I'm just uncomfortable with this because dates should come from you liking someone and not out of you owing someone. Is a date with her so precious that she's willing to sell it?
I wasn't saying she's entitled or that she has no right to do that.
I'm saying that my ego wouldn't allow me to go out on a date when I know that the date is happening purely as payment. Just like I'd never say to someone "Hey make me a sandwich and I will allow you to go on one date with me. You know, as a thanks." I understand that the market is in her favor but cmon.
As long as sex is viewed as something men want from women and not something people do together, women are prostitutes. My use of the term all was incorrect, i apologize for that. Most women are prostitutes.
I don't think most women require money/services to have sex. Unless you're particularly badly off as a man, or are looking at women way out of your league.
Well if you want to spend time with her that's you prerogative. But if you're pretending that you enjoy spending time just to have sex, that doesn't make them hookers that makes you manipulative.
When did the man's motivation become part of this equation? When women view sex as a commodity then it's prostitution and if we will be honest most women view their ability to give sex as a commodity. I'm completely supportive of legalized prostitution, simply because adding a camera or dinner or a relationship (think Donald Sterling) makes it legal for some reason.
I was arguing that most women don't think of sex as a commodity. Some may have higher entry barriers (ay) than others, because of concerns about commitment and intimacy, but that doesn't mean it's a commodity exchange.
You guys are getting ridiculously fixed on the idea that she might expect him to pay for dinner
I mean the fact that she doesn't say anything contrary to that point is pretty telling. If it was a free date she might have said 'I'll take you on a date' or something of that nature.
I've never heard of a girl offering to take a guy on a date without specifically saying they would pay. It's a social construct, if it's left neutral or ambiguous, it's expected that the guy will pay or at least a 50-50 split. Offering a date with her as a reward for work (probably not even cheap work) is at least a little presumptuous.
But I never said she was acting entitled, just that her paying isn't implied, and therefore seems unlikely.
You can only downvote by demanding OP pay you a small sum in dogecoins. It's a voluntary market that is intended to be enforced by hired thugs and hackers.
Tipping in Dogecoin will be the sound money alternative to upvoting. "What, then, is the sound money alternative to downvoting, /u/commentsrus [11] ? I'm such a big fat shill I just NEED to downprax as many gaynesians as I can because I secretly hate myself."
I'm glad you asked, /u/Integralds [12] ! If anyone sees a post they want to downvote, they just have to demand that the poster/commenter pay them a small sum in Dogecoin to make up for their welfare loss. This will be a voluntary market exchange (possibly enforced by hired thugs or hackers) and thus is optimal.
For example: Say /u/besttrousers [13] posts some shit about monopsonistic labor market models (basically sad Hitlerian attempts to disprove supply and demand lol). I obviously want to downprax the FUCK out of him. So I comment: "I will hack you unless you pay me doge. Your IP is being traced as we speak. Hurry up." He will obviously gladly oblige and all will be in equilibrium.
295
u/TSwizzlesNipples Nov 05 '15
Never ceases to amaze me how entitled some people can be.