This is an attempt to find out.

This essay is the third in a series examining sexual harassment and assault.

The first essay can be read here, which also includes more information about the study participants. The second essay can be read here.

The results shown below are from a study I ran about sexual harassment and sexual assault on a sample of people in the U.S. (574 people recruited on our study recruitment platform, Positly.com, answer questions about their experience as victims and/or perpetrators of harassment or assault, and 266 of these people were also asked to give free-form written responses for some questions).

In this post, you’ll see sexual harassers and assaulters attempt to give explanations for their own behavior, with the hope that seeing these responses will help us understand the forces underlying this big problem a little better. 

Warning: this post contains extensive discussion about (and numerous accounts of) sexual harassment and sexual assault. Also, note that it is extremely likely that there was underreporting of harassment and assault related behaviors in this survey (e.g., due to unwillingness to admit to it even on an anonymous survey). The purpose here is to better understand the forces underlying harassment and assault, rather than to get accurate estimates of rates of people perpetrating it. Responses were anonymized and typos corrected. Responses were deleted when they were not substantive (e.g., “I don’t know”) or when they misunderstood the question.

I attempted to group responses by the main motivation mentioned by the responders (i.e., putting together similar responses under a header). So the header above each grouping of responses is mine, but the responses below the headers were each written by different study participants.

—

Topic 1: Cat-calling – what did people say about why they have done it?

Questions asked: (1) What were the most recent circumstances in which you cat-called a person that you don’t know (by making a sexual whistle, shout, or comment of a sexual nature)? — (2) What do you think the *true reason* was that you cat-called a person that you don’t know (by making a sexual whistle, shout or comment of a sexual nature)?

MALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: male cat-callers mainly said they did it because they were hoping it would lead to sex, or to show off in front of friends, or to get noticed by (or attention from) the other person, or to signal to the other person that they found that person attractive. 18% of males reported having cat-called before.

Hoping for sex from the person

• I catcalled a girl at a bar. — I was horny and drunk
• Back in the 1990s when I saw a very attractive woman walking by and shouted out a comment to her on remarking her sexy body. — I would like to have sex with her.
• i can’t help it — i am horny and want sex since its been a while
• At the bar while hanging out with some friends. There were some very attractive girls at the bar. — I wanted to get the girl’s attention and ultimately get laid.

To impress friends or show off

• did it leaving a sporting event — as a show of “confidence” for my friends
• A girl walking by while working with my coworkers — Wanted to show off
• I was making a joke while very drunk in a touristy location so I only half feel bad about it because I am pretty sure the ladies in question were prostitutes. — I wanted to make a funny joke and impress my coworkers
• It was years ago while I was in college, I whistled at a woman I found attractive because I thought it would get my friends to laugh. — In order to get approval from friends.

To get noticed by the person / get their attention

• I yelled out of a car window at a girl. — I wanted their attention.
• I saw a good looking lady and wanted to get her attention — I wanted to get her attention
• I yelled, “Hey Hot Stuff” when passing by a person in my automobile. — I wanted them to notice me.

To let the person know you find them attractive

• Saw a hot girl while driving to work — Wanted her to know I thought she was attractive
• A long time (maybe 20 yrs) ago, I was with some friends and I whistled at a couple pretty girls walking into a bar. I certainly was trying to be sexually offensive, just let them know I thought they were pretty. I didn’t even know that sort of whistle was considered of a sexual nature. — I was just letting the girls know I thought they were pretty, they turned and smiled at us. They seemed flattered, we never did actually talk to the girls as they were aways down the street heading into a bar. It wasn’t uncommon for a guy to whistle at a pretty girl, especially back then.

To see how the person reacts

• Many years ago. Can’t remember a specific instance. — Probably because I thought they were cute and wanted to see how they would react to my overture.

For self-entertainment

• Years ago. It’s just a silly thing to do. I did it more as a joke. I didn’t really want that person. — It was a joke. I’m an aloof individual. My true reason is to entertain myself.

To meet the person

• I was with friends in a neighborhood in Miami Beach and I saw a very attractive girl. I made a comment about how attractive she was, she came over with her friends and they all introduced themselves. We spent the rest of the night hanging out as a group. — Because she was attractive. There’s absolutely nothing more to it. That kind of thing happens constantly in that neighborhood, it’s part of the environment.

As an immediate reaction to attractiveness

• I’m a homosexual, and recently saw a young guy pass by, and I said ‘Wow!’ but I don’t think it was loud enough for him to hear it, nor did anyone else. I was saying it mostly to myself, because he was so breathtaking. — As I just wrote, I was just surprised by the beauty of this very independent young man, and did not try to get his attention. I was just appreciating his looks, but I could tell he didn’t even hear me, so this is honestly very superficial, but you did ask for the most recent. However, I’ve never done much of that sort of thing even long ago.

Unclear

• I don’t even remember, I whistled at a girl or something from a car sometime within the past 10 years. — Because I thought she looked cute.
• I can’t remember, but it was quietly to my friends — I found them attractive

FEMALE PERPETRATORS:

Takeaway: female cat-callers mainly said they did it as a joke, or for fun, or to get the person’s attention. 9% of females reported having cat-called before.

