From the headline, I assumed that this was men kidnapping women. But it is actually men being baited by profiles of women an kidnapped or robbed. This is also quite common in Colombia. I heard a story of a Dutch guy who met a very eager woman from Tinder. She drugged his drink, and he ended up naked with no belongings at the bottom of a well. Somehow managed to escape alive.
And it sounds like men in São Paulo need to start doing what women have been doing since the beginning of dating: always letting somebody know where they are, always meeting first in a public place, never taking a drink from anybody except a bartender.
For men elsewhere, it's really good for them to know that women do this, and that this is why. You may know that you're not the man who does that, but they don't, and the consequences can be worse than losing your wallet. Practically every woman knows a woman who has been assaulted this way. Understanding that will help you plan your dates accordingly so that she can feel a lot more comfortable, and you'll both have a much better time.
The reason this happens with men is what the article doesn't mention: most/all the victims are married men cheating on their partners. So, they arrange dates on empty or far away places, late night and don't communicate where they're going.
Married men are also probably the richest marriage+sex classification. I can't imagine catfishing a bunch of single 18 - 22 year olds that dominates dating apps is super profitable.
I don't see a link between that Bloomberg article and these kidnappings happening mostly to married men cheating. Nor is it the case that "love motels" are primarily used for cheating. We have plenty of those in Argentina. As the Bloomberg article indicates, they serve a social need because of the traditional multigenerational family homes people live in.
And hardly will find in other article due the fact that cheaters will lie to protect their identify if they ever come across a survey or interview. The "love motel" being used for cheating is a known thing across brazilians and still is not easy to find in writing. Also, BR motels are different from the Argentian ones (at least the ones that I saw in Buenos Aires).
the list was to give some sort of reference to the statement "they arrange dates on empty or far away places, late night and don't communicate where they're going" posted above
I lived in Brazil. Many standard couples use those motels there; it is not directly associated with adultery but for sure it is also used for that.
It is a standard service in a country where it is usual for young single adults to still live with their parents well into their thirties, even when they are rich or upper middle class. It is awkward to bring a casual relationship to have sex in your room when you live with your parents.
But, even ignoring that, so you're implying that if people engage in extra-marital affairs it is ok for them to be kidnapped and robbed? Well, why not stoning those sinners too?
the post was to give some additional context to the statement "they arrange dates on empty or far away places, late night and don't communicate where they're going" posted above. That would make it easier to picture what those "empty or far away places" would be
"For men elsewhere, it's really good for them to know that women do this, and that this is why. You may know that you're not the man who does that, but they don't, and the consequences can be worse than losing your wallet. Practically every woman knows a woman who has been assaulted this way. Understanding that will help you plan your dates accordingly so that she can feel a lot more comfortable, and you'll both have a much better time."
This is solid. Guys, do not take it personally when a woman who doesn't know you extremely well is taking these kinds of safety measures. It's because either we've personally had a bad experience with someone who seemed like a decent guy, or have been told about a bad experience someone else had. We're not refusing the drink you thoughtfully brought us from the bar because we're picky; we're doing it because we have an acquaintance who woke up in someone else's bed, unplanned.
Knowing what safety measures women normally take will help you avoid feeling slighted. It's not you, it's the bad behavior of enough of your fellow fellows, bad behavior you're unlikely to directly witness.
If we didn't think you were a decent guy, we probably wouldn't be going out with you in the first place (or were too scared to say no).
Used to be a bartender and there were several times I watched a woman get a drink and take a fake sip, and then wait until the gentlemen is away and ask for a different one. Like she was bought a rum and coke and then moseyed up to the bar and asked for a replacement one -- "I'm not sure I trust his drink" -- fair enough.
We also had a sign in the ladies room: "ask a bartender / waiter / bouncer if their friend Trudy is doing okay, that means you or someone with you is being creeped on and are concerned for safety". Only had that chat 2-3 times, but it did happen.
>And it sounds like men in São Paulo need to start doing what women have been doing since the beginning of dating: always letting somebody know where they are, always meeting first in a public place
Doesn't help when nobody knows or will find the attackers...
The response is how to take basic steps to protect one's self. Steps that are already common among women. Basic safety steps are not victim blaming, for example, wearing bright clothing at night to reduce the chance of being injured by motor vehicle.
It seems you are implying that the comment is victim blaming, or if I take your statement less charitably it is flame bait implying that the comment above would cause outrage if the genders were swapped.
