The Onlyfans factor

Status
Not open for further replies.

ph40

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Sep 6, 2021
Messages
102
Also the most cucked men have been strong providers, what’s your point?
The point is that being masculine and providing material resources in a relationship with a woman aren't mutually exclusive.
 

Will_V

Modern Human
Modern Human
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
543
If you persuade a young woman with the generosity of gift-giving, and engage in sexual intercourse with her, that is seduction ..

Do you think there's a clearly defined difference between pickup and paying for actual prostitutes?

Because you have to put the boundary somewhere. You can't just say 'everything is an exchange of value' and lump it all together.

What Chase wrote above is the best way to see the difference - if a woman is keen to sleep with you only because of financial gifts then it's not seduction. And when you start throwing money at her, how can you be sure you know what her motivations are?

You can see why many of us draw the line with sugar dating on the other side - because when you go in your jeans and t-shirt, take a woman for coffee, escalate and then to bed, there's no chance it was anything but an actual seduction, because money is in no way involved. She either wanted you or she didn't, and you were the only reward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: POB

topcat

Modern Human
Modern Human
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
273
Throughout human history, some of the most masculine, powerful men were strong providers for the women in their lives - wives, daughters, mistresses...

Society's elite usually had first pick of beautiful women. They were not distributed to the paupers with silken tongues professing love, but to the royals with silken sheets adorning beds. :)
yes.. and the lowest of the low, mankind’s (and womankind’s) refuse, could be found trawling the whorehouses. Today, their descendants frequent such haunts as the stripclub, the brothel, and for the most distinguished among them - Seeking Arrangements.

Good luck to you.
 

POB

Tribal Elder
Tribal Elder
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
300
Location
South America
Society's elite usually had first pick of beautiful women. They were not distributed to the paupers with silken tongues professing love, but to the royals with silken sheets adorning beds. :)
No, because if the paupers even looked at them they would be dead lol
This comparison is just laughable, we are in 2022 for fucks sake
Unless you are a sheik who craps oil rigs in the toilet every morning, this is a ridiculous statement.

Society's elite can kiss my hairy ass.
I don't need to use material status nor power as weapons to have sex with beautiful women.
Pretty sure I'm in a much much happier place than those pedophiles and child molesters, thank you very much.
 

ph40

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Sep 6, 2021
Messages
102
Do you think there's a clearly defined difference between pickup and paying for actual prostitutes?

Because you have to put the boundary somewhere. You can't just say 'everything is an exchange of value' and lump it all together.

What Chase wrote above is the best way to see the difference - if a woman is keen to sleep with you only because of financial gifts then it's not seduction. And when you start throwing money at her, how can you be sure you know what her motivations are?

You can see why many of us draw the line with sugar dating on the other side - because when you go in your jeans and t-shirt, take a woman for coffee, escalate and then to bed, there's no chance it was anything but an actual seduction, because money is in no way involved. She either wanted you or she didn't, and you were the only reward.

So if you buy a dinner for a woman is it prostitution? If you buy a house and move into it with your wife is it prostitution?

There's a whole spectrum of these things. On one end you might have the hardcore dogmatic seducer who says "I will never give a dime to any woman" and that will turn off a lot of women, so he might have a string of casual relationships with women who don't ever expect more than just "dick and conversation". Or you might have a strong provider who provides a house, food, cars, etc. to a wife and children, and has a long term relationship with her. Or you might have someone who has as more casual relationship with a younger woman and provides her with gifts and experiences. Or you might have a man paying a flat fee for a sexual encounter (prostitute) and nothing more. All of these men are in relationships with women. Some of them are providing resources to varying degrees, and the hardcore "won't pay a dime" man is providing his time and energy and nothing more, to a woman who is OK with that.
 

ph40

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Sep 6, 2021
Messages
102
No, because if the paupers even looked at them they would be dead lol
This comparison is just laughable, we are in 2022 for fucks sake
Unless you are a sheik who craps oil rigs in the toilet every morning, this is a ridiculous statement.

Societie's elite can kiss my hairy ass.
I don't need to use material status nor power as weapons to have sex with beautiful women.
Pretty sure I'm in a much much happier place than those pedophiles and child molesters, thank you very much.

I don't consider myself or any of my friends on that same level, despite being financially successful. My point with this statement is to show that, yes, historically, providers with wealth and resources typically had more access to higher quality woman than men without resources.

Look at Ghenghis Khan, the great conqueror (no, I'm not comparing myself to him). What I find fascinating is that in his society of marauding invaders, there was a clearly established hierarchy of men who would rate and distribute conquered peoples' women based on this hierarchy.

In some ways Ghenghis Khan was the world's greatest pickup artist. He slept with more women than any man could imagine. What were his methods? Simple, he was the most dominant man in the room at any given time, and he took things by force. He seduced them with violence:

After the conquest, Genghis Khan took for himself the most beautiful women. He liked women with small noses, rounded hips, long hair, and a beautiful voice.

