Yes. That's one of the points where my analogy fails. PUAs don't fund entertainment for people who aren't interested in them. Another failure of my analogy is that there's no technology for skipping over them. I concede that my analogy stinks like a fetid corpse. It still smells better than your beer analogy, though.
My analogy was not meant to compare adverts to PUAs. I wouldn't call myself an artist of anything particularly, just someone who sees beauty and pursues it.
Rather, the analogy was meant to stand for the real issue: the (unsolicited) male approach. Men are not psychic. We cannot possibly know (without talking to women) if they are single, taken, interested, uninterested, or any of the vast gray area that exists within (everybody knows that sometimes "yes" signals are nos and. Yes, you have to make the approach and not be sure if it will be requited or not and thats not
wrong, whether it occurs at a club, at the company water cooler, or on the street. You need no context, no prior indication, looks, glances, or invitation to speak to a women provided you:
-don't violate her personal space
-are respectful, hygenic, and calm
-Allow her to leave at any point should she wish
If you are not allowed to speak to who you want, we would be living in a totalitarian society. The dictatorship of romance.
All too often these days people think "If I dont like something it shouldn't exist." You see this all the time in the US where people (usually liberals/the left) try to silence opinions which they do not agree with. They say "You have ____ identity, therefore you cannot speak about this" or any of the millions of other iterations of this same idea, banning of speakers at universities, public shaming and removal of people from their jobs, and the like.
This is a very dangerous slope of telling people they cannot behave freely and speak freely simply because their views *may* offend or cause discomfort to some other segment of society.
What about if you need directions, so you stop to ask someone? That other person has zero vested interest in your goals and you most certainly are taking time from them without ANY chance of benefit to them (at least with nampa there's a chance they will be grateful and meet the love of their life, or even just a cool fling). Yet I think very few people would object to stopping someone on the street to ask where Starbucks or the local train station is.
That's because society has told men that their desires are SHAMEFUL and should be locked up inside them. Your genuine curiosity in the woman is not considered a legitimate reason to talk to her (respectfully), whereas if you are lost that is "legitimate."
Which is, of course, total bullshit.
So my point is that the (sometimes unsolicited) male approach is in many ways the foundation of romance which has and will always pave the way for countless happy relationships and marriages, even as it often leads to dismissals or rejections. They are part and parcel, inseperable, and the approach is necessary in order to find out where things stand. The freedom for a man to go up to a woman, or ask her out to a date, or (later) try to kiss her is ultimately a right. The flip side of course, is that the woman always posseses the "no," the ability to vocalize her lack of interest. After which both parties are clear.
Have you seriously only asked a girl on a date whom you knew would say yes? If so, my friend, you are selling yourself short