You're right. I assumed the commenter was male. I'm just recalling how many times women in my life said that to me in response to me daring to bring up any male-centered concerns. Things like Me Too witch hunts of men later proven to be innocent.
I have been able to have constructive conversations about things like false rape accusations with women by engaging constructively and having specific, salient points about them.
When I have seen them go very badly, it is almost always because the man comes at the conversation as there is somehow some equivalence or at least relative importance. And there absolutely is not anything close to equivalence.
Sexual violence is so prevalent among women that I know several women who have been assaulted multiple times. I once was having a deep conversation with two female friends and one of them started to tell a story that was obviously hard to tell, and when she paused, the other friend said without emotion, “so, what’s this going to be, rape or no rape?” (It was rape)
So yes, sure “me too witch hunts” are a real bummer, but telling that to a woman who has a not-insignificant percent chance of having been assaulted for real seems tone deaf, to put it mildly.
> I'm just recalling how many times women in my life said that to me in response to me daring to bring up any male-centered concerns. Things like Me Too witch hunts of men later proven to be innocent.
This is also in a larger thread correctly identifying that this is a situation that women have had to deal with for years - with no one saying it is acceptable.
It is then easier to understand a point when people are more nuanced I will give you that. Usually people comment on just one small part of the comment that is why you always have to try to interpret everything with good will. Saying "Men might have to do what women do" could also be interpreted as belittling what women go through.
São Paulo was a pretty dark place back in the days I hope it has gotten better because it was also one of the most friendly places I've visited. Those tips for women seemed prudent for me back then.
I am more worried about the problem with digital money. It's a lot easier to rob/assault someone if you do not have to drag them to an ATM.
I too thought your criticizing was overaggressive, but I'll grant you one thing: the comment "You may know that you're not the man who does that, but they don't, and the consequences can be worse than losing your wallet." does give the impression that the worst thing male victims might suffer is a "lost wallet" when the article makes it clear that these attacks against men are violent and have included homicides
I'm not convinced that the commenter was intentionally trivializing the attacks on these men, but it's likely that the way it was phrased would have that effect.
I agree, but it's 100% called victim blaming when you apply it to women. "We shouldn't have to do anything differently", "teach men not to rape" etc etc.
I don't think anyone here disagrees, they're pointing out the double standard.
> it's 100% called victim blaming when you apply it to women
Yes, but only by some people. Many, maybe most, women would consider "don't walk down dark alleys at night alone" to be common sense. I suspect the subset of people who call that "victim blaming" only seem like a majority because that view happens to be popular with media personalities and Twitter loudmouths.
I'd also point out that it matters when the advice is given. There's a difference between "don't walk down any dark alleys alone tonight" and "this wouldn't have happened if you hadn't walked down that dark alley alone".
In any case, getting offended by good advice just because some other people get offended by good advice doesn't make sense.
Whether a statement is victim-blaming or not depends on the purpose behind it.
If the purpose behind it is to give helpful, relevant, useful advice for avoiding a bad situation, it's not victim blaming.
If the purpose behind it is to downplay and deflect and ignore the other causes of the bad situation, it is.
If someone isn't wearing a seatbelt, and dies in an auto accident, it's not victim blaming to remind people to wear seatbelts. It is victim blaming to use that reminder to divert attention away from the fact that the auto accident was caused by another drunk driver.
Honestly, my purpose was neither. This is, thus far, a localized matter, and it's unlikely to affect most men. The advice is sound, but that's not really the purpose. (And it was very much not intended to blame them.)
Rather, my purpose was to use the opportunity to give men perspective about women. And it's something they can use to their benefit: not to avoid being robbed, but to have more successful dates.
We get that advice. We know that advice. We give that advice to one another.
What “women” typically object to is when the first response from someone after reporting an assault/harassment/attempted assault is to be immediately questioned, “what were you wearing?” “Did you lead him on?” “What time of night was it?” “You were drunk, weren’t you.”
That’s what pisses us off. The immediate move to blame the victim as if they asked for it (and in some parts of the world, rape is still framed that way. She asked for it.) and thus deserve this to happen.
I can assure you that every woman I have ever met over the age of 21 (I don’t know any girls who are in high school now, sorry) has been told her whole life to be careful and take precautions when meeting someone, especially someone from off the internet.
“Text us when you get there.” “Be sure to watch your drink.” “Meet in public first, just to be safe.” “If If you don’t text me by “X,” I’m going to blow up your phone.” “Be sure to take an Uber if you’re going home after X o’clock.” These are things we say to EACH OTHER. These are things our mother’s taught us.
