In article ,
 GoddessBaybee  wrote:

> In article
, Mark
> Sobolewski says...

> Let me try to explain,
> When I was single, I'm now married,
> I preferred to go out with guys who asked me out on real dates, as opposed to
> frat-skank types who'd simply try to get me to go back to their room to
> hook-up.
>
> I think there's a big difference between a guy who's got a crush on a girl
> and
> who's lookin for a real relationship with her, and a guy who's just hot for a
> girl, and who is looking to get some quick.
>
> IME, the guy who's got the crush is much more likely to take the girl out and
> buy her dinner, ymmv.

So lessee: You're saying that guys who forked out money for
dinner are probably gentlemenly because all you had to compare
them to were horny frat boys?  Is that it?

And you're proud of this, yes?  You think this somehow
makes you a good judge of masculine character?

> >Then, the moment you're in the driver's seat, you
> >use that situation to emotionally extort,
> >what?, fuckin' free meals?  And you have the NERVE
> >to look down upon prostitutes?
>
> I don't look down on prostitutes, but i do tend to feel sorry for 'em.

How nice of you.  :-)

But aren't such women who make good money getting rewarded for
sex far beyond women who shag some guy who throws a few
bucks at them for dinner and says some nice things?

> Honestly tho, I am very creeped out by guys who go to prostitutes.

Yet you believe that a frat boy who shagged women in their
room are ok because they plunked down money for dinner?
That makes them clean?

> >> LOL!
> >> Sure Mark, if ya define "wuss" as men who treat for
dinner and who don't
> >> go
> >> toprostitutes, then yep, guess I've got myself a wuss.
> >> pssst:  i'm ok with that.
>
> >As I said, this isn't just about "treating" people for dinner.
> >It's about someone being extorted and manipulated into
> >doing it.
>
> >And you know it.  Ok, you don't.  The men can be
> >manipulated into telling you that's not true.
> >Kiss kiss. :-)
>
> >Then why the intellectual dishonesty?
>
> What dishonesty?

That you're somehow noble for having milked men for meals
and that men's nobler impulses were responsible for them
having gone along with it.

> >Why the hostility?
>
> Who's hostile?
> I don't see any hostility, tho you do seem to be getting kinda snitty with
> me.

You know, you're right.  Sorry.

> >I don't feel any shame whatsoever in having been
> >with prostitutes.  None.  I'm courteous, of course,
> >and don't bring up the subject at church socials
> >but I don't feel any moral shame.  I don't feel a need
> >to try to make it out for something it wasn't.
> >
> >Dear, you've been so exposed to wusses conditioned to
> >say what you want to hear in exchange for the hope
> >of sex treats that you don't know the truth when
> >you hear it.  You've been used!
>
> huh?
> sure mark, i've "been used" cuz i've been treated to dinner,
and cuz my
> husband
> hasn't gone to a prostitute.

If you wanted men to treat you with nobler intentions then
yes, men who are not much higher than frat boys paying
for your company in the hopes of future nookie were using
you.  You were using them too of course.  But these
relationships weren't much higher than what you've compared them to.

If your husband shagged girls at the frat house after
getting them drunk on cheap punch, would that make him better?
If he DIDN'T do this, and his only sexual outlet was
paying for dinner with women such as yourself...

What makes you so sure his intentions were honorable?

> >> >In a way, your cost for
> >> >gratification is far higher than the 100 bucks
> >> >for hookers at L.A. brothels.
> >> >
> >> >> I think when you like someone, it is natural to
*want* to do nice
> >> >> things
> >> >> for that person which will make them happy.
> >> >
> >> >So such women can offer to pay for the WHOLE first date AND tell
> >> >the men they find them sexually attractive.
> >> >
> >> >Their failure to do so suggests they like the men they
> >> >are dating less than the men like them.
> >>
> >> Nope, expecting the guy to pay for the first date is just one of many
> >> screening
> >> tools to weed out certain guys...
> >
> >Yeah, you screen out guys who don't pay for you love them
> >long time. :-)
> >
> >> like guys who don't want a dating
> >> relationship...just a boodie call type thang.
> >
> >HAHAHAHAHAHA!
> >
> >Wouldn't their refusal to pay suggest that they
> >weren't so desperate for "boodie" that they
> >would throw money at you like a stripper?
> >
> >Yeah, the men love you for your mind!  Good luck
> >believing that!
> >
> >> Also, it weeds out cheep guys.
> >
> >Not necessarily.
> >
> >As you noted, I paid several times more to avoid this situation.
> >It's the guys who are too doggy to get "boodie" without
> >paying for it or don't have enough money for high
> >quality hookers who see... you.
> >
> >You're getting beta males.
>
> Whatever Mark.
> Feel free to call guys who don't go to prostitutes "beta males",

Yeah, and all men who pay for dinner are doing so because
they have a "crush" on the woman's mind. :-)

It's this type of intellectual dishonesty that
twisted my nipple.  I'm not saying all men who don't
go to prostitutes are beta males.

>  you can call
> 'em "wusses", call 'em whatever ya like Mark, but honestly I
don't think
> that's
> gonna change the fact that a lot (probably most) women tend to be icked out
> by
> guys who go to prostitutes. I know I am.

These same women who got drunk and shagged by frat boys
for some cheap punch?  Those same catholic school girls?

FYI: You're mistaken.  EVERY woman I've met has found
my experiences interesting and resulted in me being exciting
moreso than the steady line of gentlemen that the
ladies rolled over for free meals and moved on.

regards,
Mark Sobolewski


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/5/05 8:23:24 PM ---