Yeah there is hypocrisy here. Effectively, if you're wealthy you can fly in escorts from around the world, brag about it at work (I have one colleague who loves talking about the 'favor' he does these girls), source quality pepsi, do anything you want. And you'll never be "caught" or "prosecuted" really.

The focus normally is on the trafficking rings themselves. Especially with this push to "respect"/legalize sex work.

I'd be for brothels, far away from any schools or the like. Way out in the boonies - not to be "normalized" in city life. I'm also not for red light districts in cities - kids should never be exposed to it.

You’ve got it backwards imo. How is there NOT any truth to it? It’s pretty self-evident when you look at what’s going on in the West.

Lose your job and see how long your wife sticks it out with you. Money is the leading cause of divorce, its higher than infidelity. 50% divorce rate, women filing for the vast majority of them...either a lot of gold diggers out there or a lot of delusional men who think women approach this chit like its a disney movie

Posts like these don't track any data, or the real world, except that women file for more divorces than men do.

Note:

"The predominant role of women in wanting divorce in heterosexual marriages is a gender-specific phenomenon that has been observed across historical time in the US, and across many countries but which has never been satisfactorily explained. In this paper, for the first time, I compare the gender of breakup in marriages to the gender of breakup in nonmarital heterosexual unions. I show that women’s tendency to want divorce is not inherent to women’s relationships with men. In nonmarital heterosexual relationships, men and women are equally likely to want to break up."

https://bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites....akup-paper.pdf

I post this paper in threads on marriage/divorce, yet some folks are so desperate to adhere to factually incorrect elements that one wonders what motivates that, srs.

It makes them feel good. Instead of trying to improve themselves they try justifying it by saying you pay either way... It then creates crazy expectations that they deserve a girl that treats them like a king plus they also think they deserve a highly attractive girl now cause they only slept with hookers that are attractive.

"Backwards" == claiming X is the case without any data proving it, then claiming that the person who doesn't see the reasoning fails to see what is "self-evident".

Sorry but just because they have jobs and even earn more money doesn't mean they still aren't interested in taking yours from you.

If your employer comes along and offers you a raise do you just say no thanks because you're already earning good money? LMAO at this logic. Women are still trading sex for whatever resources they can take from you at the end of the day. Imagine thinking it's about "needing" you. You've missed the point of the transaction entirely which is not surprising at all.

I had to take my buddy to court in Columbia, Missouri we were chilling in one of the hotel rooms and he was scouring for escorts. He found one that had a friend and would be down to meet up with both us. It sounded fun then I realized that paying for women while they just lay there and watch the clock sounds terrible. I ended up letting him take my truck and go have fun while I sat on the patio smoking a cigar

There's no logic in your post - no reasoning. Merely an assumption that women (and it seems, men too) only look at relationships from a "resource acquisition" perspective.

Your example makes no sense, unsurprisingly: you are paid to work. When you're in college banging girls left and right - what is that? Was the resource my sexual prowess? Or when does the money grubbing kick in for women?

Exactly - boy must your face be red, LOL.

How was he, afterward? I get the feeling these guys have never fu*ked a woman who had a legit orgasm. So when they're pounding away and the woman's just going "yes baby, yes baby" every 10 seconds they feel like kings among men.

Ugh, lol.

He’s a really close friend damn near brother. He was always smashing girls in Buffalo, he just didn’t know what was gonna happen with his court so he wanted one last time just in case. He was only gone for like 45 min though because I still had a little bit of cigar left. I’m sure he had good time wasn’t gonna dig too deep into details lol the escorts were hot

So whats your reasoning then for why theres an exchange at all?

Its not anything automatic that whimsically happens just because. If you were two statues being completely autonomous then youd stay separated for perpetuity.. so why then is there movement between the two?

I feel like your problem here is "resource" or a specific resource but bottom line is theres something to be gained by making the movement

And thats the cost/ benefit people are talking about.

Anyways, whats your reasoning as to why you had all those women in college? Ultimate chemistry? Is your wife ultimate chemistry?

I guess youre just a big chemical ball for most women? And even in that big chemical ball all reactions and exchanges are neutral and "just because"

I dont think a mutual relationship has to mean its split 50/50 but that theres an equitable give and take.

Are you new to life? Everything is a transaction. No one just wants to be with you unconditionally. Absolutely all of it is conditional.

We don't even need to limit this to romantic relationships. You actually think your friends care about you unconditionally? F*ck no they are getting something from you too. But going back to romantic relationships who do you think values sex more, men or women? Spoiler... it's not women. All this crap about women like sex too is great and all and not totally incorrect but men like sex more. THe party that wants something more from the other party is going to have to "give" something else in return to make the relationship worthwhile to the other party.

So to summarize, women needs something in return from men when you give them sex. I don't give a f*ck what you want that thing to be. It can be money or security or entertainment. I really don't give a f*ck. Sex is their commodity to sell to you for something you can give to them.