We don’t get mad when reminded to be safe. We get mad when the instinct is to blame us for our own assaults. (And it isn’t just men that blame women. Women can blame women too. And women can blame themselves, even when they did absolutely nothing wrong.)
When I tell my wife about the time I get robbed when in Mexico, the first kind of questions are things like what time of night and did you go to the slums etc. If the answers are yes I'm called a dumbass and told not to do it again. [Yes I have been robbed or attempted robbed multiple times including at gunpoint and no I'm not offended by these questions]
I'm not saying being robbed is anywhere near as bad as getting sexually harassed or raped but I never thought the line of questioning was really unreasonable. Even if I've heard the advice being told it again by someone I know can be helpful because even if I'm told it constantly I still need to be reminded not to be a dumbass and go out at night dressing like I'm well off or whatever because someone will rob me and I have a bad memory with that kind of stuff.
Granted most people in general including women are probably less a dumbass about these things than I am.
> I'm not saying being robbed is anywhere near as bad as getting sexually harassed or raped but I never thought the line of questioning was really unreasonable.
Then it is probably a good idea to listen instead of putting up a defensive front so that you can understand why these situations are different and why women in general feel the way they do.
>I'm not saying being robbed is anywhere near as bad as getting sexually harassed or raped but I never thought the line of questioning was really unreasonable. Even if I've heard the advice being told it again by someone I know can be helpful because even if I'm told it constantly I still need to be reminded not to be a dumbass and go out at night dressing like I'm well off or whatever because someone will rob me and I have a bad memory with that kind of stuff.
You still shouldn't be blamed for being robbed. You're right that depending on the area and the time of night, crime can be more likely (although plenty of crime can take place in broad daylight) and being aware of that in advance makes sense. But that still doesn't make the crime your fault and you still weren't asking for it. And assigning blame or calling you a dumbass for getting robbed still isn't OK.
But being robbed, even at gunpoint, is different than being sexually assaulted or raped. And most rapes don't happen in bad areas late at night by random strangers. Most rapes are people the victim knows. That's what makes questions about "what you were wearing" and "did you lead him on" even more offensive.
> the first kind of questions are things like what time of night and did you go to the slums etc. If the answers are yes I'm called a dumbass and told not to do it again
Your wife can imply you are to blame because as far as you two are concerned the robbers are force of nature. It's good for preserving personal sanity, but not when this logic is applied in public or by authorities and can influence public opinion or policy. Are they force of nature? Or perhaps something we can or even should deal with? If you want robbers to go away, normalizing them is the worst thing you could do.
You don't need to give that advice to women. They've already gotten it, almost certainly from other women.
Given how women are often treated by men, I totally understand why they would chafe at being given this sort of advice from a man. I would, too, if I were in their shoes.
Apparently there are a lot of men who haven't received this advice from anyone, though, even though it always applied to them as well.
I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, because "provenance" literally means "where it came from", so by definition it changes according to who is giving the advice.
I assume that you mean something more like "how good the advice is". And you're right. But that's not the point.
The point is that most women are constantly being told how they should or should not be by men, usually in a way that is treating them as if they were children. So when they are unnecessarily instructed by men about how to be safer in world where it's mostly men that makes it dangerous for them, I totally understand why that might be irritating.
No matter what the message is, who gives it is often the primary thing that determines how it will be received.
I am saying that it is ad-hominem fallacy to say that advice (aka arguments) are any less valid based on their provenance, or as you put it “where it came from” (and of course, who it came from).
There isnt a double standard - people say those things you quote when they are given basic safety tips as a response to being sexually assaulted, which is absurd and humiliating and very clearly puts the onus of responsibility on the victim.
Obviously no one should have to be so careful. We should aspire to have a society where all people are safe from crime. But this is the reality of the world right now, and it is helpful to suggest that men take a page from women's playbooks when it comes to personal safety.
This advice is given all the damn time. You've never seen an article about how to be safe on blind dates or such? A quick google search turns up several.
Is it that women's problems are invisible to you until men start having some of them?
You're absolutely right. Just as we should be teaching boys not to assault women, we should be teaching girls not to drug and rob men.
That doesn't seem to be as big a problem yet, but we should nip it in the bud before it spreads beyond São Paulo. Every parent should teach their daughters that robbing men is wrong. Just as every parent should be teaching their sons that raping women is wrong.
