Do alpha males pay for sex?

[rjc149]

Women are primarily attracted to status. Not money in and of itself. Yes there are gold-diggers. But the reason why a woman is attracted to a wealthy man is because that man has high status in society. Wealthy men exude confidence. When you have/make a lot of money, you tend to not give a fvck about people's opinions of you. You can lead your own life, do what you want. Social consequences for wealthy men are much lower, and they live their lives with that knowledge. That is what women find attractive about wealthy men.

As I've often said on this forum, a first date with a woman should never involve expensive wine 'n dine venues. It should be at a casual bar or lounge where costs can be moderated and it's clear that you're not trying to impress anyone. Don't take her to a dive. Just an unpretentious, nicer upscale bar, pub, or lounge. If the date goes well and it's clear that she's attracted to you, then you can take her with you to eat somewhere. If the date is not going well and she ejects after 2 rounds of drinks, you're out $35-40 tops. Big deal.

There's a lot of post-feminist b!tching and moaning about paying the date tab on this forum, that women should pay half etc etc. THE MAN PAYS. He's not paying because he wants poon from her. He's not paying to impress her and simp. Doing either is a huge turn-off to women. He's paying because he's the man, and the man leads, the man takes care of people under this charge, the man is responsible. He takes care of his lady. Because he demonstrates that he is a masculine alpha man who protects, provides, and takes care of people, the lady is attracted to him. NOT because she wants his money.

Hence, taking care of a woman on a date, which she agreed to attend because she is romantically/sexually interested in the man, is NOT THE SAME as a man hiring a professional skank to touch his d!ck. Not in any way. The only similarity is monetary expenditure, which you need to do in order to pay your rent, eat, get to work, fill your car with gas, copay a doctor's visit, whatever.

This is like saying "banging a hooker is no different from making a mortgage payment, because you have to spend money either way." Spending money on dates, and spending money on hookers, are not the fvcking same. In any way.

There are a lot guys on this forum who I very much doubt have any interest in actual pickup and seduction. They want to complain about women and Chad, and justify why it's better to bang hookers than to learn social skills with women.

 

[corrector]

Women are primarily attracted to status. Not money in and of itself. Yes there are gold-diggers. But the reason why a woman is attracted to a wealthy man is because that man has high status in society. Wealthy men exude confidence. When you have/make a lot of money, you tend to not give a fvck about people's opinions of you. You can lead your own life, do what you want. Social consequences for wealthy men are much lower, and they live their lives with that knowledge. That is what women find attractive about wealthy men.

As I've often said on this forum, a first date with a woman should never involve expensive wine 'n dine venues. It should be at a casual bar or lounge where costs can be moderated and it's clear that you're not trying to impress anyone. Don't take her to a dive. Just an unpretentious, nicer upscale bar, pub, or lounge. If the date goes well and it's clear that she's attracted to you, then you can take her with you to eat somewhere. If the date is not going well and she ejects after 2 rounds of drinks, you're out $35-40 tops. Big deal.

There's a lot of post-feminist b!tching and moaning about paying the date tab on this forum, that women should pay half etc etc. THE MAN PAYS. He's not paying because he wants poon from her. He's not paying to impress her and simp. Doing either is a huge turn-off to women. He's paying because he's the man, and the man leads, the man takes care of people under this charge, the man is responsible. He takes care of his lady. Because he demonstrates that he is a masculine alpha man who protects, provides, and takes care of people, the lady is attracted to him. NOT because she wants his money.

Hence, taking care of a woman on a date, which she agreed to attend because she is romantically/sexually interested in the man, is NOT THE SAME as a man hiring a professional skank to touch his d!ck. Not in any way. The only similarity is monetary expenditure, which you need to do in order to pay your rent, eat, get to work, fill your car with gas, copay a doctor's visit, whatever.

This is like saying "banging a hooker is no different from making a mortgage payment, because you have to spend money either way." Spending money on dates, and spending money on hookers, are not the fvcking same. In any way.

There are a lot guys on this forum who I very much doubt have any interest in actual pickup and seduction. They want to complain about women and Chad, and justify why it's better to bang hookers than to learn social skills with women.

Other posters who see hookers will say you still need limited game and social skills dealing with hookers and you still need to look presentable. Also you will need to differentiate between high class call girls vs street hookers because they are not the same.

The only time you do not need social skills or looking presentible is when you subscribe to an OF page. Only in that way there is zero interaction with the hooker.

 

[Epicenter]

Women are primarily attracted to status. Not money in and of itself. Yes there are gold-diggers. But the reason why a woman is attracted to a wealthy man is because that man has high status in society. Wealthy men exude confidence. When you have/make a lot of money, you tend to not give a fvck about people's opinions of you. You can lead your own life, do what you want. Social consequences for wealthy men are much lower, and they live their lives with that knowledge. That is what women find attractive about wealthy men.