He measured women with points. If a woman‘s score was too low, he gave her to his lieutenants.

He preferred to sleep with the wives and daughters of the defeated enemy rulers.

His soldiers believed he had extraordinary sexual prowess. A belief which he promulgated, since he had sex with multiple women every night.



Genghis’s love life included raping and concubines. However, on the other side of the coin, he showed a lot of respect and love towards his wives, especially Börte, his first wife.

Genghis and Börte’s parents arranged their marriage when they were around ten years old. He married her when he was sixteen years old. Shortly after the marriage, the rival Merkit tribe kidnapped Börte.

In the Mongol steppes, it was a common practice to steal women from another tribe and marry them. Genghis’s father stole his mother from the Merkit tribe many years earlier. By kidnapping Börte, the Merkits had retaliated to the Genghis’s tribe.

However, Genghis was no ordinary man, he attacked the Merkits and saved Börte. By then, they had held her prisoner for eight months and had raped her many times. Soon after Genghis saved her, she gave birth to a son, Jochi. Genghis acknowledged Jochi and treated him as his own son. Nevertheless, the widespread belief that he was not Genghis’s biological son persisted.

Genghis respected and followed the advice from his wife Börte. Mongol men listened to their wives, they believed a smart wife prevented them from making stupid life decisions.

Börte became the Grand Empress of the Mongol Empire. Only sons by Börte were Genghis’s legitimate descendants.

In Mongol society, polygamy was acceptable if you could afford it. Genghis certainly belonged to the category of wealthy men. He had six wives.

Ghenghis Khan was a man who has done more with women than any pickup artist on the forum could dream of. He slept with concubines, with slaves, with conquered women, with women in his social circle, and married and supported many. He was the ultimate alpha male provider.
 

Skills

Tribal Elder
Tribal Elder
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Messages
2,218
Location
South Florida
I see that this thread has degenerated into ad hominem / mocking of sugar dating. It's unfortunate that we really can't have a serious discussion about all kinds of dating behaviors, as I thought this was a site dedicated to discussing dating in general. But the mere mention of resource exchange in dating seems to bring out virulent opposition in people who have dedicated their lives to extracting female resources from the mating game with minimal expenditure on their part as a man - despite the fact that throughout human history mating has traditionally been an exchange of resources from male (resources and status) to female (youth and fertility) and female to male.
Reactive much, we were making fun of seduction gurus that are suppose to teach how to attract women by exchanging sex for sex vs exchanging sex for material resources into some type of seduction angle cause they get at discount or backwards rationalize pay for play.... imagine a mma teacher rationalize why pull out a gun in a one on one ring fight... I am personally pro prostitution under certain circumstances.


 

Skills

Tribal Elder
Tribal Elder
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Messages
2,218
Location
South Florida
I don't consider myself or any of my friends on that same level, despite being financially successful. My point with this statement is to show that, yes, historically, providers with wealth and resources typically had more access to higher quality woman than men without resources.

Look at Ghenghis Khan, the great conqueror (no, I'm not comparing myself to him). What I find fascinating is that in his society of marauding invaders, there was a clearly established hierarchy of men who would rate and distribute conquered peoples' women based on this hierarchy.

In some ways Ghenghis Khan was the world's greatest pickup artist. He slept with more women than any man could imagine. What were his methods? Simple, he was the most dominant man in the room at any given time, and he took things by force. He seduced them with violence:







Ghenghis Khan was a man who has done more with women than any pickup artist on the forum could dream of. He slept with concubines, with slaves, with conquered women, with women in his social circle, and married and supported many. He was the ultimate alpha male provider.
Dude what do you think if the women said no to this dude? Take a guess... causation correlation
 

ph40

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Sep 6, 2021
Messages
102
Dude what do you think if the women said no to this dude? Take a guess... causation correlation

That's my point. In this situation, Ghenghis Khan became the greatest seducer the whole world has ever seen. His method of seduction? Violence, power and wealth. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

But we don't do that in modern society, of course. I wouldn't want to seduce in this way! But my point is, basically, that there are always different methods to accomplish the means.

And you can't invalidate all of Gheghis Khan's sexual exploits as "fake" because they weren't traditional seduction. Tell his 16+ million descendants that their existence is the result of fakery.
 

Winston

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Jul 4, 2021
Messages
56
That's my point. In this situation, Ghenghis Khan became the greatest seducer the whole world has ever seen. His method of seduction? Violence, power and wealth. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

But we don't do that in modern society, of course. I wouldn't want to seduce in this way! But my point is, basically, that there are always different methods to accomplish the means.

