Well obviously no one can guarantee you results there's a lot of factors that go into whether you succeed or not like how good your coach is,where you're meeting girls,how effective your method is,whether you can utilize said effective method properly,how dedicated and driven you are to succeed. Just like anything else in life nothing can be promised to you because the future can't be predicted.
www.girlschase.com
@Rain,
Because the means look similar but the ends and intentions are different.
When a man pays for a date for a woman and she accepts it, generally he is doing that as part of a courtship ritual. He is saying, "I'd like to provide for you and am capable of that. Would you accept to be my mate?" She is saying, "I'll accept your gifts as I consider whether to accept you as my mate."
Men who continue to treat their women to gifts and dinners once in a relationship do so either because a.) gift-giving is part of their love language or b.) they think they have to or fear they have to. The woman may or may not care about receiving these gifts. There are plenty of women out there who get sick of guys constantly taking them to dinners or burying them in gifts and wish the guy would simply give more quality time instead.
Here's one example further highlighting the divide between prostitution and genuine relationships:
There are men who use gift-giving as a way to try to slide women into quasi-sugar baby relationships. I have had women tell me about their disgust at discovering a man was doing this to them. e.g., the guy who starts seeing a girl, dumps gifts on her, but is only able to see her once a week. The girl quickly gets frustrated with "gifts instead of progression in the relationship" because she wants progress, not gifts; then eventually she discovers he's actually got 2 or 3 girls he's dumping gifts on trying to keep. She dumps him in disgust, feeling dirty and used... feeling like a prostitute.
You can actually break human romances down depending on the intentions of each party:
- Pure romance/seduction: man is with woman for her; woman is with man for him
- Woman using man (gold digger): man wants to be with woman; woman gives sex because she wants man's money
- Man using woman (Lothario?): woman wants to be with man; man gives gifts because he wants sex
- Pure transaction (prostitution): man gives money/gifts for sex; woman wants money/gifts for sex
Thus why you're able to instinctively tell "sugar dating" is different from a traditional "man pays for woman" date -- it is the intentions of each involved party that determine how you feel about it. If one or more of the parties is approaching it transactionally, it's something different from pure romance/courtship/seduction.
@ph40,
If another guy came along with 5x more money and offered your sister to switch to him, would she?
If not... and my guess is it's probably 'not'... we cannot say she is with him "for the money", which is what makes it transactional.
A man's earning potential may factor into a woman's selection of that man as a short-term or long-term mate. However, having that as one of a constellation of factors that makes a man desirable as a sexual partner or a marriage partner is a very different thing from having money as the principle thing a woman is seeking in EXCHANGE FOR one-time sex or an ongoing sexual relationship.
Who said that?
I did not say that.
See my differentiations to Rain above.
As for "someone who is financially supporting a young college girl"... that is not a 'real' date in the definition of neither party having intentions other than "let's see if this can lead to mutual sex and/or a romantic relationship."
Here's how you make it a real date: college girl goes out with you with no expectation you pay for her lifestyle, purely because she's excited about you and hopeful that either a.) you're gonna lay some good pipe down or b.) you might be the man of her dreams.
So long as there is an expectation in one of the party's minds other than "penis in vagina" and/or "cozy nice relationship" it is not a real date.
If a guy takes a girl out but she only wants to be his friend, that is not a real date no matter how much he insists it is. He got played or was delusional about it.
If a girl goes out with a guy she's hoping for a relationship with, then he buys her an expensive dinner, pumps and dumps her, and proceeds to never contact her again, because he figures "she got a nice, expensive meal out of it; we're even", without ever clarifying to her that all he wants is sex or that he views that ribeye steak as advance payment for the sex, that too was not a real date. In this case, it was the girl who got played or was delusional about it.
You need to factor the intentions of both parties in to figure out if it's a 'real' date, if one or the other is getting played or is deluded, or if it's mutually transactional on both sides.
No offense dude, but that has got to be the dumbest argument I have ever heard in favor of prostitution / gold digging ever.
That kind of super simplistic one-dimensional mate selection calculus only holds in prostitution world.
In fact, not even there. I know a guy who was living in Pattya, Thailand (hooker central), and girls past a certain looks threshold would not take his money because there were too many good-looking young guys flooding the town, and since every guy was paying the same rate these girls decided they were only going to go with guys who were good-looking AND would pay. That's two dimensions for you, right there (looks and money). But actually that same friend said if he built some preselection and let the hottest hookers see other hookers flirting with him, he could often get the really hot girl hookers to take his money too. So there's a third selection criteria for you.
Out in the real world, where women are seeking mutual sexual/romantic connections, rather than transactional ones, the mate selection process is infinitely richer than it is in the super simplified prostitution world.
There are hundreds or thousands of different things real girls are looking at to determine if they want a man:
How Many Attraction Factors are There? Infinite
One of the biggest obstacles for a lot of men when it comes to improving with women is fixating on the wrong thing. Much of this seems to come from improper understanding of some of the raw basics of attraction. When you see guys get hung up on one specific characteristic and blame that as the...
