38 male virgin - Pros and Cons of paying for sex

[JJW]

Tying to get through this whole thread at once has me very fatigued. Mostly I've skimmed but have caught a good many respectable points. Not having a solid understanding of every viewpoint in this thread I still feel there was a point that was not made, or at least not made intensly enough.

If you are going to spend the money you might as well spend it on yourself and go someplace and have a good time. I'm not a fan of one night stands, and buying a quickie is even less than that, but there are people that just want a romp. There are places they gather.

Neither of those options make any investment. If you just want to get laid then fine. That's up to you. But investing in a relationship can get you laid repeatedly if you are so shallow as to want only that. An investment in a relationship can give you purpose and happiness, and some misery. One thing you will never likely do is find that relationship in a bar, or buying an encounter.

Everyone has interests. Join interests groups. Having a common interest is fuel for conversation. Conversation is the first step into a relationship. After contact if your partner is receptive go on a date. "Spend more than a dollar." ~ Agent J.

You have to let go of how you feel about yourself. If people aren't over critical they are vain. Neither is good for a first impression. I will guarantee what you feel about yourself will not be a shared opinion. How attractive you are, how charming you are, how worthy you are is not up to you. Those things are decided by the other person. Be yourself. No one has a lasting relationship with anyone that misrepresented themselves.

We are stuck with who we are. Making an effort to improve yourself is always a good thing. I would not recommend trying to change to please others. Having to keep up a facade is difficult at best. Please yourself. Then you can advertise the real you.

People that are alone are usually lonely. They are willing to take a chance on you just for that bit of company. Let them know who the real you is and they might just find you appealing.

I don't think anyone wants to buy sex. They want sex and are willing to pay for it. It's not like you can't blow $100 on a professional and not have a relationship later. But what do you ultimately want? Sex now and then? Or someone that is willing to invest in you? Pick one, and spend your effort there.

 

[TheSkaFish]

Tying to get through this whole thread at once has me very fatigued. Mostly I've skimmed but have caught a good many respectable points. Not having a solid understanding of every viewpoint in this thread I still feel there was a point that was not made, or at least not made intensly enough.

If you are going to spend the money you might as well spend it on yourself and go someplace and have a good time. I'm not a fan of one night stands, and buying a quickie is even less than that, but there are people that just want a romp. There are places they gather.

Neither of those options make any investment. If you just want to get laid then fine. That's up to you. But investing in a relationship can get you laid repeatedly if you are so shallow as to want only that. An investment in a relationship can give you purpose and happiness, and some misery. One thing you will never likely do is find that relationship in a bar, or buying an encounter.

Everyone has interests. Join interests groups. Having a common interest is fuel for conversation. Conversation is the first step into a relationship. After contact if your partner is receptive go on a date. "Spend more than a dollar." ~ Agent J.

You have to let go of how you feel about yourself. If people aren't over critical they are vain. Neither is good for a first impression. I will guarantee what you feel about yourself will not be a shared opinion. How attractive you are, how charming you are, how worthy you are is not up to you. Those things are decided by the other person. Be yourself. No one has a lasting relationship with anyone that misrepresented themselves.

We are stuck with who we are. Making an effort to improve yourself is always a good thing. I would not recommend trying to change to please others. Having to keep up a facade is difficult at best. Please yourself. Then you can advertise the real you.

People that are alone are usually lonely. They are willing to take a chance on you just for that bit of company. Let them know who the real you is and they might just find you appealing.

I don't think anyone wants to buy sex. They want sex and are willing to pay for it. It's not like you can't blow $100 on a professional and not have a relationship later. But what do you ultimately want? Sex now and then? Or someone that is willing to invest in you? Pick one, and spend your effort there.

There's a lot of good stuff in here for people that aren't even wondering about paying for sex, but just trying to figure out how to attract someone in general.

If I could, I would "love" this twice. Well spoken

 

[Mr. Preuss]

People that are alone are usually lonely. They are willing to take a chance on you just for that bit of company.

I would completely agree with you if you applied this assumption strictly to men, but to women as well? Good luck, cause you're gonna need it. Don't be surprised if the results are way different than expected.

But what do you ultimately want? Sex now and then? Or someone that is willing to invest in you?

Actually, between being dependent on a woman for sex and being dependent on a woman for affection (because a relationship will do one or both of those things to you, to a lesser or greater degree), I would say it's much preferable to be dependent on sex than on a woman's affection. Of course, it's better to be reliant on neither, to be spiritually self-suficient, but as a general rule it seems to me that the least harm is done when one is dependent on sex alone. After all, this way the woman can more easily be replaced, satisfaction and well-being can more easily be assured, if at all, and for these and other reasons that I'll refrain from mentioning for brevity's sake, it just is the lesser of two evils.

There's a certain degree of cynicism in those words, but it's hardly any cause for alarm. After all, many women would just as easily, if not with an even greater ease, dump men once their utility has run its course. I know many such cases, including from personal anecdotes of acquaintances. It is what it is.