Trust me, I don't care how much of a Casanova you think you are women aren't with you because of the sex you give them. You're in state of delusion. If you don't believe me though go ahead and try to withhold sex from your girlfriend or wife in exchange for something you want them to do. They will laugh at you because sex is not yours to offer. They will just not have sex with you if you try to pull it from the table. In fact, they might just go and have sex with someone else if they do want it because it's that easy for them to have it. It's theirs to offer plain and simple.

Actually since this is such a hard concept for you to grasp LogicalLifts (and anyone else against prostitution) let me try another approach.

Imagine you're in the gym and a cute girl comes up to you and says she will suck your dick if you give a her a spot on her lifts. Are you gonna tell her no? If so you're a f*g. In this case you're not trading money, but instead your strength to spot her, and in return get your dick sucked. Any man that turns that offer down from a girl he thinks is cute is a straight up gay ph aggot tell me different.

logicaldoesntlift is a fkn retard confirmed

mogged in your own thread

Well obviously they’re banging you because they’re attracted to you. The important question is: why?

One possible explanation is status, which is a very good proxy for resources.

Sounds wild, hope he's okay now.You're overcomplicating things. There is no parallel between CopeFear (hi - LOL) paying some fat asian woman in a rub n tug to jerk him off, and a guy's girlfriend jerking him off. One is a "relationship" and the other is a "transaction".

If you think relationships are purely transactional, then we'll have to agree to disagree. That's the mantra of the 'all guys pay for sex somehow [so paying prostitutes is the same as having a happy marriage]'.

No, they DO track data and thats the point. The people writing papers like that are desperate to try and paint a different picture, because they believe that it paints women in negative light. So they are cherry picking, and then rely on people like you to swallow it whole because it allows you to all continue living in dreamland.

See the difference between men like you and men like me, is that I accept Gods natural given order and I accept that women are the way they are. There is nothing wrong with women expecting their men to provide for them. That is your job as a man. In exchange for security and resources, you get sex and children. Everything else that builds around that is an additional benefit. It has been this way forever and modern relationships the way they are today have never been the norm, and wont be the norm for long because they defy the natural order. Its on borrowed time.

This is why you are seeing so many incels now, because with sexual liberation women are forming into natural harems again.

Understand this and internalize this. If you are not providing for your woman and family, its the equivalent of her no longer having sex with you or taking care of the kids. You are not doing your duty as a man, and that one will sting a lot of peoples egos because their wives have to work.

The VAST MAJORITY of men who frequent hookers are MARRIED. They are not using hookers as a substitute for a relationship. They are men in sexless marriages where their wives have abandoned their responsibilities, but there are also many who just need the variety because they are hard wired for it. You inability to provide for her will result in her leaving you if she has any self esteem at all and thinks jumping to someone else will provide her with what she needs.

Money matters to women like sex matters to you. Accept this.

You seem to be confused on a number of fronts, like that other poster who wrote that I'm "against prostitution", although ITT alone I have said I am not necessarily against it, I just wonder why some Miscers (continue to) glorify it.

You didn't read the paper that I posted, sadly, or you wouldn't just dismiss it as you did. The fact of the matter is that women initiate divorces at higher rates and have since before legislation even benefitted them, so this isn't necessarily about money. At times it is, of course, but it isn't necessarily the case. Many women outearn men in cities and have for decades, and have graduated at higher rates in HS and college too - for decades.

That's why you're seeing so many Zoomer virgins: they don't participate in the work force, are relatively poorly educated, and still live with their parents. 2 of those 3 have severe impacts on the chances of getting laid.

But your severe mistake is that you equivocate money with sex - this is a thread about the glorification of prostitution, recall that and keep that in mind when posting ITT. You're writing essays trying to reduce a woman's potential desire in a man to "money". And it's a nonsensical position - one you can't argue for, simply state over and over again that it's true.

And if that's your life experience - that every woman around you or that you have ever met is a money grubbing (whore) - that says a lot about you and your socioeconomic status / social circles. Not about the world. Get it in your head - people aren't a monolith.

The issue here is that you refuse to accept human nature and you want to try and reframe it along the lines of some modern political ideology that is at complete odds with what we are as humans. You are trying to have some sort of weird philosophical argument and in the process have setup this dumb strawman, and you are doing this because you are uncomfortable with the fact that women are mercenary. You view that as a problem, but its an idealistic and quite frankly childish view for you to have. There is nothing wrong with women, this is how they are.

You cant even really seem to put two and two together though. You cite examples of women outperforming men, to the point where they are outperforming them as potential mates and as a result no longer want to date these "zoomer losers". So right there, in your own retarded way, you have just confirmed that women date and marry up, which means they want men who can provide more resources for them than they can provide for themselves. Otherwise they ignore these men.

So if women did not care about money and your ability to provide, then why the phuck do they care about your job, your income or the house you live in? Or are those things markers of success because it shows that you can provide for her and your kids better than the jobless zoomer?

The reality here is that you are a insecure weakling who cannot seem to accept that the world is a specific way, and rather than just accepting it and finding your place in it you would rather try and convince yourself and others that your reality is somehow different because you are not measuring up.

Your entire view of this is Soycuck 101, you go through life trying to please women and appealing to them, which would disgust them. I would hate to see what you actually phuck if you even do, although you are going to swear blind there is an endless parade of women in and out of your life no doubt Im sure.