There is no excuse. Whether he's wearing a Rolex, or she's wearing a miniskirt, that's their choice to make. It is not an invitation, and you are not entitled to anything.
Rape is a crime, and robbery is a crime. We should prosecute both, and make sure our children get the message that it is unacceptable.
I appreciate your reminder that the criminal, not the victim, is to blame. It's unfortunate that people do have to protect themselves, but I hadn't intended my advice to suggest that that's the only change we should make. We already have laws and must enforce them.
Unfortunately, this is a real problem for women. A lot of boys get the impression that women are "teasing" them and "deserve" to be assaulted. Every woman who files rape charges knows that she's going to have her sexual history questioned, and be asked what she was wearing, as if that made a difference to the legality.
You wouldn't think that "No means no" is a lesson we'd have to teach, but not only do we have to, but a lot of people will push back on it.
So I'm being a bit facetious in my reply, but I'm using the opportunity of the OP's self-pity to reiterate: this is a thing that women go through all the time.
One example: watch some 80s movies again. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom stands out. Indy forces a kiss on a woman and it is seen as romantic -- she says no but wants it. A lot of messaging like this is just accepted and we never think about it. But when you realize it, it happened a lot.
You don't think that a lot of men think that women who dress or behave a certain way are teases that deserve "what they get"? You're the one in a dream world, mate.
The Grievance Industry and Woke Studies courses really try hard to make it seem that men are these evil brutes, but the vast, vast majority are conscientious people.
But theres a minority that is not, and is that minority the one that drives these bad altercations and therefore bad outcomes like these are the ones that lead the risk assessment for women. And this will keep happening irregardless of how conscientious the majority is. Because this issue is not about the majority, but the minority
Why wash and rinse the normative majority's brains with this info then? They have no levers to pull and the minority of perpetrators won't mind these ramblings anyway.
> Why wash and rinse the normative majority's brains with this info then?
Because that minority group can be groomed from childhood to not behave in such a way via strong social norms, and therefore reduced in size to an even smaller minority. Likely will never disappear entirely, but achievable goals are better than idealistic perceptions never applied
A lot of men think that the people they rob or stab "deserve what they" get as well. Telling these people that robbing or stabbing people is wrong wont help, since that isn't the problem, the just say "deserve what you get" because they know what they are doing is wrong.
"A lot" might be anecdotal, but my observations of heteros doesn't really seem like the number of a lot. Maybe more than zero, because in an ideal world it would be zero.
There is no conversation, however, on the physical violence regularly suffered by men. Or the tells/behaviours that we adopt to avoid such things happening when we can. Men are the victims of the most crime, but because of a small subset of us we are also the perpetrators of most crime. Everyone focuses on the latter, ignoring the former.
I would wager it’s popular any place where you have a large number of tourists who think its easy to pick up local girls because they have more money than the locals.
The highest risk cities are Medellin (high expat population) and Cartagena (high tourist population). No matter how much I tell my friends not to use Tinder in Latin America, they still try and end up in close calls. One friend ended up in a 'Millionaire's Ride' extortioned to buy overpriced cocaine.
Going to Colombia in a week. Not planning on dating around, but do you have any other tips for staying safe as a solo traveller? Not trying to end up at the bottom of a well.
One universal advice is that if you're not looking for drugs or sex work, the chances of ending up 'in a well' are very low. While acclimating, I recommend Uber over taxis; you can call taxis on the Uber app, too. If you want to get out of the cities, the bus network is actually quite safe. If you want a private/trusted driver for a group, you can get foreigner rates by asking your hotel or better rates by straight up asking an Uber driver if they're willing to do off-platform service for cash.
I've built a network of 3 trusted drivers for trips outside Bogota, two from Uber XL and one from chatting with a driver at a museum.
Other universal tips are to keep in mind that starter phones in the US/EU are luxury phones in Colombia. I would recommend being alert of your surrounding when using a phone in cities like Medellin, Cali, and Cartagena. In Bogota, mostly be careful around major arterial roads: a common way to lose a phone are motorcycle bandits when you are close to the road. Especially iPhones, they really stand out compared to the Android models that are common in Latin America.
Other universal tips is that, Cartagena aside, most Colombian cities are early to wake and early to sleep/go home. Sunrise and sunset are very stable year round, and locals prefer to be out and about in daylight -- daylight is waaaay safer than night time. Day time in some Bogota barrios feels like Spain; night time gets edgy.