Joking/to get laughs

• people think it is innocent to jokingly tell someone they are cute, being dumb with friends — acting dumb with friends
• I was young. I leaned out the window and told a boy “NICE BUTT!” I was with my friends and we were having fun at an event. The funny thing is that had I seen him later, I would have been too embarrassed to talk to him. — He really had a nice butt. We were out.  I was with my friends. We were excited and having a good time. I think I did it because it would make my friends laugh. Oh God, I am as bad as men who do this, aren’t I?

Fun

• I was out with friends and did it out on a dare — I thought they were attractive and that it would have been fun
• Not recent but for fun we did it at a concert toward the performer. I believe that counts since we do not know the performer. — It was for fun and that was it. There was no malicious intent.
• Back when I was a teenager I would cruise at night with my friends and we would yell things out to men or boys that we thought were attractive. — I was a teen with hormones. I just wanted to have fun and meet boys.

To get the person’s attention

• I have cat-called strangers at bars or parties. — To get their attention.
• when i went to the club and i was walking downtown — for attention

To feel a certain way

• This was at least 20 years ago, when I was out with a few friends and we were having fun. The men we cat-called (whistled) at seemed to think it was funny because they laughed and flirted back. — Because I was young and care-free and didn’t think of it as objectifying or crude. I just wanted to feel daring and confident.

Other

• I was younger and catcalled a good looking man riding a bike. — He caught my eye I suppose.
• a couple of years ago in a party with some friends someone made an spicy comment and i wink my eye and answer him in a sexual manner — if i like a person i don’t hesitate in show it

—

Topic 2: Making unwanted requests for sexual favors – what did people say about why they have done it?

Questions asked: (1) What were the most recent circumstances in which you made unwanted *requests for sexual favors* that you continued to make even though you believed the requests were unwanted? — (2) What do you think the *true reason* was that you made unwanted *requests for sexual favors* that you continued to make even though you believed the requests were unwanted?

FEMALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: 4% of females reported having made unwanted persistent requests for sexual favors.

• I kept flirting with my romantic partner and encouraging a romantic night even though he wasn’t in the mood and didn’t want to spend his little free time in that manner — I felt bad that previously when he wanted a “favor” I turned him down and was trying to make sure he was satisfied, but took it too far.
• I thought the guy was liking what I was saying but he told me that it made him uncomfortable. — It was for personal gain.
• because my wife was mad at me and she was tired. It was a normal marriage fight in my eyes and hers — Because I wanted to try different things and spice up our love life

MALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: males who made unwanted requests for sexual favors said they did it mainly because they desired sex, or because they hoped the other person would change their mind about not wanting to give those sexual favors. 6% of males reported having made unwanted persistent requests for sexual favors.

For sex

• I black mailed some girl to get in bed with me. — i was just a horny dude
• To my girlfriend — Wanting some sexual action
• asking a close friend to fornicate — attraction to her
• In a hotel with a girl — I wanted it
• To my girlfriend when i want sex — I was horny
• I asked a girl that I had sex with once before to come back with me (for sex) after we went out drinking together with some friends. She had told me earlier that she couldn’t stay over, but I tried to change her mind. — I wanted to have sex with her once again.

Hoped they would eventually change their mind

• I liked the person and hoped they would change their mind. But after a while I stopped after I felt I tried and the person was no longer interested. — I wanted to have sex with that person, I was attracted to them.
• just asking partners for particular acts they don’t seem interested in. — because i thought i could wear them down

To see what would happen

• It was several years ago while on a date in a foreign country. — For the adventure of it. And to see what would happen.

Feeling that the other person should change their mind

• I continued to ask a partner for oral sex but my partner continued to refuse because they didn’t like that I was uncircumcised. — I felt that my partner wasn’t complying because of a preference that they should change.

Perceived mixed signals

• The most recent time was a long time ago. I had a friend who I was very attracted to, and she gave me very mixed signals. That doesn’t excuse my repeated requests for sexual acts, but it was an element of what was going on. — at the time I was unable to successfully form sexual relationships, due to problems with my early sexual development that I had not yet overcome. I was very attracted to my friend, and a lot of that was very much *because* she gave me mixed signals and wasn’t really going to “put out.” It was a very dysfunctional pattern (on both sides).

—

Topic 3: Verbal sexual harassment – what did people say about why they have done it?

Questions asked: (1) What were the most recent circumstances in which you *verbally* harassed another person in a manner that was *sexual in nature*? — (2) What do you think the *true reason* was that you *verbally* harassed another person in a manner that was *sexual in nature*?

FEMALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: 5% of females reported having verbally sexually harassed others

Joking

• I have catcalled strangers at parties, or commented on their sexiness, without knowing them and without knowing if that was acceptable to them. — I think I thought it was funny.
• I was super young (elementary school) and didn’t know what was right/wrong or consequences. — I wanted to “try it out”. I didn’t know how to express my feelings the right way and I thought it would be cute/funny

To hurt the person

• During a fight I did say things about sexual experiences and similar topics that were towards someone that I was in a relationship with. I knew they would hurt and that was my intention during that time. — I wanted them to hurt because they had hurt me before.

MALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: males who said they had verbally sexually harassed someone most commonly said they did it in order to hurt the other person, but also mentioned a mix of idiosyncratic motivations. 9% of the male sample reported having verbally sexually harassed others.

