Are Prostitutes Better Than Normal Women?

[Contrarian Expatriate]

I have no issue with any married man who does so as a Red Pill Aware man.

However, this thread has revealed some of the most irredeemably anti-male reprobates that societies will ever know, the married, traditionalist cucks. How do you identify them? You only need to listen to their internalized use of FEMALE shaming tactics such as:

-You're just selfish!

-You must have been hurt!

-You must be gay!

-You just hate women!

-You just haven't found the right woman yet!

-Et cetera....

The MGTOW named Liberation Y has expanded on this topic, and brilliantly so.

As you watch the video, see if you can recall other men using these female tactics on you so you can better identify those men who are against you and your best interests.

More importantly, see if the behavior discussed APPLIES to you. If it does (I'm not saying any names), then you have been already defeated by gynocentrism and you have a long way to go out of that abyss. If it hits close to home and you become depressed and perhaps suicidal, please seek professional help as you transition into a free, self-actualized, masculine man.

[MrMan]

I'm not a cuckold, so you calling me a 'cuck' is slander. You could redefine 'cuck' to mean something that has nothing to do with what the word really means, and say you aren't slandering me. So I could redefine 'Cucktrarian Expat' to refer to the poster who uses the word 'cuck' to mean something other than what it really means.

Hate to break it to you, but according to this definition, you are indeed a "Cuck."

Instead of rejecting the characterization, you should own it because you are 100% behind men sacrificing themselves as disposable utilities for women who decline in value over time. Cucks militate against anything that empowers men as men instead of men as utilities. Don't be ashamed of the term, you should be ashamed of your characteristics that render the term applicable to you.

If you read the definition of a cuck, you might feel less attacked and more comfortable with that label.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckservative

You apparently don't understand the definition of your own word,

One definition of "cuckservative" is a conservative who sells out,[11] having bought into all of the key premises of the left,[12] and sympathizes with liberal values

That doesn't apply to me at all. I believe wives should submit to their husbands. The husband father is the leader and father of the home. These are old conservative values, not a sell-out to the left. I don't think women necessarily need the 'right to vote', but I do not campaign for it either way. I think society would be a bit better if women could not vote, but I do not think it is realistic at this point to campaign against it. So my values aren't 'leftist' on our political spectrum, certain in regard to gender issues.

Using women as sexual playthings is more of a leftist 'value' than a right wing value. Your attitudes toward sexuality are more 'left' in that regard. Sexual libertinism is left wing, not right wing.

[MrMan]

I'm not a cuckold, so you calling me a 'cuck' is slander. You could redefine 'cuck' to mean something that has nothing to do with what the word really means, and say you aren't slandering me. So I could redefine 'Cucktrarian Expat' to refer to the poster who uses the word 'cuck' to mean something other than what it really means.

Hate to break it to you, but according to this definition, you are indeed a "Cuck."

Instead of rejecting the characterization, you should own it because you are 100% behind men sacrificing themselves as disposable utilities for women who decline in value over time. Cucks militate against anything that empowers men as men instead of men as utilities. Don't be ashamed of the term, you should be ashamed of your characteristics that render the term applicable to you.

If you read the definition of a cuck, you might feel less attacked and more comfortable with that label.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckservative

You apparently don't understand the definition of your own word,

One definition of "cuckservative" is a conservative who sells out,[11] having bought into all of the key premises of the left,[12] and sympathizes with liberal values

That doesn't apply to me at all. I believe wives should submit to their husbands. The husband father is the leader and father of the home. These are old conservative values, not a sell-out to the left. I don't think women necessarily need the 'right to vote', but I do not campaign for it either way. I think society would be a bit better if women could not vote, but I do not think it is realistic at this point to campaign against it. So my values aren't 'leftist' on our political spectrum, certain in regard to gender issues.

Using women as sexual playthings is more of a leftist 'value' than a right wing value. Your attitudes toward sexuality are more 'left' in that regard. Sexual libertinism is left wing, not right wing.

[MrMan]

I have no issue with any married man who does so as a Red Pill Aware man.