Two good arguments for legalization would be the decreased role of pimps exploiting the women and the decrease in the spread of disease.

miscers make threads non stop about how you need to be top 1% of guys to get laid

also miscers: guys shouldn't pay for sex


of course when there's ever one of these threads there's a vid of some crackwhore with a bunch of sob stories about her pimp beating her


we're not talking about these street corner skanks when we say we fuk escorts

these girls are making $10k-$20k a week easy, you know what that is in a year? do the math



i fuk them regularly. it saves me time and effort, and a whole lot of headaches of going on tinder etc

nothing beats the convenience. here's the money. fuk. leave. done.


i'm 38, i don't want to get married, wtf do you want me to do, go to bars by myself every weekend?


if i don't fuk hookers and put in a ton of effort i might fuk 3 or 4 girls in a year. that's not enough.

sorry we can't all be like you gigachad studs banging "2 to 3 girls every week"


other than ibby no one is glorifying it either, some of us choose to do it, i don't give a fuk about what any of you do, dunno why anyone would care what I or others do

this is coming from someone who doesn't live in the us

I don't "look down on it" in of itself, but yeah...anyone who "glorifies it" or the like (regularly engages in it/whatever) is really lame, imo.

I was in the Navy and also lived in San Diego for several years (so me and some bros definitely made some Tijuana trips) and so...I've procured some whores in the past. Not something I much cared for though, tbh. Something about the very blatant/upfront business transaction nature of it, even if they're smoking hot (and there are a lot of really hot ones in TJ if you go to the right places), is just a real mood killer for me.I have no idea if it's actually true, but I know I've read that legalized prostitution actually increases trafficking.

That you believe all relationships are transactional in nature shows how jaded and embittered you are. But your personal trauma isn't indicative of the world around you, which is exactly why (this should be obvious) a happy marriage is a far better result than regularly visiting whores.

And that you think men only ever attract women if they "provide more resources" I mean - ugh. It says a lot about the women you're exposed to, I suppose even your own mother. Sad.

I honestly find it more lame

For guys to want to aspire for some grandiose chit while still getting the same "whores"

HOWEVER, if a woman is truly good then i dont think its lame

A guy like matty or nonsense clearly paid significantly MORE for poosy when they either or juiced, spend all time working out, cultivate social media profiles, spend thousands of dollars on facial reconstructive surgery and or hair transplants

Then.. pretend like they dont. WHILE simultaneously getting said whores

And to me, their problem is not in paying as aforementioned, its like they dont want to buy into theyve bought into an illusion. And someone who pays 200 bucks to get their nut off has short cutted the system. Especially compared to those who bought facial reconstructive surgery

So.. again, do i think a real special woman is worth it... yea. But so few are nowadays. And plenty that think they are.. arent

You know... i can guarantee you the whores nonsense are with to the guys they like arent like "im a big fat whore that deserves nothing"

It behooves them not to act that way

For the small (very small) minority that do a lot and have a good woman by their side... congrats, thats the way it should

But the guys that do a fuken chitload for whores under guise.. i think thats more lame and paying wayyyy more for it than some guy who pays a few and gets his nut off

Further, im not sure why some men would want to protect the delusion theyre paying significantly more

Right - that what I imagine is "leave 400 bucks on the table please then we can play" - I don't know how that doesn't kill it for some brehs. Per the title of the thread, it's only some posters here who glorify it.

Others (per this thread) make it sound like a necessity: "Women are only attracted to money, so I have to pay them to have sex with me" - that's effectively their "argument", which is factually incorrect.

On the legalization: right as I said earlier, 'legalization' shouldn't just be "go wild". There should be bank account monitoring (of the whores), taxation, mandatory STD tests, mandatory psych evaluations and the like. In NYC they continue to prosecute trafficking rings - they are largely focused on those massage parlor trafficking rings, the kind that CopeFear was so proud to frequent. Thanks for the comment on my CP, CopeFear, I knew this thread would get to you.

i mean if you're concerned about her not being into you and that hurts your ego

bang her to make her want you

is she cums 10 times and the sheets are soaked from her kunt you best believe shes probably into you

I honestly don't care what grown men do with their penises...and neither should you.

The mistake you (and other posters) make is getting into personal attacks like "you, you, you". When in fact this thread is aboutyou, not me, and your penchant for whoring.

Miscers: (i) it takes money to attract women
Also Miscers: (ii) let me spend significant amounts of money on women
Also Miscers: (iii) THOT audit, stop giving women your money

Which Miscer group are you talking about here?

This thread is about "glorifying" prostitution, and it's not just that UK railroad dude. There have been plenty, Rajc too, normally: identifiable minorities living in predominantly white areas. The whole 'whoremaxxing crew', which stems from posts like yours which are effectively: "it's too much effort to engage with women naturally, so I'll just pay one to come over for a couple of hours and smash, and then be done for [insert]". I mean...

so wtf is the point of this thread?

you clearly have an issue with it

i gave you reasons why some of us do it

i think it's better to fuk hookers than have a relationship/marriage

so i guess in your mind i glorify it

so what