To hurt the person

• It’s been 10 or 20 years ago at least. I probably messed with some friends’ girlfriends because I was in a mean mood & thought she was a slut. — Because I didn’t like that particular person & wanted to offend them.
• I was having an argument with a person. — I was angry
• Getting mad at a girl — I was mad and wanted to get to them
• get even with them — be an asshole

To express anger

• During sex, I started to verbally abuse my sexual partner. I don’t know if it was upsetting to him. But he didn’t ask for it ever before or after. — Anger towards men in general.

To impress friends

• I catcalled a woman as I was leaving a sporting event in a vehicle — To impress my friends

Thought the person would like it

• I called a girl cutie, but she didn’t like it. — I thought she would like me calling her cutie.

Feeling of power

• It was amusing at the time. — As a sign of power.

To show the person you find them attractive

• I talked about a woman’s breasts in front of her. — I wanted her to know I found her attractive.

Drunkenness 

• I called a lesbian sexy but I was drunk — I was intoxicated and out of control

—

Topic 4: Making persistent unwanted sexual advances – what did people say about why they have done it?

What were the most recent circumstances in which you made unwanted *sexual advances* towards a person that you continued to make even though you believed the sexual advances were unwanted? — What do you think the *true reason* was that you made unwanted *sexual advances* towards a person that you continued to make even though you believed the sexual advances were unwanted?

FEMALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: 4% of females reported having made persistent unwanted sexual advances

• Years ago I felt that my actions towards this person wasn’t wanted, but yet we still would go back and forth with advances as jokes. Eventually it turned out that they wanted sexual advances mutually. — I felt that there was something between “us” and when the other person would start to reciprocate the advances then things started to change.
• At an event years ago I flirted with a man I found attractive. I could tell he wasn’t into me (or the conversation really), but I didn’t let him out of the conversation easily and continued to flirt with him. — He was attractive and I suppose that if he rejected me then I would feel badly? So I wanted to prove that if I flirted better, he might flirt back a little, and then I wouldn’t need a date, because that would be approval enough? I’m not really sure, it was years ago.

MALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: males who said they had made unwanted sexual advances mainly said they did it hoping for sex, but a couple of males mentioned doing it out of anger and some mentioned other idiosyncratic motivations. 9% of males reported having made unwanted sexual advances.

Hoping for sex

• I flirted shamelessly with a waitress even though it was rather clear to everyone except me that she was having none of it. — I was drunk and horny.
• Its been a while, but I liked the person and wanted to do things sexually to them. — I just wanted to have sex at the time and the person was just there.
• my girlfriend stopped having sex with me even though I enjoy it, so I like to do it still — I was horny
• flirted I guess but that’s all. — sex.
• My neighbor is very attractive and I wanted to have sex with her. — She is very attractive and I am very attracted to her and so I wanted to have sex with her.

Anger

• some girl that got me mad that is my friend who was being rude to me — I wanted to get even
• My sexual partner was tired one night, and I continued to sexually touch them while my partner was saying they wanted to sleep. — I thought they weren’t actually tired, just upset with me for other reasons, and I was angry for that.

Hoping for reciprocation of feelings

• In my early adulthood I would make sexual advances towards a relative of mine; she had actually done some sexual things with me but was no longer interested. Still I would sometimes make advances towards her. — I had unresolved sexual issues from early sexual development that did not go well; in addition, I was very socially inept in general. I found her quite attractive and wanted to be with her, sexually and emotionally. I was desperately lonely and horny and she was being nice to me. It was a dysfunctional pattern. I’m glad I’m over that.

Thought the person was playing hard to get

• I was messaging someone on social media and we were showing interest in each other, and suddenly I stopped receiving messages, but kept sending some, hoping for a reply. — I thought they were just playing hard to get.

Fun

• Again, it was several years ago while I was temporarily living in a foreign country. — I did it for fun, for the adventure of it. I didn’t assault anyone, or force anyone to do anything.

Hoping to take sexual activity further

• When I was hooking up with a girl, I attempted to touch her p****, even though she had stopped my hand previously. — I really wanted to have sex with the girl so I was hoping that she would relent. The girl had no problem making out with me and me grabbing her a**.

Unclear

• I told this person I was going to f*** her — I was drunk

—

Topic 5: Physical sexual harassment – what did people say about why they have done it?

Questions asked: (1) What were the most recent circumstances in which you *physically* harassed another person in a manner that was *sexual in nature*? — (2) What do you think the *true reason* was that you *physically* harassed another person in a manner that was *sexual in nature*?

FEMALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: about 4% of the female sample said they had done this, though only one person among those wrote about what they did.

• I have slapped the asses of strangers. — Because I wanted to touch them and that’s not appropriate behavior.

MALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: the responses that males gave to why they physically sexually harassed someone were idiosyncratic, all in different categories. Overall, few men reported having physically sexually harassed someone (about 4% of the male sample), which is likely in part due to an unwillingness to admit physical sexual harassment (even in an anonymous survey).

Anger

• A woman was yelling at me so I grabbed her breast to keep her quiet. — I was angry

Defending someone else

• I physically harassed the boyfriend of my good friend…He had physically abused my friend…When he threatened to harm my friend, I reached out and cupped his testicles in my hand… He was quite disturbed and compliant by the turn of events. — I was upset and even scared; but, once he threatened my friend I had to act. I knew he was violent…I did feel a rush of power for knocking him off balance and taming his anger but mostly I was relieved.