Here's a post I made on /r/solotravelers specifically about Colombia:
Thanks for all the tips and the linked thread! Lot of good info there. I’m flying into Bogota and will be spending some time there as well as Los Llanos and the coffee regions, probably Medellin as well. I might try to make it up to Cartagena area, I’ve heard of a neat seeming “lost city” multi-day backpacking tour.
Metaphorically! Safety is on everyone's mind, but in reality food poisoning is a likelier risk. And there's concrete steps to avoid it, like BisBacter, Smecta, imodium, bottled water, and being thoughtful about how you ease into foods. The difference in food safety and water quality in Bogota is very different from small villages in Antioquia.
If you think you shouldn't be drinking a fruit juice, then you probably shouldn't! You can fulfill the craving with fresh fruit... for my fruit-loving friends, check out Paloquemao market in Bogota.
On the contrary to Brazil and Mexico (for example) the good news in Colombia is that people fight back. They don't like crime and so, if they see someone being robbed, they assault the robber. So just stay in the populated areas and you'll be fine. In Mexico and Brazil people turn their heads around and you're on your own...
I have a video of a brazilian bystander deciding to mess up a crime in progress by kicking an armed teenager in the leg and knocking him down. Teenager got up and executed him in cold blood for the insult, then resumed whatever he was doing.
Been living in Medellín for 3 years now. If you don't go out of your way looking for drugs/sex, you'll be fine. Most people getting in some form of trouble go above and beyond looking for both.
Pix is not an app but a platform (like INTERAC in Canada). It works with most banks and most people with bank account now have it.
Not only that, it is not just a QR app. You can send money to any key, that can be:
- An email
- CPF (unique SIN / SSN number that in Brazil is not considered secret)
- Telephone number
- Randomly generated key
The transactions are also, for the most part, instantaneous (think 1-2 seconds) and irreversible (as far as I know).
Even if you only have in your phone apps for banks without a Pix key, it is trivial and fast to create one. Unfortunately the only way out of this is to never have on your phone a bank app (and they can even force you to download one on the spot if you are actually kidnapped).
Also, from someone who was carjacked in the past in Brazil: this has always happened here. I think it is simply the delivery method that is changing. Unfortunately, ban those apps and the bad guys will just go back to randomly kidnapping / carjacking people on the streets of rich neighbourhoods like they did in the past.
Agree with your comments, but as a Brazilian too, I feel the need to emphasize that although this kind of thing happens, it’s not that high of a risk that it will happen to you. I’m from Rio and personally don’t know anybody who has suffered such crime. I felt like adding this comment because “this has always happened here” could be interpreted as “this happens all the time to a lot of people”.
I've been robbed 8 times in 30 years in Brazil. From having my watch stolen at 14 by someone with a broken glass to the carjack I talked about previously. My family and close friends, for the most part, have been robbed, kidnapped or carjacked 0 times.
It is a numbers game. I, unfortunately, have been on the unlucky side. It is one of the main reasons I left for Canada.
So while I do agree that is not something that happens every day to your circle of known people, it does happen more often than it should even if you are not on the high crime zones.
And I'm not even from Rio or the most dangerous cities, I'm from Belo Horizonte which, for Brazilian standards, is actually considered more on the safer side for bigger cities.
>> It is one of the main reasons I left for Canada.
... where we have to remind people not to leaving their running, unlocked cars unattended or they might get stolen. Must have been quite a change for you!
Here in Rio already happened before by using ATMs in far away places to withdraw cash, and using credit card machines from "laranjas", people that is hard to trace, usually without their consent.
Nothing new. Didn't increased. São Paulo cases are a novelty because it's really a "well" thought/planned method with specific personas to attack. It's not just a random person in the streets.
And it shows that men are as fragile as women in these emotional tricks. (and we should understand them better as part of this increased awareness)
This varies a lot depending on where you live and your routine. If you’re middle class, lives in a nice neighbourhood and go out into posh areas, the risk is really really low.
This is why this Tinder scam is extra dangerous, as it’s baiting men to go alone to a non public location to meet an unknown woman.
Do they not have Reg E and KYC in Brazil? Seems like taking a ransom by electronic payment should lead to very fast arrest when you try to move the money from that account.
They do and this and PIX payments are discussed in the article. Unfortunately with PIX and like with everything else enforcement is a snail pace compared to the move of the funds. You might get a money mole but you don't stop the underlying crime.