However, this thread has revealed some of the most irredeemably anti-male reprobates that societies will ever know, the married, traditionalist cucks. How do you identify them? You only need to listen to their internalized use of FEMALE shaming tactics such as:

You have a twisted view of what a reprobate is, thinking its okay to bed all those young girls, and then calling non-cheating married men 'reprobates'?

-You're just selfish!

I called your philosophy selfish based on the specifics of what you are saying. I had details to back that up. So my description was fact based not a 'female shaming tactic'. You calling me a cuckservative is more along the lines of leftist feminist and LGBT activist tactics. You come up with some term designed to insult other people which you aim at decent people for holding to their decent views. Feminists call men who believe men should be in charge male chauvinist pigs, and LGBT activists call those with decent sexual morals homophobes. Your a fornicator who calls married conservatives cuckservatives.

I suspect you resort to name-calling because you can't really defend your case without it. MGTOWs have a culture of name-calling. It's a lot like feminists from what I've seen, except a bit more harsh and more male of course.

-You must have been hurt!

-You must be gay!

I don't know if a girl hurt you are not. Most people have been hurt. That's part of living life. That doesn't mean that is why you went MGTOW. Going to bars and picking up women isn't a characteristic of homosexuals.

-You just hate women!

You haven't shown love for women. But you may be apathetically using them without caring about them.

-You just haven't found the right woman yet!

That does sound like something a women like to say, but some MGTOWs deconvert if they find a girl who pays them attention. I'd imagine those who become MGTOW to make themselves feel better when they can't get a date would be more likely to fall into this category.

As far as being in favor of what's best for men is concerned, you seem pretty concerned with what you want to do without caring much about other people around you, from your past posts. Why care about men? Why care about some men who is not you if you don't care about women who are not you? I want to live in a well-ordered society that is just for both men and women with men and women in their proper roles. I don't think I have to be against women to be in favor of men. Women taking care of their husbands and children is a good thing for them, most of them, in line with their design.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

I'm not a cuckold, so you calling me a 'cuck' is slander. You could redefine 'cuck' to mean something that has nothing to do with what the word really means, and say you aren't slandering me. So I could redefine 'Cucktrarian Expat' to refer to the poster who uses the word 'cuck' to mean something other than what it really means.

Hate to break it to you, but according to this definition, you are indeed a "Cuck."

Instead of rejecting the characterization, you should own it because you are 100% behind men sacrificing themselves as disposable utilities for women who decline in value over time. Cucks militate against anything that empowers men as men instead of men as utilities. Don't be ashamed of the term, you should be ashamed of your characteristics that render the term applicable to you.

If you read the definition of a cuck, you might feel less attacked and more comfortable with that label.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckservative

You apparently don't understand the definition of your own word,

One definition of "cuckservative" is a conservative who sells out,[11] having bought into all of the key premises of the left,[12] and sympathizes with liberal values

That doesn't apply to me at all. I believe wives should submit to their husbands. The husband father is the leader and father of the home. These are old conservative values, not a sell-out to the left. I don't think women necessarily need the 'right to vote', but I do not campaign for it either way. I think society would be a bit better if women could not vote, but I do not think it is realistic at this point to campaign against it. So my values aren't 'leftist' on our political spectrum, certain in regard to gender issues.

Using women as sexual playthings is more of a leftist 'value' than a right wing value. Your attitudes toward sexuality are more 'left' in that regard. Sexual libertinism is left wing, not right wing.

I completely get why you'd like to shift this discussion into a semantic one. But I am not so inclined to let you off the hook.

You are a CUCK, as in a cuckservative in that you advocate the continued disposablily of men under the guise of marriage. Sure, you can squawk about being dominant over your wife, but the fact of the marriage is that your wife passively rules over you and gets you to like it.

Traditionalist men like yourself that encourage men to marry do themselves a disservice. But I don't care about you and other married CUCKS. I care about warning unmarried men about the snares and traps that you paint as positive when they are as inimical to men as can be. Damn you for trying to bamboozle other men into the same servitude that you toil under!

[MrMan]

Contrarian Expat,

A curse undeserved does not come to rest.

If you discover a nice uncrowded beach that is just close enough to shopping, are you going to post online about what a great tourist location it is? You might, but then if enough people read it, you'd have another crowded beach.