And you can't invalidate all of Gheghis Khan's sexual exploits as "fake" because they weren't traditional seduction. Tell his 16+ million descendants that their existence is the result of fakery.
I think you have a too loose definition of seduction. It has something to do with arousing desire in another person. Rape is not seduction.

subjective feeling (seduction) vs objective act (sexual intercourse)
 
Last edited:

ph40

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Sep 6, 2021
Messages
102
The definition of seduction according to dictionary.com is:

seduce​

[ si-doos, -dyoos ]SHOW IPA


verb (used with object), se·duced, se·duc·ing.
to lead astray, as from duty, rectitude, or the like; corrupt.
to persuade or induce to have sexual intercourse.

So anything that is used to persuade or induce someone to have sexual intercourse is seduction. That can be smooth talking, that can be gift-giving, that can be violence.

Ghenghis Khan and his band of mauraders sack a village and round up the most beautiful women in town. Essentially, he will tell them that he wants this female and that female in his camp that night. Are they going to refuse? No. Is there an implied threat of violence? Yes. But it doesn't matter because women RESPOND to this display of power and authority instinctually. They won't even think TWICE about betraying the men they grew up with to sleep with this invader.

All they have to see is the men of their village impaled on swords all around them to know, that these men who invaded their village are the superior, dominant men. This is a display of value, or power, of the ultimate kind, that a PUA living in the 21st century cannnot possibly ever show.

And why do you think women over time have developed this "hypergamy" that we all speak of? Solely because human history for the *majority* of its time is littered with violent men taking things they want by force, including women.
 

Winston

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Jul 4, 2021
Messages
56
The definition of seduction according to dictionary.com is:


So anything that is used to persuade or induce someone to have sexual intercourse is seduction. That can be smooth talking, that can be gift-giving, that can be violence.
You are overstretching this definition. No one uses the word seduction in this context.
 
Last edited:

ph40

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Sep 6, 2021
Messages
102
You are overstreching this definition. No one uses the word seduction in this context.

So let's just be honest and up front about what everyone on here is all about, and it's subset of seduction in which the seducer uses only smooth talking, and charm to induce intercourse. These men had their place in society for much of human history, but they always played in the shadows of the really dominant, powerful, wealthy men of history. It's the Casanova sneaking out of the princess's bedroom... the man who uses purely words to seduce a woman is usually seen as no more than a fucktoy, if that. A high quality woman will only ever "belong" to a man with power, wealth, or a violent disposition. Because that man has the ability to destroy a Casanova with his resources and his dominance.
 

Winston

Space Monkey
space monkey
Joined
Jul 4, 2021
Messages
56
So let's just be honest and up front about what everyone on here is all about, and it's subset of seduction in which the seducer uses only smooth talking, and charm to induce intercourse. These men had their place in society for much of human history, but they always played in the shadows of the really dominant, powerful, wealthy men of history. It's the Casanova sneaking out of the princess's bedroom... the man who uses purely words to seduce a woman is usually seen as no more than a fucktoy, if that. A high quality woman will only ever "belong" to a man with power, wealth, or a violent disposition. Because that man has the ability to destroy a Casanova with his resources and his dominance.
You should read Tristan and Iseult.

It's the story of a love relationship between a queen that cheated on her husband (who is a king = has power) with someone of lesser status. The king tries to kill Tristan, but that doesn't make his wife fall out of love.

And this story is foundational in the way the concept of love is seen in Occident.
 
Last edited:

Skills

Tribal Elder
Tribal Elder
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Messages
2,218
Location
South Florida
So let's just be honest and up front about what everyone on here is all about, and it's subset of seduction in which the seducer uses only smooth talking, and charm to induce intercourse. These men had their place in society for much of human history, but they always played in the shadows of the really dominant, powerful, wealthy men of history. It's the Casanova sneaking out of the princess's bedroom... the man who uses purely words to seduce a woman is usually seen as no more than a fucktoy, if that. A high quality woman will only ever "belong" to a man with power, wealth, or a violent disposition. Because that man has the ability to destroy a Casanova with his resources and his dominance.
Wrong see this is my point with you... I asked you what are you doing in this forum, you said to find a girlfriend... but you are bad with women and seduction... you pay for sex.. and you don't want to learn but to teach... teach us how to aquire resources to pay for play but shut the fuck up kj about seduction..you are clueless...bro there are sugar daddy boards and only fans go there with your none sense.... again we are here to exchange sex for sex, no sex for $. If I am you take a break from all that pay for play your mental hardware is fucked
 

ZacAdam

Cro-Magnon Man
Cro-Magnon Man
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
5,693
I like to say that the guys here have been awesome for the past 6 months.

I enjoyed it
There's a shift in attitude and how we handle topics because we are literally having 3 generations,
- gen x
- millennials
- gen z
All 3 generations are completely out of wack.

TLDR:
If Skills is right, you have a bigger problem, ph40. An analogy: You are insisting on creating a chocolate cake based on the foundations of a moon cake
.

YOu have to be aware of this before we can even help.

This thread must be stop for now
Because we have to dismantle your entire wiring system. And that takes sometime, often a long time.

z@c+
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top