The person that received the money has some days (7 I think) to send money back with 1 button click on the his Bank App without knowing the account details it needs to send back.
So yeah, you need to contact the person on the other side.
Out of all the dating apps Tinder has done the absolute bare minimum to ensure the safety of its members.
The number of active fake profiles on there in large metropolitan areas is mind boggling. They've known this for years and done absolutely nothing to address it. I imagine it would affect the numbers significantly. I have completely given up on the app given the % of fake users who are there to take advantage of someone's loneliness.
I'm fairly convinced if tinder actually killed fake profiles it would go bankrupt. Not in terms of total user count, but in terms of female user count.
It's already basically a meme to talk about the horrible m/f ratio. The number floating around of 20% female doesn't take into account the high population of "don't respond to messages here, if you're hot hmu on my OF" profiles, which is about one in four profiles here.
But moreover the number of crypto scammers is extremely high. At one point I had like eight reading the same script to me on the same day. And tinder actually makes it so you can't report them, seemingly going out of its way to protect this revenue stream.
I have never used any app with more dark patterns than Tinder. It is the worst offender out there - and from that experience alone, I would not count on them caring too much about their users otherwise.
It is simply a tool to funnel as much money as possible from desperate people.
Normie dating apps are horrific for being absolutely loaded with the worst dark patterns combined with the worst userbases. The only one I have used which wasn't terrible is Barq which is like tinder+grindr for furries. No paid subscriptions, no cypto chud scammers, no only fans thots, no fake profiles, pretty much everyone is friendly and will chat.
It's a lot of things crammed in to one app. But they have features for filtering people by age, gender, sexuality, relationship status, and kinks.
It would be normal usage to use it to find new local friends, finding dates, or just finding people to have sex with. Normally people spell out what they are looking for on their profile.
Barq is pretty good, have seen a few bots on there but the thing is us furries as a target we're not really any sort of payoff - furries are mostly hip to any sort of scammy behaviour etc anyway and it's also really hard to make a bot that can masquerade as a furry vs "wot up bb click 2 see my boob pic" with a chick profile pic.
But yeah it is kind of an eclectic mix of socials/dating/hookups. Not perfect, but so much better than howlr was.
> “If I am 51 and she is 23, how can I not think I am being catfished for a possible robbery?”
The man makes a fair point. Personally, I don't go on a date unless I am convinced this person and I have some things in common and would actually have a good time hanging out. If one party is worried, they can ask for a phone call/video chat or to exchange social media. I have a feeling many men are far less discerning and are simply "swiping right" on everyone and then engage with any of the resulting "matches" that give them the time of day.
> I don't go on a date unless I am convinced this person and I have some things in common and would actually have a good time hanging out. If one party is worried, they can ask for a phone call/video chat or to exchange social media.
In a balanced environment this would work. Dating, apartment rental, and job search markets notoriously aren't balanced environments.
> men are far less discerning and are simply "swiping right" on everyone and then engage with any of the resulting "matches" that give them the time of day.
This here is the reality. It doesn't matter what you want and feel.
For many men, the intention of dating is sex. They are willing, if they must, to perform romance along the way; but that is a compromise, not a goal. The romance may become genuine in practice, but that still doesn't make it an explicit goal.
This is the side-effect of a cultural narrative that pretends sex and romance to be one and the same.
In St. Petersburg, Russia, there was reportedly a restaurant where a fake date would invite men and then quote them exorbitant sum (order of magnitude higher than expected) for food and drink.
All the profits, none of the risks of criminal persecution.
Russian has a slang word, dynamo, for the attractive women who date without romantic interest just to get dined & maybe some presents, and then bail out.
It's very common scam and not only in Russia. A woman splits the profits with the restaurant that charges the naive Western tourists 10x of normal bill(actually it can be without a woman trap involvment). The same can happen with a clothing store. Some guys can spend like $1000 on woman's clothes which she promptly returns and gets part of her share.
Heck even on Greek islands, many clubs had attractive ladies on payrol to get the guys in and buy drinks.
The easiest rule of thumb while traveling is that if you're the one who is approached(or, if there is a situation that is engineered to have you approach someone), you're what's for dinner.
So what do you do to eat while traveling, since cafes and grocery stores have you approaching a server or cashier to get food? How do you get around town? Until we have self driving cars, Taxis/Uber require approaching a person (via an app that's very much engineered to have you approach the driver). Do you just sit at the airport (because the hotel experience is engineered to have your approach the reception desk where there's a person) until it's time to leave? I guess you can avoid a person at newer hotels and some Airbnb's, but what a weird way to travel!
