SelfHelpGuy

Is Cold approaching illegal?

35 posts in this topic

So I just started Cold Approaching, but some of my family members are saying it's illegal. 

Saying 'I think you're cute' or any terms of endearment is apparently illegal and if you systematically approach girls a certain amount of times in a specific area apparently they will see on cctv cameras and investigate you. 

Now i'm not sure what to do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if thats the case you can expand your area


The road to God is paved with bliss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harassment is illegal. Going up and talking to someone is not. So, cold approach is not illegal. It just depends on what you say and how you respond to requests to desist. So, if you go up and start with something lewd, that's illegal immediately. But if you go up and say, "Hi, you look nice today." it's not harassment until she says she doesn't feel comfortable with that. Then, if she tells you to stop and you continue, then it's harassment.

But honestly, it's VERY unlikely that you would have legal consequences for cold approaching in general, even if you were a total creep about it and opened with "I like your boobs". Now, of course, that's illegal and just a crappy thing to do, so don't do it. But women have to deal with creeps constantly, and there's just not enough time to press charges against them all. And most women just want to get out of that situation and move on with life. 

Also, unfortunately, even when women are dealing with more serious forms of harassment like rape, most of that goes unreported because of the fact that so many people in your life will take the side of the abuser and accuse you of making false accusations. And the majority of people will give the abuser the benefit of the doubt over you, because of "innocent until proven guilty". So, it can just be easier to keep it to yourself and try to move on to avoid being re-victimized by society.

So, if you approach a woman on the street and aren't a total creep about it, the chances of being prosecuted drop to nearly 0. I guess there could be some crazy woman out there that would get the cops just for looking at her the wrong way or something. But that would be incredibly rare and without proof on her part it would amount to nothing.

So, as long as you are being normal and respecting her boundaries, you shouldn't have a problem. Women are used to being approached. And women are used to being harassed. It's really clear what the difference is. Now, approach becomes a problem if it's happening all the time. It's very annoying when you're just trying to get from A to B, and like 10 random guys approach you. That can be exasperating. So, you should pay attention to the setting and what she's doing there, and try not to interrupt her when she's probably been approached a lot. 

Edited by Emerald

Are you struggling with self-sabotage and CONSTANTLY standing in the way of your own success? 

If so, and if you're looking for an experienced coach to help you discover and resolve the root of the issue, you can click this link to schedule a free discovery call with me to see if my program is a good fit for you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Emerald So would you say it's okay to go to  a certain place 3 times a week and cold approach 10 girls each time (So 30 a week in total) is okay?

 

I'm very genuine about it and the girls all seemed very comfortable with it. 

I just said 'I know this is very forward, but I thought you looked pretty cute, nice to meet you' etc etc

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SelfHelpGuy said:

@Emerald So would you say it's okay to go to  a certain place 3 times a week and cold approach 10 girls each time (So 30 a week in total) is okay?

I'm very genuine about it and the girls all seemed very comfortable with it. 

I just said 'I know this is very forward, but I thought you looked pretty cute, nice to meet you' etc etc

 

It's not the amount of girls that you approach. It's more about whether or not you think a particular woman gets approached in that setting a lot. But I think what you said is fine, as long as you start with a "hello" and gauge her reaction to it. You have to watch for facial cues and body language to tell if she's okay with it. But none of this is something that you would be over legal bounds with, as long as you respect their boundaries and don't be too pushy or lewd. 


Are you struggling with self-sabotage and CONSTANTLY standing in the way of your own success? 

If so, and if you're looking for an experienced coach to help you discover and resolve the root of the issue, you can click this link to schedule a free discovery call with me to see if my program is a good fit for you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SelfHelpGuy Just don’t talk about her “bobs and vegana” and ass. I’m addition don’t tell her that you want to fuck her and you’ll be fine.

I as a rule of thump never give compliments on a girl appearance, even girlfriends. Although that’s arguably a bad rule. 

Edited by Spiral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah i heard talking to women (strangers) can get you arrested 

the solution is to never talk to women because they all start off as strangers 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, d0ornokey said:

yeah i heard talking to women (strangers) can get you arrested 

the solution is to never talk to women because they all start off as strangers 

where you from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Spiral said:

I as a rule of thump never give compliments on a girl appearance, even girlfriends. Although that’s arguably a bad rule. 

That is a bad rule. Compliments can be great when used correctly.

@SelfHelpGuy

I’ve never once come close to getting into legal trouble from cold approach. Use some common sense and you’ll be fine.


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Moreira

im just messin lol

@aurum

Sorry. I disagree. Let me tell you why. 

