairs till the end of time on that one.
Either way it goes people who manipulate others to get things from them have no regard for the target, to them it's a mere candy dispenser and they just figured out which buttons to push.

 

[Something Amyss]

You misunderstand me, or possibly I framed that comment inaccurately: what I was trying to say was that your comment about the rapist being sent to prison for buying a condom sounded like a dark joke, implying that society couldn't give less of a stuff about rape. Unfortunately in real life, English footballer Ched Evans was convicted of raping a 19 year old woman (with a friend), sentenced to five years in prison and only served two and a half before going right back to his old career because "the Football League values the reintegration of reformed criminals." So there you go kids, it's cool to rape as long as you're good at sports!

The point of the "dark joke" was to point out an underselling of the story. People do go to jail for rape, maybe not often enough, but they do.

Parallel it to this case, where a guy is being barred from entry for multiple reasons, none of which actually have to do with free speech, and people getting LOUD and ANGRY and defending him because FREE SPEECH.

The parallel here isn't so much that someone might or might not go to jail, but that someone wouldframe the story of the person going to jail as being for the purchase of a condom. Now the story is about the outrage that you can't buy a condom without going to jail.

If you want a less rape-y example, if the rape thing tripped you up (it just seemed appropriate given what this guy's done, claimed to do, and encouraged others to do), let's look at games reviews. Several games have received "bad" scores for well- argued reasons, but when the internet gets ahold of them, the story becomes "magazine X didn't like game Y because SEXISM!"

Sexism is sometimes a sizable portion of the review (Bayonetta 2), but usually is not (GTA V, Dragon's Crown, Wonderful 101), and framing it that way creates a new narrative (Sorry, CS) and frames it in a way to get maximum outrage not withstanding the facts. Another, non-sexism example might be the Pokémon ASRO (ass-row?) reviews, where a laundry list of complaints was boiled down to "too much water" and used to complain about the horrible horrible score of 78.

Or, for a better example:

Yes actually. I enjoy watching the show dexter, and other similar crime dramas, and would be very sad they became illegal. I don't think that book OJ wrote should be banned. So yes.

Look, you can go live in china if you want some bureaucrat breathing down your neck for every piece of entertainment or information you consume, but i actually believe in freedom of expression.

This guy just took a question about instructing and encouraging people to get away with something and tried to turn it into some fascist statement that would ban Dexter and OJ Simpson's book, despite the reality that the act is illegal and these books are not. I'm not sure if he didn't read the question, didn't understand the question, or has just reframed the story (though given his recent claims about me, I'm betting the last one. And the kicker? This is someone who supports "ethics" in journalism!), but he has reframed things in a way that doesn't reflect the source material with no apparent purpose other than manufactured outrage towards me and my anti-free-expression ways.

At this point, there's nothing really to address, as his strawman argument has twisted the question beyond recognition. But it was a perfect example of the sort of thing I was just talking about.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Why is this an issue? Well because those who choose to pay and listen to him, will have the high intention of carrying out the "advice" he is giving out and cause more problems in the long run.

So what?
He's teaching people how to commit "professional" sexual assault?
Well golly gee gosh! It's still a crime if they commit it too! Charge them and be done with it.

Or are you just one of those commentators who always goes "Why is this an issue" or "Why is this a big deal", without looking into detail of the situation? We shall never know.

Oh spare me your hollow snark.

This isn't some great controversy; there isn't some point of contention where the creep might be right on some legal or other technicality.

It's an open and shut case of a man being an absolute sleaze, and you're blowing it up into this ridiculous slippery slope scenario just because there are other desperate assholes out there looking to follow his example.

 

[Parasondox]

Why is this an issue? Well because those who choose to pay and listen to him, will have the high intention of carrying out the "advice" he is giving out and cause more problems in the long run.

So what?
He's teaching people how to commit "professional" sexual assault?
Well golly gee gosh! It's still a crime if they commit it too! Charge them and be done with it.

Or are you just one of those commentators who always goes "Why is this an issue" or "Why is this a big deal", without looking into detail of the situation? We shall never know.

Oh spare me your hollow snark.

This isn't some great controversy; there isn't some point of contention where the creep might be right on some legal or other technicality.

It's an open and shut case of a man being an absolute sleaze, and you're blowing it up into this ridiculous slippery slope scenario just because there are other desperate assholes out there looking to follow his example.

Oh the horror. No, I weren't blowing it out of the water. Just a topic and debate that is happening here in the UK about a manlike that and wanted to find out the thoughts of those on the Escapist about this story seeing as other nations don't take him lightly either. Discussion, debate, all good. I shall spare nothing good sir.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Oh the horror. No, I weren't blowing it out of the water. Just a topic and debate that is happening here in the UK about a manlike that and wanted to find out the thoughts of those on the Escapist about this story seeing as other nations don't take him lightly either. Discussion, debate, all good. I shall spare nothing good sir.

Oho! So NOW you just wanted to hear my thoughts?

Or are you just one of those commentators who always goes "Why is this an issue" or "Why is this a big deal", without looking into detail of the situation? We shall never know.

Is that why your first reply includes this passive-aggressive confrontational attitude?
That isn't "discussion" or "debate", that's trying to yank my chain to make yourself look smart.

 

[Parasondox]

I just need a break...

 

[Parasondox]

Oh the horror. No, I weren't blowing it out of the water. Just a topic and debate that is happening here in the UK about a manlike that and wanted to find out the thoughts of those on the Escapist about this story seeing as other nations don't take him lightly either. Discussion, debate, all good. I shall spare nothing good sir.