Drunkenness

• I was fairly aggressive towards a bar employee to the point where they wanted me expelled — I am unsure, I was heavily intoxicated

Impulsive desire to touch the person

• Several decades ago, when I was a young man, one night I was in a bar and fairly drunk, and I grabbed a woman’s butt. She turned around and punched me, which I deserved. — I was drunk and did something impulsive, stupid and obnoxious. I liked her a** and wanted to touch it. It was a very wrong thing to do. Also I was sort of acting out, “this is what guys are supposed to do, isn’t it?”

Thought the person was coming onto them

• I inappropriately touched a co-worker. — I thought that they were coming on to me.

Hoping to take sexual activity further

• I was attempting to touch the privates of the girl that I was hooking up with. I only attempted several times, and never forced the situation to the point where the girl had to exert more physical force than pushing the hand away. I relented in the end and respected her decision. — I wanted to escalate the situation by further arousing and stimulating the girl, thereby leading to sex.

—

Topic 6: Carrying out unwanted sexual activity – what did people say about why they have done it?

Questions asked: (1) What were the most recent circumstances in which you had sexual activity with a person when you had reason to doubt whether the person actually wanted to engage in that sexual activity, but you continued anyway? — (2) What do you think the *true reason* was that you had sexual activity with a person when you had reason to doubt whether the person actually wanted to engage in that sexual activity, but you continued anyway?

FEMALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: few women reported having continued unwanted sexual activity (when they had reason to doubt the other person wanted to engage in it), only about 4% of the female sample. Only one wrote an explanation:

• As previously mentioned, a time with my husband. Neither one of us were really into it though. And finally, we just talked and communicated about how we were feeling. — Not communicating over the course of several encounters and weeks. Trying to please my man even though he was trying to please me in different ways. Two ships passing in the night situation.

MALE PERPETRATORS:

Overview: about 8% of the male sample reported having continued unwanted sexual activity (when they had reason to doubt the other person wanted to engage in it). The most common explanation given for this behavior was having sexual desire to engage in the sex act (or complete the act if already started), coupled with the other person not explicitly stopping them.

Having sexual desire without the other person stopping them from acting

• i wanted to have and she didn’t restrict me.. — she didn’t restrict
• Like my husband had a plan to have sex at night and because he gets tired he changed his mind but he can’t tell me and I do it because he asked me too so may be that is the situation — because he did not refuse directly
• I was with my girlfriend. I had a feeling that she was not in the mood, she did not say anything to stop me probably to avoid getting me upset. — I was way too horny. I could have stopped if she would have told me to.
• I had sex with a man when he said he didn’t want to that night. I just started applying lubrication a few minutes later and started to enter and he didn’t explicitly protest. — I felt that he was apprehensive because of mental reservations but should learn to get over it.
• this was years ago and someone invited me over…I wanted to have some kind of sexual activity with them [even though we had agreed to just cuddle as friends] and I never had done that with them before, and having them so close was really turning me on, and I think that I was hoping that somehow the chemistry of the moment and the greatness of my desire would make them change their mind, because I thought they wanted to have sex on some level but just didn’t want to seem like they were easy by getting sexual with me too early on. So mostly I was guilty of grinding, and I wasn’t sure how they felt about it, but they didn’t move away or tell me to stop so…I don’t know. I do feel a little weird about that one. — she wasn’t explicitly stopping me or moving away or saying anything, I hoped I would change her mind and be able to both enjoy ourselves more

For sex

• Recently — she was tired and I am very persistent to have my needs filled
• I was at a bar drinking with a girl and later on she was drunk and I seduced her or talked her into having sex. — I was able to convince her to have sex
• A girl was on her period and did not want to have sex because of that. She was enamored with me and as a result, a bit embarrassed to have “messy” sex. She said she would f**** me when she wasn’t on her period…I convinced her to let her guard down and have sex. — I wanted to have sex.

Wanting to finish the sexual activity

• They said stop but I continued — I wanted to finish
• When I was a teenager, a LONG time ago, I did this one time with someone I knew. She was allowing me to do things but at a certain point said “no” a couple of times. I was horny and wanted what I wanted, and she was letting me. It was a seriously f***ed up thing to do. At the time I had significant emotional issues and was not good at interpreting social cues. Also I had gotten some very toxic messages from my environment about consent and masculinity. I was horny and f****ed up and what I was doing physically felt good. I’m glad I’m not that person anymore.

Other

• just to know if she will give it up. — curiosity
• It seemed as though both of us were going through the motions. — We were both wanting an experience that evening.

What do we conclude from this? What most surprised me was the wide variety of motivations for sexual harassment and sexual assault, including:

• anger or revenge
• getting attention
• sexual gratification
• attempting to attract the other person
• impressing others who are there
• attempts at humor
• miscommunication around desires
• self-entertainment or curiosity

Sexual harassment and assault appear to derive from a wide variety of motivations, which are worth grappling with when we consider how to reduce sexual harassment and sexual assault in society.

While I think there are very serious concerns that advancing technologies, and AI in particular, raise (such as lack of control over these systems with could be a tremendous threat, reduction of agency, and the potential for extreme concentration of power), if we can keep these technologies well under control and pointed at the betterment of humanity (a big if) I don’t think they have to destroy meaning. Here’s why:

While some people do derive a lot of their sense of self-worth from their work (such as myself), and such people could be especially hard hit if they are replaced by technology, there are, thankfully, many things that humans intrinsically value, and therefore, lots of potential sources of meaning. By seeking and then (at least to a reasonable degree) creating what we intrinsically value, we create meaning.