 

[ardour]

I would completely agree with you if you applied this assumption strictly to men, but to women as well? Good luck, cause you're gonna need it. Don't be surprised if the results are way different than expected.



Actually, between being dependent on a woman for sex and being dependent on a woman for affection (because a relationship will do one or both of those things to you, to a lesser or greater degree), I would say it's much preferable to be dependent on sex than on a woman's affection. Of course, it's better to be reliant on neither, to be spiritually self-suficient, but as a general rule it seems to me that the least harm is done when one is dependent on sex alone. After all, this way the woman can more easily be replaced, satisfaction and well-being can more easily be assured, if at all, and for these and other reasons that I'll refrain from mentioning for brevity's sake, it just is the lesser of two evils.

There's a certain degree of cynicism in those words, but it's hardly any cause for alarm. After all, many women would just as easily, if not with an even greater ease, dump men once their utility has run its course. I know many such cases, including from personal anecdotes of acquaintances. It is what it is.

It's inevitable that men rely on women for affection, since that would be (almost always) the sole source of it in a man's life. More broadly, the idea that people can live happily without these needs being met is a feature of the kind of society we live in; 'bootstrap' value, discouraging community, interdependence,

 

[Jackie]

So what do you guys think? Should I pay for it or wait for true love ?

It depends upon where you are. In my country prostitution is legal but paying for sex is not. Does that make any sense? No, of course it doesn't but that's the way it is. Selling is legal but buying it is not.

Or any other advice you have, would be greatly appreciated.

I think you are trying to balance two different things: Sex and Love.

1). If sex is the issue then purchase a condom and find a woman who isn't afraid of soap and water. You may not enjoy it anyway particularly if you are expecting love in the bargain. My best advice on sex is DO IT and find out for yourself if it was worth it. Keep us posted.
2). If love is the issue then I can't give you any specific advice that will apply to you ... personally.

Decide which of the two is most important at the moment and we'll try again.

 

[Mr. Preuss]

It's inevitable that men rely on women for affection, since that would be (almost always) the sole source of it in a man's life.

True, a very deep observation in a way.

More broadly, the idea that people can live happily without these needs being met is a feature of the kind of society we live in; 'bootstrap' value, discouraging community, interdependence.

You must live in a different society than I do then, certainly not the society in which the youth can only think of getting drunk/high and going to parties, cause that's the society I live in.

 

[TheSkaFish]

You must live in a different society than I do then, certainly not the society in which the youth can only think of getting drunk/high and going to parties, cause that's the society I live in.

That's just the d*uchebag youth (can we still say that word here?). Living for the 'gram. It can't be ALL of the youth.

I never fit in with the popular crowd myself. Didn't "have enough going for me", I guess.
It explains my instinctive recoil at transactional systems where "you have to provide value".
I grew up thinking that was both all luck, and shallow/superficial/immature/morally wrong.
And being shut out of the system because I "wasn't providing value", didn't make me want to provide value (which I thought I lacked the traits/talent/body/brain/mind/interests/personality to do anyway).
Why would I want to impress the people that insulted me and said I wasn't good enough, treated me like I was second class? Besides I thought they'd never accept me anyway, because you have to be born into their club.
It made me double down, made me feel like, "I'm not here to 'provide value'/be useful or entertaining to you f*ckers, I'm not here to kiss ass. I'm here for ME". Which I feel was kind of a mistake, in retrospect. But anyway.
I thought we were supposed to feel like people, and life, had value inherently.
Apparently most people did not agree, and I just didn't get the memo.
It was like they were playing chess by the rules of the game, and I was playing with the pieces like they were toys, making up a story.

But in time I realized that I wouldn't have been happy in the popular scene anyway. I didn't like their personalities and never would have been comfortable there, we didn't share beliefs, and didn't even share most interests save for a few (cars, that's about our only common interest). I realized that it didn't matter how hot a woman was, if their looks were the only thing I liked about them, and we had nothing to talk about, I didn't feel good around them, and I couldn't care about them as a person.

There's got to be some more authentic people around though - both in your society, and mine.

 

[Unsigned]

It depends upon where you are. In my country prostitution is legal but paying for sex is not. Does that make any sense? No, of course it doesn't but that's the way it is. Selling is legal but buying it is not.

This is the "Nordic Model" that some "progressive" DA candidates here in the US, especially the one who last ran for Queens DA, is trying to bring to the US. "Sex Work" would be legal, but those who promote it or purchase it would be prosecuted. It is quite bizarre.
IMO, the best option is decriminalization. Let the cops and prosecutors focus on violent street crime. Not lonely men. Or women who need money for their expenses.

 

[Jackie]

This is the "Nordic Model" that some "progressive" DA candidates here in the US, especially the one who last ran for Queens DA, is trying to bring to the US. "Sex Work" would be legal, but those who promote it or purchase it would be prosecuted.

Well .......

It is quite bizarre.

You can say that again. Here in Sweden women are considered the victim no what befalls them. And guess who's "to blame"? Yep! So a woman prostitute is thought of as a "poor soul" and the "john" is a rotten S.O.B. It's his fault the woman is on the street.