For airports specifically, look for an official taxi stand with an attendant. I flew into Santiago about 15 years ago to spend a month in Chile and didn't think twice about being scammed. Everything I read said that Chile and (modulo city life) Santiago had and still has relatively low prevalence of crime and corruption, by any standard. While I'm always wary of pick pockets and other random street crime, some places you tend not to worry about organized or systematic criminal rackets wrt mundane activities. So I just jumped into a cab at the airport without looking for a taxi stand.
Recently I came across a forum where people were discussing a supposedly well-known and long-time scam at the Santiago airport involving taxis picking people up and extorting money. So perhaps I dodged a bullet (or an adventure) at the Santiago airport. Of course, there's no guarantee an attendant wouldn't be in on the scam, but the goal here is reasonable risk minimization, otherwise your only real option is to hunker down in some Japanese or Swiss suburb.
This is good advice but I fear it's only a matter of time before scammers realize this and turn up as dates that are quite believable similar to your average Joe/Jane.
I wondered the origin such places in Poland, that's how they arrived! Meanwhile it's mafia covered by local police and politicians, importing the best capitalist practices. Prague in Czechia is also notorious for these kind of places.
The difference is they sell alcoholic beverages, in some cases to the extreme. In Wrocław there was a case of a Turkish dude that died of alcohol poisoning in one these establishments. The staff was charged with murder.
I get regularly approached to “go have fun” and it is so annoying. On the other hand I had reports of people having a good time.
By the way the us embassy in Warsaw has a security alert on the topic.
The only time the problem receives publicity and the victim receives minimum empathy is when a foreigner gets extorted, mugged, or murdered there. The mindset in Poland is "if a man desires sex, he deserves extortion and beating".
I think this is true in lots of places. Actually I cannot think of a society where this is not true. That is just one more reason for legalisation of sex work. I do not expect it in Poland though but that is the way of the land.
I have heard variations of this scam in other places around the world. I think it's sadly a somewhat common scam.
Either a fake date or someone in front of the café or bar leads you in. You have a few drinks and are subsequently presented with an outrageous bill, and a few burly men have appeared out of nowhere preventing you from leaving. Police don't really care since you're just a foreigner.
Abroad in Japan (a great YouTube channel about Japan) recently made a good video on the topic: https://youtu.be/NeZUOFKOUeI
They do (did?) that all the time in Poland. Hot girls will act extremely interested, while insisting on you doing shots with them. The dude then passes out (from spiked drinks), and is brought to the backroom where the staff is going through his cards, making exorbitant purchases from the joint.
I've seen it as "get into a seedy bar, have women chat you up and ask whether they can join you for a drink, get presented a huge bill", but women going on dating apps to get men to the bars is a different level. It makes sense obviously, digitalization doesn't stop at scams.
Male profiles have negative value for dating apps, so it's better for a man to ignore fishy profiles than to report them with any negative feedback and risk a nuclear ban. Can we shred the Match group into pieces, please?
Not true. Paying account is quite obvious from the female perspective. Sooner you'll be a target for scammers and gold diggers, at best Instagram and OnlyFans influencers will reach out to you more aggressively.
Sort of anecdotal but I now know two people who have been mugged on Grindr in London, one person had their new iPhone taken, and the other one their PS5 from their home, I would stress this advice, always meet someone for a coffee first somewhere busy and public before going somewhere private.
There is a scam that I've heard of in India with these kind of dates though not as serious. You get a woman who is eager to meet up. You meet up and she takes you to an expensive place to eat and then a particular 'hotel' for after dinner. The 'hotel' charges a bit more than you'd expect but well you really want to go ahead by then. She gets a cut of the food and hotel charges.
Yup, same can happen to gay guys on gay dating/hookup apps. That's why I always meet in a public place, but even then you're still gambling.
But tbh aren't we also gambling by leaving our houses? Sao Paulo afaik is famous for crime/kidnappings/all sorts of bad crap. The criminals are just using Tinder as a tool today, tomorrow they might use whatever else is popular/effective.
When I was in Cyprus on business I got separated from my group who were walking ahead, we were in the strip/club district ofc bc most of 'em are straight.
