An appeal to logic

Susan Walsh makes a good case for women to reject a certain type of man if she's looking for a relationship, but her advice is rendered somewhat hollow by flying in the face of the realities of Game:

If your objective is a long-term relationship or marriage, the implication of these findings is clear. Reject any potential partner who has cultivated a habit of engaging in casual sex. (There really aren’t that many of them anyway.) Whether they were damaged goods before or after the sex is immaterial, as the negative psychological outcome is the same. And if they somehow can have casual sex without feelings of anxiety of regret? Those are the most unsuitable partners of all, as they lack the capacity for healthy emotional responses and relationships (see Dark Triad).

I'm not arguing with her reasoning in the slightest.  However, it nevertheless comes off as trying to convince freshman women to not order pizza late at night in the dorm room.  There isn't a college woman alive who doesn't know that scarfing pizza is going to make her pack on the pounds, and yet, there are observably few who are capable of resisting the temptation.

Alphas and Sigmas are intrinsically desirable to women and the unsuitable Dark Triad men are like walking, talking catnip to them.  It's fine to tell women to keep them at a distance, but that's not going to make them any less attractive late at night when the phone rings.  To a certain extent, this is like telling men who want to pursue relationships that they should simply pursue plainer women.  That might be true, but it's going to be a hard pill to swallow.