So let’s have a quick look at different human intrinsic values (i.e., things people value for their own sake, not as a means to an end) and how advancing technology, such as AI, may impact each of them:

—

Spirituality and purity: there are no reasons I see that technology would have to interfere with spirituality, religion, or attempts to act purely. So these values could continue being a source of meaning.

Truth and learning: if anything, really effective technology can accelerate the search for truth and our ability to learn. At the same time, technology gone wrong could make the truth harder to discern (e.g., if technology facilitates misinformation outcompeting accurate information).

Achievement: this one could be hard hit by technology insofar as it’s related to doing things that eventually AI may do better than all of us. At the same time, humans find a lot of value in achievements regardless of non-human performance. For instance, people compete in sprints (even though cheetahs could easily outrun us) and find value in achievement in chess (despite AI being able to easily beat the best human). A lot of people also value personal achievement – merely doing the best you can, or improving to do better than your own previous results.

Freedom: while technology could impair freedom (e.g., if it concentrates power into the hands of certain actors, they might choose to limit freedom), there is also potential for technology to expand freedom a lot by allowing us to do many things that weren’t possible before, either because we didn’t know how to do them or because they were too costly before.

Pleasure, non-suffering, longevity: there is no fundamental tension between technology and these values, and technology may be able to improve these by reducing sources of suffering (such as disease), increasing lifespans, and making pleasure more easily accessible.

Happiness (as distinct from pleasure and non-suffering): This is a tricky one, because technology can cut both ways here. For instance, while it’s likely social media has increased some kinds of pleasure, it may well have reduced overall happiness for some people by making them more disconnected or impacting the way they see the world.

Caring, reputation, respect, loyalty, and virtue: these don’t have to be impacted by technology; we could continue valuing these in our relationships with others, even in a world where AI has replaced most work. The main threats I see here from technology are the ways that social media can cause people to spend less face-to-face time together, and the way that AI friends or “relationship” partners could take the place of human relationships.

Justice and fairness: this could go either way. Technology could concentrate power in a way that makes these worse or systematize bias. On the other hand, if the benefits of technology are distributed widely, they could create increased abundance. Technology also has the potential, if harnessed correctly, to reduce (currently commonplace) human bias.

Diversity: globalization tends to reduce diversity, and so technology could accelerate that trend. On the other hand, giving people more freedom through technology could end up increasing forms of diversity (such as how people choose to live their lives).

Protection: technology has the ability to make us safer, so while we may experience more protection (for ourselves and our loved ones), it also could mean that our own role of protecting others is reduced, which could reduce the meaning derived from providing protection. On the other hand, if technology is not developed thoughtfully, the world could feel increasingly chaotic and even become more unsafe, so protection could become even more important.

Nature: technology has a track record of destroying nature, so that trend may continue. However, it’s possible that with sufficiently advanced technology, that trend will go the opposite direction (e.g., cheap green energy makes it easier to protect nature). Technology often destroys nature either as a means to accelerate or as a side effect of acceleration, but sufficiently advanced technology may reduce that effect.

Beauty: technology has the possibility of increasing beauty in the world (making it easier to create and experience beauty), but also runs the risk of filling the world with generic slop.

Overall, while advancing technology may have a negative impact on some things that humans intrinsically value, as long as we don’t destroy the world with these technologies and avoid allowing extreme concentration of power from them, other intrinsic values may not be impacted or even be benefited by technology. As long as we can seek and (to a reasonable degree) create what we intrinsically value, there are sources of meaning available.

This piece was first written on November 16, 2025, and first appeared on my website on December 22, 2025.

Here are the steps of how this happens, as I see it, though not every one of these steps occurs in every single case:

(1) Many people feel dissatisfied with the state of their society and its impact on their lives, and blame the groups that have long remained in power. (Sometimes these groups that have long been in power deserve blame for the bad state of affairs; other times, the bad state of affairs is due to circumstances largely outside of their control.) Blaming these groups that have long remained in power often also involves distrust in existing institutions.

(2) A new potential leader emerges who is perceived not to be a member of the groups that have historically been in power (or if they come from the original groups of power, then this potential leader typically claims outsider status, presenting themselves as a reformer who is different than the other insiders). Typically, this potential leader is viewed as being more “one of the people” than the prior groups in power.

(3) This leader is charismatic and, though potentially polarizing, many people find this person captivating and persuasive. Oftentimes, this leader is also high on traits commonly associated with grandiose narcissism (e.g., a belief in their own superiority and specialness, a need for admiration, arrogance, manipulative tendencies, a “with me or against me” mentality, and reduced empathy).

(4) This leader promotes a grand vision of what the country could become (or could be restored to again) under their leadership, which gets many people excited.

(5) The leader typically appears to be powerful and courageous, and willing to stand up against (and correct the errors and abuses of) the previous people in power who have held the country back.

(6) In addition to blaming society’s problems on the prior group in power, the leader also uses one or more other groups as scapegoats, and blames many of society’s problems on that group as well (typically a distrusted local minority group, immigrants, or some other country that the population sees as a potential threat). However, the scapegoat group(s) are either not actually a cause of any of the problems in that society, or are only a minor cause (with most of the problems being caused by other factors).

(7) The leader also exaggerates, lies to, and manipulates the people, claiming simple (but inaccurate) narratives about what’s gone wrong that make their solutions seem likely to be effective, and that paint themselves as the heroes and the prior groups in power (as well as the scapegoats) as villains.

