Aside from king_jester's good point, he doesn't even follow that CYA in the guide. The other (more offensive, IMO) passage that people are in an uproar about is when he talks about how even when she rejects your touching or rubbing her when you first meet, she's actually secretly getting turned on, and that you should continue.
> when he talks about how even when she rejects your touching or rubbing her when you first meet
He suggests no such thing. He writes about having been on several dates and now you’re alone with her and you’re expected to escalate. His gives some suggestions how to do so, to make it more physical:
“Be playful. Spin her around. Pick her up. Push her away as a tease and then pull her back in. Decide that you're going to sit in a position where you can rub her leg and back. Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap.”
Only then does he write: “Don't ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.”
In other words: try something, see what she will allow. She’s definitely going to tell you what she doesn’t want when you try it, but it’s very unlikely that she’s going to tell you what she wants before you try it.
Every woman you flirt with. Touch them immediately. Be shameless in your physicality. When a girl rejects your advances, she knows that you desire her, and it arouses her physically and psychologically.
Stop trying to evade what the quote says and trying to find some legalistic way of misreading its plain meaning.
I hate to break it to you, but humans (and animals!) value touch very, very much. Flirting without touching is not as effective at creating a bond. Generally, I'd say this advice is fairly sound, if your goal is to make another human being feel more connected to you. But of course, touching someone when they aren't interested does not create a bond, because they weren't interested in the first place.
So yeah, if your goal is play it safe for fear of lawsuits, offense, or rejections, then by all means, do not initiate any physical contact. Expect to be forgettable and for people to tell you "they just didn't feel that spark."
The project doesn't say touch is good, it associates that any time you touch a woman and she rejects that advance or tries to distance herself, she is actually just really aroused and should totally keep going. That is: IGNORE WOMEN'S OBJECTIONS TO YOUR VIOLATING OF THEIR SPACE, CONTINUE TO VIOLATE THEIR SPACE. This is literally the mindset of rapists.
Nothing of the sort was written. The text in question:
“Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That's hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.”
Which may or may not be true, but nowhere did the author suggest to the reader that he should carry on after the girl objects. He strongly advises against it.
That kind of statement serves as a justification for action even if someone objects to what you did. This is literally the kind of thing rapists say about the sexual assaults they committed.
A thief will say he stole a Rolex because he wanted it. That’s the same motivation as someone who buys the watch in a store, and yet, the two are not the same.
The difference between a rapist and a date is that one stops after you told him/her to stop, and the other doesn’t.
I don’t know what you think ‘touching’ entails, but I think you’re reading too much into it. He didn’t write “Every woman you meet, grab her crotch!’. If you touch someone’s shoulder, that hardly qualifies as sexual harassment.