Given what you value, it is irrational for you to promote MGTOW. Let's say you were successful and multitudes of married men at all ages, including men in their 40's, like myself, decided to go MGTOW. What would that mean for them?

First of all, they might leave their wives who would probably get the children. If you have looked around some of the more useful, educated portions of the manosphere, you may have encountered statistics that show that children raised with fathers in the home tend to be better behaved, less likely to be envolved in crime, etc. If your message really had an impact and 10, 20, or 30% of men went MGTOW, after several years, the number of poorly behaved youths would likely increase. The number of young thugs likely to rob you on the side of the street as you get more and more feeble and less able to defend yourself would increase, as you get into your 60's and 70's.

They would leave their wives, but still have biological and emotional urges for sex. Who would your message appeal to the most? Men with fat, domineering wives with irritating personalities. So who would flood the night clubs? You'd have a lot of competition, not just from 50-year-old men like yourself who can't pull off looking 30, but also men in their 30's and 40's competing for these hot young women. You might see more expat tours to Russia and other places you like to frequent. Maybe you could still pull the ladies, but you'd be competing for the creme of the crop, and your looks may begin to show as the young men you influenced flooded the bars.

But there would be more women, too. Mainly those fat, old-looking, domineering wives of the men most succeptible to your MGTOW message, the type of women you might not want to put up with to be around long enough to seduce, and the type of women you wouldn't want to if you could stand their personalities. If you are trying to seduce 20 year olds up into your '80's, they'd be more likely to be poorly behaved and not well trained to submit to men if they are raised without fathers in the home, because their dad's went MGTOW.

I don't see why you have any incentive to spread the MGTOW message. Influencing men to join MGTOW isn't going to help you enjoy the type of temporal pleasures you are looking for. It's like inviting the crowds to the nice secluded beach or the quiet spot in the woods you like to enjoy. Other men marrying off and raising kids is actually what enables you to get many of these things you want as a MGTOW.

It's also arrogant and narrow-minded of you to impose your MGTOW player non-values on married men. One of the things men's rights activists point to is how the system leads to male suicide. How many of those suicides do you think happen after a man looses his wife and kids? He cares about his kids? Trying to convince married men with kids who are happy with their wives to go MGTOW isn't promoting a pro-man objective. Your telling men to mess their own lives up. That kind of message might appeal to a divorce man whose wife left him. MGTOW might appeal to some young, single men, unfortunately, which isn't good for the next generation of men because the MGTOW who go the player route may leave boys raised without fathers. Your promoting MGTOW isn't going to help boys grow into well-balanced men. It doesn't help keep what is left of the system together that enables you to enjoy your life.

The way you promote MGTOW, with name calling and insults, what kind of gullible ignoramuses would fall for that? Who is going to give up their wife and kids because they get called names? That's probably why a lot of the MGTOWs I've interacted in online do not seem to be very bright. The movement seems to appeal to angry men who are incapable or unwilling of relying on reason and instead rely on insults.

It's a masculinized version of the garbage the feminists were feeding women in the '60's where wives and mothers were painted as slaves and prostitutes. MGTOW does it with married men. Feminists were taught to be anti-man. A lot of MGTOWs have an anti-woman attitude. It's a garbage philosophy that promotes anger and division, and isn't good for society for the whole, and certainly not worthy of your religious devotion to it.

[MrMan]

You are a CUCK, as in a cuckservative in that you advocate the continued disposablily of men under the guise of marriage. Sure, you can squawk about being dominant over your wife, but the fact of the marriage is that your wife passively rules over you and gets you to like it.

It's pretty clear that you've lost the debate already if you have to resort to using insults, your own definition of a recently made-up word at that, in order to argue your point.

How stupid does someone have to agree with you about something like this just so he is not insulted? It's a very childish recruitment methodology.

[Zambales]

If you want to spend the rest of your life single and free that's your prerogative and perfectly fine too, but will you still feel the same way in ten or twenty years time?

I am 50 years old and as time goes on, I am more convinced that I have made the best lifestyle choice as a free and fulfilled MGTOW. I wish you were courageous enough to experience the same.