(8) Through their charisma, exciting vision for the future, and promises to fix the problems in society by correcting the errors of the previous groups in power and by cracking down on the proposed scapegoats, the leader gets strong public support. The leader then gets into a position of executive power by one of a variety of means (e.g., being elected, being appointed, deal-making, coercion, or a coup).

(9) The leader then attempts to neutralize the power of formerly powerful groups that were in power (e.g., through violence, arrests, seizing their wealth, and/or disparaging them and damaging their reputations).

(10) The leader additionally harms the scapegoated group(s) (e.g., through arrests, preventing immigration, forced migration, tariffs, military action, and/or violence). Sometimes, though not always, the leader also cracks down on leading intellectuals and groups of intellectuals, attempting to weaken their influence or prevent them from being listened to.

(11) The leader amasses power and wealth for themselves while in charge, while also attempting to reduce the checks and balances on their power (e.g., by weakening or consolidating other parts of government, or by exerting control over media and journalism). Additionally, the leader typically engages in information control and propaganda in an attempt to get the population to view all of their actions as positive. The more effective their information control and propaganda are, the more they can get away with making terrible decisions on behalf of society and enriching themselves at the expense of the people.

(12) The leader’s actions sometimes produce no benefit at all for the bulk of the populace, and sometimes produce a short-term benefit to the populace, but ultimately, the leader’s actions come at a meaningful (and sometimes disastrous) long-term cost, leaving society worse off long-term than it was before that person rose to power.

And, with that, as has happened again and again in many societies throughout the world, populations end up trying to improve their country’s problems by electing an exciting new leader, but instead end up being lied to and manipulated, leaving the well-being of the people of their country worse off than it would have been. This is a worldwide phenomenon. It happened with Hitler in Germany, Kim Il-Sung in North Korea, Mao Zedong in China, Mugabe in Zimbabwe, and Putin in Russia. And it will likely keep happening. A first step towards helping stop this pattern is if voters become more aware of it.

To be clear, populism isn’t bad, per se. The unmet needs and desires of ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded are very important. And widespread dissatisfaction with the status quo usually does mean that something needs to change. The real issue is that grandiose manipulators leverage populist sentiment to install themselves in power, leaving their people worse off in the long term.

It’s also important to observe that this pattern isn’t one of the right or the left – it’s a pattern that arises on both sides of the political spectrum.

This piece was first written on August 31, 2025, and first appeared on my website on October 23, 2025.

It’s definitely true that some women are attracted to traits like narcissism, callousness, and manipulativeness (and some unusual women even go so far as to write letters to serial killers to get to know them). In my experience, though, attraction to traits like these is actually quite rare (I can only think of two friends who are substantially attracted to those traits in particular).

Much more commonly, I believe, women tend to be attracted to traits that have a tendency to be found among bad guys (but which are not exclusive to bad guys), like:

• confidence (or, at least, the appearance of it)
• lack of neediness (e.g., they aren’t sitting around waiting for the woman to call, they aren’t clingy)
• independence and not being overly concerned with what other people think of you (or, at least, the appearance of not caring)
• self-determination, knowing what you want and going after it intensely
• strength (emotional and physical)
• making the woman feel extremely desired and special
• charisma (intensity, presence, high energy)
• assertiveness
• self-respect (e.g., not letting others take advantage of you)
• power (e.g., you can get things done effectively in the world, others respect you, high status)

I know a lot of women who are attracted to the traits on the list above.
So, yes, many women are attracted to bad boys, but I believe that’s mainly because bad boys have a tendency to have (or, at least, appear to have) a number of these other desirable qualities.
Women are often attracted to traits found among bad guys, but thankfully, these traits are also found among what you might call “powerful good guys.”

The regular (non-powerful) “nice guy” stereotype invokes a sense of:

• low confidence
• weakness, patheticness, neediness
• a sense of entitlement or a lack of responsibility
• low assertiveness
• not knowing what you want or not pursuing what you want
• clingy, in need of constant reassurance
• lack of charisma (e.g., low energy, lack of presence)
• lack of power (e.g., lack of respect, living in their parent’s basement)
• low self-respect (e.g., letting others walk all over you)
• an intensity of interest in a woman (bordering on obsessiveness) that can come across as creepy

On the other hand, there are “powerful good guys” who reflect the traits that women tend to like while not being “bad” at all.

If you are a powerful, good guy, you demonstrate the following:

• a quiet confidence (rather than a bragging narcissistic confidence)
• strength that is used to protect others (not to take advantage of or manipulate others)
• self-determination, knowing what you want (but with pro-social rather than selfish goals), and going after what you want with intensity (but without violating other people’s boundaries)
• strength and charisma
• independence (e.g., strongly desiring to spend time with the woman, but not being clingy or needy, and not being pouty or angry when the woman needs time alone, and having a flourishing and meaningful life outside of your time with the woman)
• making the woman feel extremely desired and special (because you genuinely feel this way, and you are not afraid to show it, rather than this being a tactic to get what you want, but also the self-confidence, self-respect, and kindness to fully accept rejection and not get angry over rejection)
• assertiveness and self-respect reflecting a healthy expression of desires and enforcement of your own boundaries (not a coercive assertiveness that violates the boundaries of others)
• power that comes about through your respect for others and competence (not created through fear or manipulation)
• protectiveness that helps you give your loved ones safety (without any coercive control – a nurturing protectiveness can be very attractive to women, I believe, whether directed at the woman themself or to others like babies, children, and animals)

There is also a major advantage that powerful good guys have over bad guys – they are kind and supportive, two traits that women often report caring the most about in their partners.

