All the hallmarks of a PUA, including the over-reliance on drinking spots.
Man seduces woman, woman publicly shames him.
Sounds fair, actually. Even the r-selected are turning, slowly. It’s always the women who shift first.
Seduction laws will be brought back in soon enough and there’s no deadline on criminal prosecutions (no sexism either). I hope the PUAs have a savings account for all the lawyers they’ll need (name and other identity fraud will make it worse, as previously covered).
The best part is that, by PUA theory, it wasn’t harassment at all (and so he can’t legally claim that) because she was doing him a favour. AMOGing over local men and a severe DHV as a player. She might as well have written “Serial Seducer” above his name and photo.
Her reputation management would help her. His ‘shame’ would simultaneously protect K-women, who are forewarned, and attract the sluts. Gossip is totally legal and it isn’t defamation if it’s true, he has no legal recourse whatsoever.
Comparing it to violent rape is pretty cheap but this woman is r-selected (Tinder) turning K, what do you expect in transition?
Seduction and its modern equivalent, rape-by-fraud are considered in many ways practically similar anyway (legally, coercion vitiates consent).
For those who dispute the existence of conditional consent, we have seen it already in the manosphere: consider that consent is always conditional between two parties. As a social contract. For example, a heterosexual man’s consent is conditional on his partner’s biological sex as female. Hence, a deceptive transsexual raped him. If it applies to men in dresses, it applies to men without.