As I've often said on this forum, a first date with a woman should never involve expensive wine 'n dine venues. It should be at a casual bar or lounge where costs can be moderated and it's clear that you're not trying to impress anyone. Don't take her to a dive. Just an unpretentious, nicer upscale bar, pub, or lounge. If the date goes well and it's clear that she's attracted to you, then you can take her with you to eat somewhere. If the date is not going well and she ejects after 2 rounds of drinks, you're out $35-40 tops. Big deal.

There's a lot of post-feminist b!tching and moaning about paying the date tab on this forum, that women should pay half etc etc. THE MAN PAYS. He's not paying because he wants poon from her. He's not paying to impress her and simp. Doing either is a huge turn-off to women. He's paying because he's the man, and the man leads, the man takes care of people under this charge, the man is responsible. He takes care of his lady. Because he demonstrates that he is a masculine alpha man who protects, provides, and takes care of people, the lady is attracted to him. NOT because she wants his money.

Hence, taking care of a woman on a date, which she agreed to attend because she is romantically/sexually interested in the man, is NOT THE SAME as a man hiring a professional skank to touch his d!ck. Not in any way. The only similarity is monetary expenditure, which you need to do in order to pay your rent, eat, get to work, fill your car with gas, copay a doctor's visit, whatever.

This is like saying "banging a hooker is no different from making a mortgage payment, because you have to spend money either way." Spending money on dates, and spending money on hookers, are not the fvcking same. In any way.

There are a lot guys on this forum who I very much doubt have any interest in actual pickup and seduction. They want to complain about women and Chad, and justify why it's better to bang hookers than to learn social skills with women.

PUAs are clowns. Being a clown is an art

Other posters who see hookers will say you still need limited game and social skills dealing with hookers and you still need to look presentable. Also you will need to differentiate between high class call girls vs street hookers because they are not the same.

The only time you do not need social skills or looking presentible is when you subscribe to an OF page. Only in that way there is zero interaction with the hooker.

Getting a hot hooker for low price with GFE is harder than getting an ugly girl. So you need more skills with the hooker then.

 

[oc16]

Can a man be alpha in every way (business, human relations, even in his own relationship with his woman) and still be considered an alpha male if he hires an escort for sexual companionship? Generally speaking of a man in any age group.

I've had my phase of paying for escorts in my earlier to mid twenties but I later as I kept doing it I felt kinda bad or sorry for myself afterwards. (Even if the experience was good). After turning 28 I decided it wasn't going to pursue it any longer. It's kinda like porn in a instant gratification type of way.

Has anyone here payed a prostitute for sex? How did you feel afterwards? Do you still do it? Curious what the manosphere thinks about this.

Also, how would one explain a female's mind in doing this type of work? Perhaps its part of her dualistic sexual strategy and a hypergamy on steriods?

Dude, there is no such thing as an Alpha.

 

[rjc149]

Other posters who see hookers will say you still need limited game and social skills dealing with hookers and you still need to look presentable. Also you will need to differentiate between high class call girls vs street hookers because they are not the same.

The only time you do not need social skills or looking presentible is when you subscribe to an OF page. Only in that way there is zero interaction with the hooker.

I don't differentiate between tiers of wh0res. Maybe one is young and insanely hot and costs $2K per hour, the other is a nasty middle-aged truck stop saggytits who will suck your d!ck for a hit of meth but it's the same. You're paying a woman to fake sexual interest in you. A wh0re is a wh0re.

I had no idea that you need game to bang a hooker. I thought you just needed money and a boner.

 

[corrector]

I don't differentiate between tiers of wh0res. Maybe one is young and insanely hot and costs $2K per hour, the other is a nasty middle-aged truck stop saggytits who will suck your d!ck for a hit of meth but it's the same. You're paying a woman to fake sexual interest in you. A wh0re is a wh0re.

I had no idea that you need game to bang a hooker. I thought you just needed money and a boner.

Wow. That's very ignorant. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about then. First of all, you just compared a druggie and a business class escort and saying you don't need game for either one. Let me tell you some news then. You won't be able to book an appointment with a proper escort (ie 20-something year old, D&D free, selective seeing one client per day, looking hot etc...) because with your attitude she probably won't even reply to your text or bother dealing with you since everyone wants to see her.

You would be able to get lower tier escorts. The types that probably have walk-ins and no appointments and see like ten to twenty clients per day. The type you'll puke a day after and kick yourself for even dealing with her and think you caught an STD.

You only get one short to make a first impression with the upper-tier escorts because they block people. Whether they fake sexual interest or not, they are very selective with who they see or get intimate with.