These good guys also tend to have much happier, healthier relationships (rather than the damaging, often miserable relationships that highly manipulative, narcissistic people tend to have).

So, if you are a guy who wants to become the sort of person who is more attractive to more women, my advice is:

• don’t aim to become the “nice guy” (who can be viewed as pathetic)
• don’t aim to become the “bad guy” (who is a dick, or worse)
• aim to become the “powerful good guy” (who builds happy, healthy, long-term relationships)

However, if you’re not close to any of these types, that’s also okay, of course! And it’s totally fine not to aspire to be like any of these archetypes.

Women are very far from a monolith. There are women who are attracted to all sorts of different things (just as there are men who want the opposite of what most men want). But, I claim, the “powerful good guy” is a better archetype for thinking about how to be generally attractive than both the “bad guy” and the “nice guy” archetypes. Plus, as a bonus, modeling the “powerful good guy” archetype helps you be a better person in the process.

Women who are attracted to men: I’d be especially interested in hearing what you think of what I’m saying here. Do you agree or disagree with my points? I’d also be really interested to know whether you (or your close friends) are attracted specifically to traits like narcissism, callousness, and manipulativeness, or (insofar as you’re attracted to “bad guys”), do you think you’re mainly attracted to traits that tend to be associated with being a “bad guy” (rather than those potentially harmful traits themselves)?

I’ll add (thanks to commenters who pointed this out!) there are at least a couple of traits more unique to bad guys that some women do find desirable, in particular, ones that inspire thoughts like “He’s an asshole to everyone but me, so that makes me special!”, and “Normally no one woman can satisfy him, that’s why he’s a philanderer, but his desire for me is so strong that he’ll commit just to me!” and “I know he’s bad, but I can fix him!” While some women are, indeed, attracted to these ideas, I think it’s fair to say that most people would acknowledge these are unhealthy desires that typically end in frustration and failure, and they aren’t key components of most women’s attraction to men.

Finally, it’s worth noting that many (but not all) women find sexual dominance attractive (which they may associate with bad boys). But sexual dominance is neither bad nor good and has nothing to do with being good or bad per se (though sometimes people enjoy having it mimic bad behavior, such as with r*pe fantasies). In other words, sexual dominance is a neutral behavior that is equally compatible with being a powerful good guy as with being a bad guy. It can be done ethically (if done with consent and with attention to your partner’s experience) or unethically (if done without consent or with indifference to your partner’s experience).

This piece was first written on October 25, 2023, and first appeared on this site on January 18, 2024.

2. Suppose aliens show up on earth that are far smarter than the smartest among us at all cognitive tasks. They have specific goals that aren’t fully aligned with ours, are completely unconstrained by human morality, and don’t value our survival. What happens next?

3. Suppose someone builds a hacking A.I. that is trained on all the public information about computer hacking ever written, can think and type 1000x faster than a human, plans far ahead, and deposits a fully operational copy of itself onto every sufficiently powerful computer it hacks. Each copy then hacks further computer systems. What’s the world like a month later?

4. Suppose someone wants to have complete control over the world. Unfortunately, they’ve created one hundred million software agents that each think like Einstein + Bill Gates + Elon Musk + Warren Buffet. The agents attempt to do exactly what is commanded without hesitation or limits. Can anyone stop them?

5. Imagine a being that is godlike in its capabilities (relative to us). Suppose its only desire is to have the world be a certain way with maximal probability. It will stop at NOTHING to make the world this way, and it won’t tolerate even the SLIGHTEST chance of things being different than it desires. Will the resulting world include a human civilization?

6. Suppose you can think, process information and act 100,000 times faster than other humans. That means if you spend a day making and executing a plan, that’s equivalent to someone else spending 270 years on it. Your goal is to become world dictator. Can you do it?

7. Scientists discover how to create bug-sized self-replicating robots that out-compete natural life. These bug robots each try to maximize their own objective function. Unfortunately, these robots have leaked out of the lab and are now in 20 countries. Every day they double in number. Would we be able to eradicate these robots?

8. There’s a machine so powerful it achieves any goal you specify. You give the goal to the machine as written text. You can’t control HOW it achieves the goal; it ONLY cares about literally achieving it EXACTLY AS STATED in the most efficient way possible, and it can’t be stopped once started. The machine may do absolutely anything not explicitly forbidden in order to achieve the specified goal. Will it usually be a good (or horrible) outcome if you give the machine an ambitious goal like “prevent all war”?

9. Scientists invent a new idea – the Omnicide Synthesis Box. It could have many societal benefits, but, on average, scientists estimate making it will bring a 5% chance of human extinction (though some say more like a 90% chance). Those scientists who are less worried decide to build it. Should the least cautious be the ones to decide on behalf of humanity?

10. Picture a swarm of locusts, each individually possessing the intelligence and strategic prowess of a grandmaster chess player, while coordinating with each other in perfect unison. Their creators have given them the goal of controlling all available resources, indifferent to the collateral damage. Who ends up with most of the resources?