Whether you remain single or eventually get married it doesn't matter, the goal is to be happy for the rest of your life, but remaining bitter isn't freedom or contentment, it's imprisonment. The woman or women that have orchestrated your mental state may have won the battle but if you can't move on and forget the past, they've also won the war.

You're now engaging in projection. Perhaps it is women who have affected your own mental state to the point where you are defeated? If you are married or plan to do so in the future, your defeat as a fully-actualized man is but assured no matter how much you protest to the contrary.

Also, MGTOW is not about the women, it is about the system that makes men slaves to women, regardless of country. The fact that you all are focused on the pathology of the women should be a clue to you that something is wrong however.

Marriage tips the balance of power away from the man. If you think can be "happy" for the rest of your life under those conditions, you are truly very brainwashed by gynocentrism.

But please, do indeed partake in marriage so one day you and the other slaves will know I am correct

Since when did anyone say that marriage was a 24/7 utopia? There's no guarantee of prolonged happiness whether a man gets married, or stays single for the remainder of his days. None!

Having spent over a decade in a relationship and also experiencing life as a singleton for a number of years at one stage, I can safely say that both have their pros and cons. At this particular juncture in my life the door still remains open if you catch my drift, and despite the inane nonsense you've been churning out for the past few days, this isn't going to change anytime soon.

So no, I won't be signing up to your negative, bitter, blind-leading-the-blind cult.



Do accept my sincerest apologies but I'm old enough and wise enough to make my own decisions on whether I marry or not. And I certainly don't need to be manipulated by an individual whose arguments contain more holes than a Syrian golf course.

Anyway, enjoy your life as a 50 year old "rock star" in Eastern Europe. I'm sure all the hot young desirable chicks will be bursting a blood vessel to sample a piece of your loving.

Meanwhile.

Back to reality and the more probable outcome.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

You can tell just how miserable certain married people are by the way in which they try to deflect attention away from the argument of just how brutal an institution marriage is, especially for men.

But don't take my word for it, read the accounts from some of those rare honest married people themselves.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... posts.html

It is well known that most married people LIE about their marital bliss just to justify their huge mistake. It takes more courage than the average person can muster to admit that marriage was a life-ruining experience.

And I like the humorous image of the crying man. I thought about returning the favor but reasoned that there would be nothing funny about examples of married men so utterly destroyed by wife and state that they became suicidal.

[droid]

...

Damn, CE I don't necessarily agree with everything but you 're making too many great points. When cornfed's not around you make fantastic posts lol. You've made me sign in again to post.

Sometimes I ponder about making serious proposals to some girls but all it takes to make me back up is a post of a girl with her mom.
Like they say, "look at the mom". I seriously can't fathom waking up to a monster-looking lady one day, which is what all women start turning into after 35 or or even earlier. There are nice aspects as there really are good women out there that are team players and actually bring something to the table, and children I guess, because I do get along well with kids, but also the huge expense makes me refrain. To think that, like you and Winston say, losing all my freedom and money getting spent at three times the rate, crap!

Unfortunately the decision is pretty much a binary one, you either get married or you don't. Although I've seen some that are married to loving women who turn a blind eye and understand their 'needs' to go and do the occasional p4p. I guess those guys have their cake and eat it too.

Regarding the MGTOW thing, I think the term does not apply if you have any interaction with women at all, like dating, p4p etc. So strictly speaking neither you or Yohan etc are really MGTOW. The guy in one of the videos you linked stresses this point.

I think the whole concept is too extreme, those guys pretending they don't need women at all and even some trying to suppress porn and masturbation, completely unnatural. But I understand it as a consequence of some of the things going on in society. Especially sad is that clip with the cat playing piano while supposedly 'not caring' about women's bodies in the background etc

[droid]

All you guys promoting marriage are failing to see the point. If you want lifelong companionship and children, then YES, marriage is right for you.
But if you want tons of sex with tons of different women, then nothing beats the prostitution lifestyle.
I am not going to judge either group. It's each man's choice to live how he sees fit. But the men in the prostitution lifestyle category are indeed much more free and are probably f***ing more women in one year than a married guy has f***ed in his whole life.