I wandered past a strip club to catch up with the group and this chick grabbed my arm super hard and tried to drag me into the club, told her I was gay & uninterested and her response was "that doesn't matter". Bouncer at the door was just laughing at me. Managed to get away, but if I was the one that had walked up and grabbed her arm nice & hard I would've been been put on the fucking ground.
Everything seems trivial when you trivialize the problem. Sao Paulo has an extremely high crime and violence rate aside from any dating app kidnappings. The city and country's problems extend far beyond dating apps and redirecting resources from other violent crimes to "stinging" all the bad actors on dating apps won't magically solve things for them or even reduce their overall violent crimes with their resources shifted. They've no doubt already caught multiple people performing these kinds of kidnappings, but it's just a drop in the bucket.
I wonder if this could be solved with a properly run NGO that works internationally with law enforcement in the most dangerous countries to setup these stings while doing most of the heavy lifting, so police can focus on the rest of their problems and just show up to arrest the sting targets. This is also the sort of problem that could get easier to deal with over time, like a pile of dirty dishes.
The idea of a sting for kidnappers is like a reverse double catfish, which seems a lot more dangerous than a regular catfish like Chris Hansen might use. One difference is that there's no question of the intent of the kidnapper, since you can't categorize them as one until they _actually try to kidnap someone_. It's not like they tell you on Tinder that they're going to take your wallet and condoms before throwing you in a well (or even that you're talking to a catfish). Whereas a "pedo sting" can (sometimes controversially) label someone a "pedo" as soon as they agree to meet up with an underage decoy; there's no need to physically interact with them to elicit evidence of their guilt, unless you're Chris Hansen and/or need to film it for your vigilante YouTube channel.
That difference alone is enough reason to make amateur vigilante groups a bad idea in the context of "reverse catfishing" violent criminals (not that I wouldn't watch some of these YouTube "pedo hunters" use themselves as cartel bait). And perhaps it makes it too dangerous for even an NGO. But I suspect a dedicated team of a few hundred professionals could make a difference.
Sure, and instead of wasting billions every year busting low-level drug dealers our governments could be going after spousal abusers and date-rapists and setting up stings for sexual assaults in high-crime areas. You know, crimes with actual victims.
But preventing violence against women has always been among the lowest priorities for law enforcement. So naturally, sexual violence against men, which is far rarer, is even farther off the radar. But of course we gotta stop those pesky drugs users and small-time peddlers at any cost!
Idk man recently there have been calls in the UK as to "what is the police/government doing to help with violence against women"
But there has never been a call for me; the short guy targeted at bars/clubs because I'm an "easy" target. Male on male violence is the highest and it's just completely ignored for "boys will be boys". Men can read the aggression & will naturally cower/back off because we know we'll get hit, I've seen women at clubs being mouthy, pushy aggressive towards dudes bc they know their chance of being hit is so low.
Not dismissing violence against women, just sad that even after some form of enlightenment where the police actually help women, I'll still be out here trying not to get into altercations with drunk assholes.
Re-read what the person wrote; this time take from it that the writer is saying 'it isn't going to happen because law enforcement have their priorities misaligned.'
For example dating app can require background security check in order to register and use the app. Sounds like a good business idea. Somebody do it....I have other ideas that I work on.
I'm just throwing ideas around but I thought about it for some time; with background security checks you could create a dating app or shall I see dating environment for upper-class "elite" people to date, something like European aristocracy did back in the day. For example on top of checking their background for criminal past you could also check their ancestry, their monthly income, their wealth etc. or in another words their social status/class. I like to play video games and every time when I think about software ideas I tend to compare them to video games and dating apps remind me of Crusader Kings or something like that.
Interesting. Sounds like they have implemented it in the worse possible way. ( for the consumer ). The user is charged to request a background check, requiring the name, phone number, and sometimes more info. Sounds like it would be easy to scam, and let’s match blame the victims who didn’t pay for the service.
Rule number one of Jiu Jitsu = run/avoid getting into a fight in the first place. It's actually bad with multiple attackers because most likely you'll end up getting stomped on by the others.
The General Social Survey found that "the portion of Americans 18 to 29 reporting no sex in the past year more than doubled between 2008 and 2018, to 23 percent."
23% in 2018. It was about ~35% or so in 2022 IIRC.
And then you have to also factor in that men tend to lie a bit on these surveys.
Also factor in that it's only asking if they got laid in the past 1 year. Do it 6 months, and the figure shoots way up. IMHO, the time gap should be no more than a month or so. That would define real incels. 1 year is way too much.