You're enmeshed in hooker-land.
It's seeped into your brain and made you unable to accurately process the way human courtship works outside the transactional bubble.
Chase
www.followchain.org
They are definitely not real dates.
PSA: Sugar dating is not pickup, it is prostitution
In the articles you posted, it said the guys who are getting laid the most either have good online game or are willing to pay sugar babies. So you should aim for either one of those. I have been seeing a lot more of this stuff on here lately. Guys talking about 'sugar babies' (i.e...www.skilledseducer.com
Sugar dating is GFE ('girlfriend experience') by another name. It is just a rebranding. Guys getting into 'sugar dating' who try to argue it isn't prostitution generally seem to only be familiar with the "pay money and get a blow job / sex" variety, so they don't realize they're just doing GFE.
A sugar dating app is essentially GFE Uber: an app women can go to sell themselves as GFEs and men can go to purchase their services.
(anyone who thinks it isn't: go read this sugar baby's list of rules and tell me how this is any different from the list of rules any other pro sets herself)
I don't see a problem with guys frequenting prostitutes if they have the means for it, so long as they aren't in denial about what it is. The guys who do it all want to (nobody's forcing them), and they're doing the rest of us a favor, by collectively all sharing a much smaller pool of women. I don't have exact numbers, but if we assume each woman is on average servicing three johns per week, the broader dating pool loses three men for every one woman as a result of that... very favorable for skilled seducers.
Of course, it's messier than that... the GFE girls often have a non-paying boyfriend (like in @DonGately's examples), and the johns aren't always single guys; some of them are married men who want sex / a young woman experience without having to divorce their wives. So often the woman isn't totally removed from the dating pool, and not all the guys using her services would necessarily participate in the dating pool otherwise.
But on the whole, I think it's still good for seducers.
At the more meta level, as prostitution spreads and democratizes in the West, with things like sugar dating and like the OP's OnlyFans, we may end up seeing a shift to a society that functions more like other places with rampant accessible, inexpensive prostitution, like Thailand or the Philippines, where men do not bother learning game because they don't see a reason to. If they're horny, they go buy sex (or... naked pictures on OnlyFans, I guess?). The rest of the time, they slowly court women who might make good wives.
You can go to places with rampant prostitution and pretty easily sleep with the women there (without paying), assuming you have halfway decent game, because they are not used to being picked up by men with game. They're either being courted or bought. That also might mean that a few decades down the road, however, if prostitution prices fall far enough, the idea of bothering to learn game in the first place might feel increasingly pointless to more and more Western men... as indeed already seems to be the trajectory based on what I've seen over the past 8 or 9 years...
Nightlife has a completely different function in places where prostitution is common. It's almost impossible to find a nightclub in Bangkok that isn't crawling with pros. Same with nightlife in the Philippines, in Malaysia, Ukraine, basically anywhere with a lot of prostitution... many places you will go to and a big chunk of the women in attendance are hunting for a john for the night.
It's possible the West may be headed in a direction more like these countries, where:
- Sex is cheap and available
- Nightlife crawls with prostitutes
- Most men don't bother to learn game
- Women divide into two camps: pros & non-pros
A lot of the pros I've met tend to be high sex drive girls. Which perhaps furthers the divide; if a girl likes sex and wants a lot of it, she might as well get paid for having it, right? Whereas the girls without that high a drive find the idea less to their liking.
The pros seem to do pretty well for themselves a lot of the time, too; I've seen a lot of these chicks pair off with one of their johns at some point. It is not like being a pro dooms a girl to spinsterhood. Assuming she knows when to get off the ride, of course. I've definitely also seen some weathered old pros and the first thing that pops into mind is, "Why is a chick her age still trying to work it? Does she get many clients?"
Will the Western world become another Thailand or Philippines? Impossible to say now, but it sure looks like it's been trending that way over the past decade.
Germany was that way all throughout the 1920s. After World War I and before the rise of the Nazis, Germany was Europe's sex playground... basically the Thailand of its time. It's certainly not unprecedented to have that kind of sociosexual structure in the West.
Chase
That is the exact thing that escorts say in night clubs in my location.
No, you can`t.
I am not saying it's possible with 100% of the girls that you meet through sugar dating, I am just saying that it is something that could happen.
The problem is that the probability is low. An extreme example is kind of how you could be sitting on your sofa and a pebble sized meteorite could penetrate your roof and strike you.... that's possible but it's very unlikely.
What I am saying is kind of field tested.
The dynamic goes like that: she wants to see you more (for example she propose to come casually at your place few days after the meeting), you tell her that you don't have the budget to see her more often, she answers that there would be no need for money, you answer that it's better to stay as is, then she makes repeated allusions until she understands that it won't happen.
Since I am not into the whole sugar baby thing, I see things as an outsider... you may have a valid point.