+1 fantastic points
All these judgmental guys are truly talking out of their back ends when they say the p4p women are "acting" and there is no "passion", and they're married to 9+ women. So many bullshitters. P4P is one thing people really can not talk about if they haven't done it, end of story.
Fortunately like starchild has suggested in the past we are 'multidimensional' so to speak, and it's not a one-of-the-other thing, we are not forced to stick forever to just one 'paradigm' lol.
It's definitely better to do p4p that going lying to nice girls and wasting energy just to get some action, it does serve a purpose.

[MrMan]

Droid,

I remember in my teens and 20's looking at middle aged, sagging women with make-up, trying to look pretty, and old women, and wondering how their husbands had sex with them. My theory is that it is like a frog in water raised slowly to a boil as opposed to dropping a frog in boiling water. if you drop a frog in boiling water, he'll jump around to avoid it. But slowly raise the temperature, and they say he'll just sit there and boil. The boiling water is sex with an old droopy skinned woman. Offer than to a horny teenager with no sexual ethics, and he still may turn it down.

The problem with my analogy is that sex with unattractive women, either when they are young or just unattractive because of age, isn't lethal like dropping a frog into a pot of boiling water. And plenty of young men have sex with fat, unattractive women from the get-go, and they still survive.

Just on a physical level, my wife would still be appealing to myself at 19. But I've been with her when she was pregnant, something that wouldn't have appealed to me at 19-year-old, and it was not a bit obstacle to overcome. Familiarity and slow change makes it not too big a deal. No shock, at least.

I still have to wrap my head around 60 year old men who get divorced or widowed who want women around 60. I can understand 40 or so if she's in good condition. But I guess they get used to being with an older woman, so the frog in the water may not just be a phenomenon related to one specific woman, but to women in general.

Something to keep in mind is that, while men's faces may stay a bit tighter longer, and younger women going for older men (If they are rich, accomplished, powerful, influential, especially) is a lot more common than young men going for older women, we are all deteriorating and getting older. So when that pretty young woman you like is an old sagging woman, you probably won't look so hot yourself.

Character is more important than looks, but if you are into looks, you can choose a woman that doesn't have a tendency to blimp up, whose never been fat so far and has some 'thin genes' in her family, who has tight facial skin and young looking older relatives, and who takes good care of herself. You could also marry a woman a several years younger if you choose that route if her looking young when you are older is an issue. At least she'll be behind you in age and hopefully looks.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

There are many risks in resorting to a prostitute, such as:

-Theft from apartment, hotel room, pockets, car, etc.

-Extortion, "If you don't pay me double, I will call the police and claim you raped me."

-Mental illness which manifests itself in BPD outbursts or rage fits.

-Illegal substance abuse which could expose you to arrest even though you had nothing to do with the illegal substances.

-Robbery schemes where you are lured somewhere then you are robbed, beaten, and maybe killed for money by her associates.

I would not recommend anyone engage in using a prostitute as I have seen too many of these incidents transpire in my time.

STILL LESS RISKY THAN MARRIAGE!
PROSTITUTES STILL BETTER THAN "NORMAL WOMEN"!

NORMAL WOMEN-
1. Child Support
2. Alamony
3. Jail Time when you are unable to pay

Oh very true!!!

[Cornfed]

There are many risks in resorting to a prostitute, such as:

-Theft from apartment, hotel room, pockets, car, etc.

-Extortion, "If you don't pay me double, I will call the police and claim you raped me."

-Mental illness which manifests itself in BPD outbursts or rage fits.

-Illegal substance abuse which could expose you to arrest even though you had nothing to do with the illegal substances.

-Robbery schemes where you are lured somewhere then you are robbed, beaten, and maybe killed for money by her associates.

I would not recommend anyone engage in using a prostitute as I have seen too many of these incidents transpire in my time.

STILL LESS RISKY THAN MARRIAGE!
PROSTITUTES STILL BETTER THAN "NORMAL WOMEN"!

NORMAL WOMEN-
1. Child Support
2. Alamony
3. Jail Time when you are unable to pay

Oh very true!!!

You f***ing pigs would know it.

[mand38]

"JohnDoeBigBaller", like your post, pro and contra arguments, don't have answer on question which women are better, but your post is really good...