Oho! So NOW you just wanted to hear my thoughts?

Or are you just one of those commentators who always goes "Why is this an issue" or "Why is this a big deal", without looking into detail of the situation? We shall never know.

Is that why your first reply includes this passive-aggressive confrontational attitude?
That isn't "discussion" or "debate", that's trying to yank my chain to make yourself look smart.

Yeah you are right. I am being a smart ass for a bad comedic affect and failed really. When I do see things like, "why is this even news" it's mostly said by those who act as if the bigger problems in life are more important like starving kids in africa etc. and assume any other news shouldn't be highlighted. So, admittedly, I messed up and mistook what you said. Also the passive aggressive confrontati... was a straight forward question. Trust me, I don't try to make myself smart and put myself on a high platform. I know i'm not smart. Either way point made and appreciate the response. Apologise for any offence made.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Yeah you are right. I am being a smart ass for a bad comedic affect and failed really. When I do see things like, "why is this even news" it's mostly said by those who act as if the bigger problems in life are more important like starving kids in africa etc. and assume any other news shouldn't be highlighted. So, admittedly, I messed up and mistook what you said. Also the passive aggressive confrontati... was a straight forward question. Trust me, I don't try to make myself smart and put myself on a high platform. I know i'm not smart. Either way point made and appreciate the response. Apologise for any offence made.

Fair enough. Apology accepted.
This site is way too passive aggressive already, and it's infectious.

In another environment, this might be easier to discuss, limited as that discussion might be.

As for topic: It's...really open and shut.

The only thing I could add is to encourage people (women in this case) to not only look out for that sort of manipulative behavior, but to also press charges when creeps start rubbing up against them like that.
Consent isn't "implied" at any point, and the law backs that in most developed countries.

 

[Parasondox]

Yeah you are right. I am being a smart ass for a bad comedic affect and failed really. When I do see things like, "why is this even news" it's mostly said by those who act as if the bigger problems in life are more important like starving kids in africa etc. and assume any other news shouldn't be highlighted. So, admittedly, I messed up and mistook what you said. Also the passive aggressive confrontati... was a straight forward question. Trust me, I don't try to make myself smart and put myself on a high platform. I know i'm not smart. Either way point made and appreciate the response. Apologise for any offence made.

Fair enough. Apology accepted.
This site is way too passive aggressive already, and it's infectious.

In another environment, this might be easier to discuss, limited as that discussion might be.

As for topic: It's...really open and shut.

The only thing I could add is to encourage people (women in this case) to not only look out for that sort of manipulative behavior, but to also press charges when creeps start rubbing up against them like that.
Consent isn't "implied" at any point, and the law backs that in most developed countries.

Yeah it kinda is and I don't think *looks around* gamergate hasn't made things anymore easier. I do see your point on the reporting bit however you do still get cases of officers ignoring or just dismissing a case like. Shitty I know

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I'm glad they banned him. He FORCES WOMENS FACES INTO HIS CROTCH. WHAT. THE. FUCK. Then FLEES the country before charges can be pressed while carefully selecting victims he thinks will be too intimidated to report the crime.

You cannot defend this. This is undefendable. He is not a victim. He is useless fucking garbage. And honestly, the fact that people here are defending him makes me fucking sick. Im fucking disgusted. Im gonna take a hiatus from the escapist.

He wasnt charged. Alright who fucking cares. If theres video of me committing a murder, in another country and I try to come here I cant just say "Well I wasnt charged!" to defend myself because thats mindnumbingly stupid. Theres VIDEO of me committing the crime! Direct video evidence. They should treat him exactly the same as if he was charged with that video available to see.

Theres a huge host of reasons he might not be charged, he actively gives tips on how to be a VERY good and effective predator who ensures his own safety from the law/consequence in a number of ways. Rewarding him for that is utter insanity.

Thank FUCK that these people are on the wrong side of the decision. to be frank id rather have 100000000 whining people than this dude in the nation. I dont consider their opinions remotely important in comparison to the harm he has been shown to do when he visits a country.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Yeah it kinda is and I don't think *looks around* gamergate hasn't made things anymore easier. I do see your point on the reporting bit however you do still get cases of officers ignoring or just dismissing a case like. Shitty I know

If you have bent officers ignoring charges of men rubbing their crotches against women without their consent, well, I'd organize a sting personally. Get someone to record the incident with a camera phone, and post it online.

Even if the footage isn't legally admissible in court, it makes the police department look bad for ignoring the problem.
Though given the international infamy this man and his ilk seem to have, I doubt that would be much of an issue now.

 

[Parasondox]

Yeah it kinda is and I don't think *looks around* gamergate hasn't made things anymore easier. I do see your point on the reporting bit however you do still get cases of officers ignoring or just dismissing a case like. Shitty I know

If you have bent officers ignoring charges of men rubbing their crotches against women without their consent, well, I'd organize a sting personally. Get someone to record the incident with a camera phone, and post it online.

Even if the footage isn't legally admissible in court, it makes the police department look bad for ignoring the problem.
Though given the international infamy this man and his ilk seem to have, I doubt that would be much of an issue now.

Here in the UK, its not the case of bent cops but more to do with political interference. How do I explain it? You see, in the USA, your government has increased the budget for law enfirce in several states depending on what the heads of state ask for. I have seen the reports and research about several states having tanks just to combat "terrorism". Not all states have that problem might I add. However in the UK, whatever is being decided in Westminster when it comes to law enforcement, has affected police numbers and the budget they get. They have to handle more cases with less officers to handle all those crimes reported. I can't say how other nations handle there police matter but here its down to political mess most of the time.