11. Imagine an AI-powered/nanotech super-factory that produces whatever it’s programmed to at enormous speed and scale (whether commanded to make diamonds, super viruses, microchips, or assassination drones). What could the owner of that super factory do to the world?

12. A medical firm gives a superintelligence the goal of designing a cure for all diseases. The superintelligence realizes it’s not smart enough to do so, so it plans to first acquire most of the computing power on earth (as it predicts it will need this to achieve the goal it was given), and then it creates a billion far smarter copies of itself to solve the task. What if one very misspecified goal is all we get with a superintelligence?

13. Five companies are developing a very powerful tech that would be incredibly useful if done right but very dangerous if developed without extreme caution. They each believe they can develop it safely but don’t trust the others to do so. They all cut corners racing to be the one to make it. Do good intentions lead to horrible consequences when doing something safely is much harder than merely doing it?

(Two of the above were written by ChatGPT – I edited those two quite a bit, though.)

If you read this line, please do us a favor and click here to answer one quick question.

1. Parkinson’s Law: Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.
2. Hofstadter’s Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter’s Law.
3. Gates’ Law: Most people overestimate what they can do in one year and underestimate what they can do in ten years.
4. Goodhart’s Law: When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.
5. Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity (or, don’t invoke conspiracy when ignorance and incompetence will suffice, as conspiracy implies intelligence).
6. Acton’s Dictum: Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
7. Amara’s Law: We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.
8. Benford’s Law: In a diverse collection of unrelated statistics, a given statistic has roughly a 30% chance of starting with the digit 1.
9. Betteridge’s Law: Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word ‘no’.
10. Brooks’ Law: Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later.
11. Chesterton’s Fence: Reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood.
12. Claasen’s Law: Usefulness = log(technology).
13. Clarke’s First Law: When a distinguished elderly scientist states that something is possible, they are almost certainly right, but when they state something is impossible, they are probably wrong.
14. Cromwell’s Rule: Nothing but logical impossibilities have a prior probability of 0 or 1.
15. Cunningham’s Law: The best way to get the right answer on the Internet is not to ask a question, it’s to post the wrong answer.
16. Doctorow’s Law: When someone puts a lock on a thing you own, against your wishes, and doesn’t give you the key, they’re not doing it for your benefit.
17. Dunbar’s Number: Most people can’t maintain stable social relationships with more than 150 people.
18. Eroom’s Law: Drug discovery is becoming slower and more expensive over time, despite improvements in technology.
19. Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect: You’ll believe articles outside your area of expertise, even after acknowledging that neighboring articles in your area of expertise are completely wrong.
20. Gibson’s Law (or the Expert Witness Law): For each PhD (to use as an expert witness for one side) there’s an equal and opposite PhD.
21. Godwin’s Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
22. Morley-Souter’s Law (Rule 34): There is porn of it (no exceptions).
23. Greenspun’s Tenth Rule: Any sufficiently complicated C program contains an ad hoc, informally specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp.
24. Hebb’s Law: Neurons that fire together wire together.
25. Hubble’s Law: Galaxies recede from an observer at a rate proportional to their distance to that observer.
26. Hume’s Guillotine (Is-Ought Problem): Normative statements (about what’s moral/immoral/right/wrong) cannot be deduced exclusively from descriptive statements.
27. Humphrey’s Law: Conscious attention to a task normally performed automatically can impair its performance.
28. Kranzberg’s Law: Technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral.
29. Lamarck’s Principle (or “Use it or Lose it”): Use it or lose it (evolutionarily speaking, but also in the brain).
30. Lewis’s Law: The comments you’ll inevitably find on any article about feminism justify feminism.
31. Littlewood’s Law: Individuals can expect miracles to happen to them, at the rate of about one per month.
32. Maes–Garreau Law: Favorable predictions about future technology will fall at the latest possible date they can come true and still remain in the lifetime of the predictor.
33. Metcalfe’s Law: The value of a system grows as approximately the square of the number of users of the system.
34. Miller’s Law: To understand what another person is saying, you must assume that it is true and try to imagine what it could be true of.
35. Moore’s Law: Computation per dollar grows exponentially (or: number of transistors per circuit doubles roughly every 24 months).
36. Murphy’s Law: Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
37. Alder’s Law: What cannot be settled by experiment is not worth debating.
38. O’Sullivan’s Law: All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.
39. Pareto’s Principle (80/20 Rule): For many phenomena 80% of consequences stem from 20% of the causes.
40. Peter’s Principle: In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.
41. Poisson’s Law (or Law of Large Numbers): For independent random variables with a common distribution, the average tends to the mean as sample size increases.
42. Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy: In bureaucracy, those devoted to the bureaucracy get control, those devoted to what it’s supposed to achieve lose influence.
43. Putt’s Law: Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand.
44. Rosenthal Effect (Pygmalion Effect): High expectations lead to an increase in performance, low expectations to a decrease in performance.
45. Schneier’s Law: Any person can invent a security system so clever that she or he can’t think of how to break it.
46. Shermer’s Law: Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God.
47. Zipf’s Law: The frequency of use of the nth-most-frequently-used word in any natural language is approximately inversely proportional to n (few words are used often, most are used rarely).
48. Wirth’s Law: Software gets slower more quickly than hardware gets faster.
49. Sturgeon’s Law: Ninety percent of everything is crud.
50. Stigler’s Law: No discovery is named after its original discoverer, including this one.

This piece was first written on July 6, 2020, and first appeared on my website on May 30, 2026.