jankas: which came first - the antichrist, or his followers?

so there's this guy, paul janka, who i have decided is the new worst person on the planet in late 2007 (the title formerly being held by lori drew, the mom-turned-myspace cyberbully). ANYWAY, janka goes beyond the terms 'douchebag' or 'sleazeball' or 'scumbag' or even 'date rapist' in my opinion... i think he's the antichrist. or, at least the antichrist of relationships.

he espouses the following advice to men in NY who wish to get laid:

• "One good exercise is to pass patio restaurants on a summer night, and notice how many women are eating with other women (especially in NYC). You think they want to be eating with their complaining, whining friend, who is depressed and with whom they have to split the bill? Of course not! They'd jump at the opportunity to be with a guy, so ask them out and then bang the shit out of them!"

• "Pick-up girls midweek in the middle of the day while they are walking around. Do not attempt to hustle girls on a weekend night when you are competing with every other Dick. Little secret: the hottest ones are the easiest to fuck. Why? Because they are most confident, and don't guard their pussy like it's their only asset. That's my true experience."

• "Conversation—What the Hell do I talk about as this Girl gets Liquored-Up? As little as possible, is the answer. At least about yourself. Guys are notorious for blabbing on and on about themselves when out for the first time with a girl. Girls have different brains than we do and follow different cues; talking about your job may seem interesting, and the part about you being "employed" is, but frankly, women don't give a shit about that."

• "A standard timeline would be meeting, call or text the next day saying hi and setting the drink date for two days hence. Time between initial meeting and drink should never be more than 5 days; you should always try your best to fuck her after that first night, as well."

soooooo... where do i begin. well, for starters, nothing he says seems that shocking to me, since i feel like i went to law school with roughly 35 guys like this, and no one is hunting them down or writing blog articles about them (though perhaps they should be). i guess the thing about this guy that is so disgustingly disgusting to me is that a) this ideology (if you can call it that) is his claim to fame; b) he's able to parlay his 'experience' into 'today show' appearances and a book option (mofo can't even write!!!); and c) he's not even original - there's shit out there already like the book 'the game' which sells the same misogynistic crap.

his whole popular existence raises other questions and concerns as well. after sharing the above-linked story with some male friends, a couple of them - who are not generally misogynistic, macho, or anything remotely frat-boy-ish - were kind of like "what's the big deal" about the whole thing. one commented that it's really the girls who fall for wankers like janka who are to blame, and not the jankas themselves. (i think i'm just going to refer to this whole classification of guys as 'jankas').

now, my friends raise an interesting point, which made me think about what/whom i am truly frustrated with. am i more upset with the jankas, or that my female comrades can't see past his brand of trickery and arrogant self-serving ways?

hmmmmm... it might be a little of both.

generally, i would pride myself for not being the type of girl who is even remotely attracted to a janka. i am not really attracted to harvard-types; rich boys; preppies; the generically good-looking; the type of smooth operator who approaches girls in daylight in a sober, non-bar setting; or slick professionals.

i have, however, fallen victim to two of the above - the rich boy (a wannabe janka) and the smooth daytime operator (who turned out to have been on a four-day bender and was unabashedly drunk when he approached me; since he was a stranger i did not know). so. i am not wholly innocent, and can relate somewhat to girls who go out with jankas.

plus, i mean, i have lots of female friends. and, unlike me, a lot of them have very specific ideas about who they want to date, and, sadly, a lot of those qualities happen to be possessed by jankas - professional/successful, good-looking, well-dressed, confident. so are the girls really to blame for being attracted to some friendly, handsome devil who approaches them and proceeds to lay on some charm? are they to blame for having... well, some would call it standards, some would call it high expectations, but i refer to it as a mental checklist. can they help it if they are looking for a particular type of guy, but it just so happens that a disproportionate number of that type of guy are jankas?

i don't really know the answer. i do know that i've never really had a mental checklist - i mean, not much more than "treats me well", "makes me laugh", and "won't cheat on me". i don't think that means i have LOW expectations or NO standards... i just don't want some janka with a sense of entitlement and a desire to sexually conquer every woman in LA and orange counties.

at the same time, i understand where the mental checklist-girls are coming from. they, too, feel like they are entitled to something, but not some hornball who is going to fake getting drunk in order to get into her pants.

in the end, i think it comes back to this mantra i came up with several years ago - nice guys may finish last, but nice girls finish worst. nice girls have to put up with a LOT of bullshit and smutty janka guys before they find the nice guys. meanwhile, the nice guys have been kicking it in the corners while their buddies, the jankas, have been drinking their seltzer waters and calculating how long it will take for the young lady next to them to blow them. if the nice guys stopped being unconsciously jealous of their janka friends, or realized their niceness is EXACTLY what girls really do need, then maybe we wouldn't be in this mess and the jankas would cease to exist everywhere.

here's hoping.