IMO, the best option is decriminalization. Let the cops and prosecutors focus on violent street crime. Not lonely men. Or women who need money for their expenses.

And why is that difficult for so many to understand?

 

[Unsigned]

And why is that difficult for so many to understand?

They understand it.
But there is nothing to be gained by the the politicians who would promote that solution.
They would only be enticing a very small demographic (SWs and their clients).

 

[okidoke]

But investing in a relationship can get you laid repeatedly if you are so shallow as to want only that. An investment in a relationship can give you purpose and happiness, and some misery.

That’s fine if you’re not the only one in the relationship investing. It’s not shallow to want intimacy.

 

[okidoke]

just what is this "means to live happy, dignified and worthwhile lives"?

Did I just turn into some sort of celebrity or something? Suddenly I can't say a thing without someone asking me loaded questions or making a fuss about it. Go figure...

Asking for an explanation isn’t making a fuss. I too would like your meaning.

 

[Mr. Preuss]

Asking for an explanation isn’t making a fuss.

The "or" is the key to interpreting that sentence.

I too would like your meaning.

The explanation is simple: anyone or nearly anyone who can read this can, indeed, live happy, dignified and worthwhile lives, they only need to begin to philosophize and, once that is done, realize that happiness, dignity and a worthwhile existence are the supreme properties of the philosopher, of the union between the mind and the body that have chosen to devote themselves to philosophy, simply because to philosophize is to rise above the conditions that allow the existence of unhappiness, indignity and personal misery in the first place. In truth, one might even philosophize as a result of any of these 3 things, but then one will quickly - and erroneously - conclude, like @TheSkaFish did, that philosophy and philosophizing are nothing more than a cope, a way to vent. An understandable mistake, and one that is typical of someone who is still too attached to earthly dogmas, to the chains of social convention, a mistake that is typical of someone whose philosophizing hasn't yet flown high into the etereal regions of the most recondite thoughts. Just as happiness is best found when one isn't trying to find it at all, since happiness, being the state of being in which desiring ceases to be the determinant factor, is the property of a spiritually self-sufficient being, so is philosophizing best done when one doesn't have any particular, material or personal interest in conducting it, none beyond the eternal search for the truth, that is. This illustrates, albeit briefly, the relationship that exists between philosophizing and happiness.

 

[Jackie]

They understand it.
But there is nothing to be gained by the the politicians who would promote that solution.
They would only be enticing a very small demographic (SWs and their clients).

I'm speaking about the Swedish population. They understand nothing. Most disbelieve Deep State control (from abroad) exists. Wok-ism and feminism are experiments gone amok .... or perhaps designed to the "N" th. degree. When you start taking monkeys seriously ("Being there", "Rain Man", Greta Thunberg, and Joe Biden) then "up" becomes "down", same-sex marriages/relationships are more highly regarded than heterosexual ones, and a male's opinion becomes "mansplaining".

 

[okidoke]

The "or" is the key to interpreting that sentence.



The explanation is simple: anyone or nearly anyone who can read this can, indeed, live happy, dignified and worthwhile lives, they only need to begin to philosophize and, once that is done, realize that happiness, dignity and a worthwhile existence are the supreme properties of the philosopher, of the union between the mind and the body that have chosen to devote themselves to philosophy, simply because to philosophize is to rise above the conditions that allow the existence of unhappiness, indignity and personal misery in the first place. In truth, one might even philosophize as a result of any of these 3 things, but then one will quickly - and erroneously - conclude, like @TheSkaFish did, that philosophy and philosophizing are nothing more than a cope, a way to vent. An understandable mistake, and one that is typical of someone who is still too attached to earthly dogmas, to the chains of social convention, a mistake that is typical of someone whose philosophizing hasn't yet flown high into the etereal regions of the most recondite thoughts. Just as happiness is best found when one isn't trying to find it at all, since happiness, being the state of being in which desiring ceases to be the determinant factor, is the property of a spiritually self-sufficient being, so is philosophizing best done when one doesn't have any particular, material or personal interest in conducting it, none beyond the eternal search for the truth, that is. This illustrates, albeit briefly, the relationship that exists between philosophizing and happiness.

And yet, you are here, on THIS forum.

 

[Mr. Preuss]

And yet, you are here, on THIS forum.

Why shouldn't I?

 

[ardour]

Why shouldn't I?

The point being if you were able to successfully implement this view into your own life then you wouldn't be here, wasting time with the malcontents.

 

[Mr. Preuss]

The point being if you were able to successfully implement this view into your own life then you wouldn't be here, wasting time with the malcontents.

But why wouldn't I? Why is it that you consider it a waste of time to be talking to you, malcontents?

 

[ardour]

But why wouldn't I? Why is it that you consider it a waste of time to be talking to you, malcontents?

There's a million better things a person could be doing.

 

[Mr. Preuss]

There's a million better things a person could be doing.

According to whom? Who instilled in you this belief, what is the reason for it?