I've done thousands of hours of cold approach and one thing that I've learned is that there's two sides to every perspective. women are the eggs of satan and if you ever talk to one you will know. i talked to a woman once and i actually lost a part of my tooth. it's the reason i use dentures. talking to women = loss of teeth 

Edited by d0ornokey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@d0ornokey Did she punch you in the face? 


You've slept a hundred nights, And what has it brought you? For your self, for your God, Wake up! Wake up! Sleep no more.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

such a bad term, why not call it warm approach?or connection approach :)


Stellars interact with Terrans from ÓB (Earth’s Low Orbit).!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

such a bad term, why not call it warm approach?or connection approach

I think it probably originates from sales and its terms "cold calling" and "warm calling."

Cold calling is to "make an unsolicited call on (someone), by telephone or in person, in an attempt to sell goods or services."

Warm calling "refers to a sales call, visit or email that is preceded by some sort of contact with the potential customer or prospect, such as a direct mail campaign, an introduction at a business event or a referral."

Quote

And only approach girls who give you positive body language. Like eye contact and smiling.

I think that's pretty good general advice, although sometimes you see the girl before she sees you, and I don't see it as necessary to wait for her to notice you.  The worst that can happen is she's not interested, and she'll have plenty of opportunities to blow you off.

Edited by Haumea2018

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/8/2018 at 7:44 PM, Emerald said:

Also, unfortunately, even when women are dealing with more serious forms of harassment like rape, most of that goes unreported because of the fact that so many people in your life will take the side of the abuser and accuse you of making false accusations. And the majority of people will give the abuser the benefit of the doubt over you, because of "innocent until proven guilty". So, it can just be easier to keep it to yourself and try to move on to avoid being re-victimized by society.

I'm not picking a fight, but what's wrong with innocent until proven guilty?

Do you understand that without the "innocent" model I can accuse you of anything and put you in big trouble even if you are innocent?

Criminal cases must be dealt with extreme rationality and caution, because you're risking of ruining one of the two persons' lives.

You can't just trust "He/she is a criminal" and send the other person to jail for sexual non proven misconduct or non proven scam or non proven terrorism. Now of course we want to send actual criminals to prison. But they have to be true!!! And we don't know at the beginning!

I hope that I just misread because you're very intelligent.


Inquire in the now.

Feeling is the truest knowing ?️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are western civilizations becoming islamic? In islamic cultures, sexual separation is very real. Men and women are not allowed to meet unless they are spouses. I don't want that kind of separation.

Also, I see sexual misconduct allegations are taken too seriously. When multiple men accused kevin spacey of inappropriately touching their bodies, kevin spacey was fired from netflix. None of those accusations was proven, yet.

Who knows whether or not the vast majority of those men were just con artists who tried to extort money out of kevin spacey?

Obviously, everybody should attach body cams and always upload footages to the clouds and never drink alcohol. How else are you going to prove your innocence beyond reasonable doubts?

Edited by CreamCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, billiesimon said:

I'm not picking a fight, but what's wrong with innocent until proven guilty?

Do you understand that without the "innocent" model I can accuse you of anything and put you in big trouble even if you are innocent?

Criminal cases must be dealt with extreme rationality and caution, because you're risking of ruining one of the two persons' lives.

You can't just trust "He/she is a criminal" and send the other person to jail for sexual non proven misconduct or non proven scam or non proven terrorism. Now of course we want to send actual criminals to prison. But they have to be true!!! And we don't know at the beginning!

I hope that I just misread because you're very intelligent.

Because to say "innocent until proven guilty" (as an individual person and not as a jury member or judge), means that you are always giving the benefit of the doubt to the abuser and always calling the character of the victim into question by default. So, it puts you in a situation where you have to make the choice of either accusing the alleged abuser of a crime, or accusing the alleged victim of a crime. There is no middle ground. And because most people make the 'innocent until proven guilty' their default answer, they default to accusing the victim of the crime of false accusation. And whether they intend to or not, it plants a seed in the minds of society.

Because of this fact, it MUCH more difficult for victims of sexual abuse to come forward, because they may decide that it would be too painful to have so many people think that they're low enough to falsely accuse someone of a sexual crime. So, it adds insult to injury. 

And given that false accusation for all crimes (including but not limited to crimes of a sexual nature) is at a rate of 2%, if you automatically default to giving the alleged abuser the benefit of the doubt, then you will be wrong 98% of the time. And the abused will know that the seed has been planted in so many people's minds that they, as a victim, are the criminals and that the actual abuser is the innocent one. That would be very painful after having been raped.

So, I know it's uncomfortable because we don't really know what's actually happening. And if we've never been the victim of sexual assault, it's much easier to empathize with someone who might have been falsely accused instead of someone who might have been raped. So, we imagine what a nightmare it would be to be in that 2%, but we can't imagine what it would be like to be in that 98%. 

So, I always default to believing the abused, because that means I'll be correct 98% of the time. Also, I will add to a culture that makes it more comfortable for victims of abuse to come forward without having to worry about friends, family, and society turning against them and sympathizing with their abuser over them. Believing them is the bare minimum thing a person can do in terms of supporting a victim of these types of crimes.

But most importantly, I also acknowledge that I don't really know and because of that fact, my opinion means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE. So, because my opinion means nothing and has no real substantial impact on what happens, it's all the more reason for me to default to believing and siding with the abused. 

 


Are you struggling with self-sabotage and CONSTANTLY standing in the way of your own success? 

If so, and if you're looking for an experienced coach to help you discover and resolve the root of the issue, you can click this link to schedule a free discovery call with me to see if my program is a good fit for you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the supposed victims of fraud, libel, violence, murder, and other crimes? Do people need to assume that the accused are always 'guilty until proven innocent' for whatever crime?

I heard most american jurors assume that the defendants are guilty by default because the accusers are almost always right.

It sounds that you want to bypass the legal process entirely.

I'm so afraid because, when psychopaths hear about the news that the accusers are assumed always right, they will concentrate their entire force on that weak point of people's lives. Psychopaths become full-time accusers. One full-time accuser can be sueing 10~20 people at any given time.

When that happens, women are not safe, either because the professional accusers will be so productive that they will have to expand their frontier onto the entire population.

Edited by CreamCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Because to say "innocent until proven guilty" (as an individual person and not as a jury member or judge), means that you are always giving the benefit of the doubt to the abuser and always calling the character of the victim into question by default. So, it puts you in a situation where you have to make the choice of either accusing the alleged abuser of a crime, or accusing the alleged victim of a crime. There is no middle ground. And because most people make the 'innocent until proven guilty' their default answer, they default to accusing the victim of the crime of false accusation. And whether they intend to or not, it plants a seed in the minds of society.

Because of this fact, it MUCH more difficult for victims of sexual abuse to come forward, because they may decide that it would be too painful to have so many people think that they're low enough to falsely accuse someone of a sexual crime. So, it adds insult to injury. 

And given that false accusation for all crimes (including but not limited to crimes of a sexual nature) is at a rate of 2%, if you automatically default to giving the alleged abuser the benefit of the doubt, then you will be wrong 98% of the time. And the abused will know that the seed has been planted in so many people's minds that they, as a victim, are the criminals and that the actual abuser is the innocent one. That would be very painful after having been raped.

So, I know it's uncomfortable because we don't really know what's actually happening. And if we've never been the victim of sexual assault, it's much easier to empathize with someone who might have been falsely accused instead of someone who might have been raped. So, we imagine what a nightmare it would be to be in that 2%, but we can't imagine what it would be like to be in that 98%. 

So, I always default to believing the abused, because that means I'll be correct 98% of the time. Also, I will add to a culture that makes it more comfortable for victims of abuse to come forward without having to worry about friends, family, and society turning against them and sympathizing with their abuser over them. Believing them is the bare minimum thing a person can do in terms of supporting a victim of these types of crimes.

But most importantly, I also acknowledge that I don't really know and because of that fact, my opinion means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE. So, because my opinion means nothing and has no real substantial impact on what happens, it's all the more reason for me to default to believing and siding with the abused. 

 

Supporting your friends and beloved ones is also tending to believe them. I am on your side with this one but...

Actually you should be neutral in all cases. My rational and respectful response would always be "file a police report, and make the investigations start". Which is supporting justice. Which is what we want.

 

I sympathize with abused people. I care for them.
I also sympathize with innocent people, at the same level.
That's why you have to ALWAYS suggest to start the investigations and to collect the data.  Data are NOT pro victim neither pro criminal. They are pro justice. If you put your higher value on the friends you are fucking up justice. The same if you side with the accused. You are fucking up justice.

I can totally assure you that truth is always, always on the side of the victim. Also on the side of the false accused. 

Now, of course I encourage the victim to file a police report! you have to start the investigations to find the truth!!! I think we are on the same side but I still don't get if you want to abolish the rational and neutral procedure to investigate in court. Which would be an atrocity towards justice.

I asked if you are in favour of removing the "innocent until proven guilty" in tribunal. I'm talking about investigations and legal matters. Of course I support victims to denounce. That's obvious to me. If they are legit I WANT them to denounce.


Inquire in the now.

Feeling is the truest knowing ?️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now