 

[rjc149]

Wow. That's very ignorant. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about then.

I gladly accept this.

 

[rjc149]

Dude, there is no such thing as an Alpha.

Not within some primal animalistic context, ie. wolves or gorillas.

"Alpha" and "beta" for humans depends on the social context. My boss at work is the alpha at work. He's a beta with his wife. Middle-managers at work, the "betas" are alphas in their social groups. They are also betas in social groups they're not as established in.

It's context-dependent. But generally, "alpha" is a man who behaves in accordance with high testosterone levels. It doesn't mean everyone supplicates to him, or that he's the leader of everyone.

 

[corrector]

I gladly accept this.

You've been informed.

 

[corrector]

Getting a hot hooker for low price with GFE is harder than getting an ugly girl. So you need more skills with the hooker then.

A lower price means more men are seeing her and it's more disgusting times 1000. Guys normally get blocked if they try to haggle the price over the phone. I can't speculate on anything further since I don't visit hookers so my range of speculation is very limited. But if the hooker likes you then she'll likely reduce the price on a subsequent visit...but at that point why would you want to deal with her? After all, she's a hooker and is always seeing other guys in a disgusting way.

 

[ZosoWicca]

Wow. That's very ignorant. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about then. First of all, you just compared a druggie and a business class escort and saying you don't need game for either one. Let me tell you some news then. You won't be able to book an appointment with a proper escort (ie 20-something year old, D&D free, selective seeing one client per day, looking hot etc...) because with your attitude she probably won't even reply to your text or bother dealing with you since everyone wants to see her.

You would be able to get lower tier escorts. The types that probably have walk-ins and no appointments and see like ten to twenty clients per day. The type you'll puke a day after and kick yourself for even dealing with her and think you caught an STD.

You only get one short to make a first impression with the upper-tier escorts because they block people. Whether they fake sexual interest or not, they are very selective with who they see or get intimate with.

He thinks going to a hoe is like fapping while watching porn. I don't think the loser weirdo could be able to go to a hoe and have real fun fuking her.
C'mon men, married and engaged men go to hoes, they just like them. Fuking hoes is not mutually exclusive with being a good player (or not).
You can be a weirdo an go to hoes. You can be sucessfull with women and still go to hoes because you want to orgasm in 30 minute from now and don't have the mood to deal with women at that moment.

If you are confident enough about your capability, you won't be bothered for going to hoes as it is a demonstration that you are not good with women or that you are not attractive 'cause you know it is not the case.

The same goes for weirdos. If a weirdo goes to hoes *because* he is bad with women, going to hoes doesn't make him good with women or 'alpha', he is still bad and needs to improve himself.

It is like Hugh Grant, he got a beatiful wife, he is an alpha/rich/famous guy and still got catched hiring a street hooker. He didn't do that 'cause he is a weirdo. He just wanted easy and fast sex.

 

[corrector]

He thinks going to a hoe is like fapping while watching porn. I don't think the loser weirdo could be able to go to a hoe and have real fun fuking her.
C'mon men, married and engaged men go to hoes, they just like them. Fuking hoes is not mutually exclusive with being a good player (or not).
You can be a weirdo an go to hoes. You can be sucessfull with women and still go to hoes because you want to orgasm in 30 minute from now and don't have the mood to deal with women at that moment.

If you are confident enough about your capability, you won't be bothered for going to hoes as it is a demonstration that you are not good with women or that you are not attractive 'cause you know it is not the case.

The same goes for weirdos. If a weirdo goes to hoes *because* he is bad with women, going to hoes doesn't make him good with women or 'alpha', he is still bad and needs to improve himself.

It is like Hugh Grant, he got a beatiful wife, he is an alpha/rich/famous guy and still got catched hiring a street hooker. He didn't do that 'cause he is a weirdo. He just wanted easy and fast sex.

I don't know. Somehow in "escort-world" it seems, at least on the surface, they care more about race (ie if you are white or at least not black) then whether you are a loser-weirdo or well adjusted. If you are not white, then, you have to white maxx or have to up the game a bit.

I visited an escort back in 2014 and had an ugly panic attack the next day which lasted for the rest of the month. The panic attack started just after playing this music video called "Brighter than the Sun":

the following morning because I felt too pagan when I visited two escorts in a 24 hour period and felt I lost my moral identity as being a morally grounded person. That shock was too much for me to handle. That really hurt me and I never visited another escort since.

 

[Lover_boy]

So I guess its correct to say, that a true alpha male, and I mean using the term "alpha" (as this word has been thrown around a lot in this post) as a man who thinks, behaves, and believes highly of himself and is congruent with that behavior and mindset in every aspect of his life, can still hire a hooker and pay for a fast lay.

I believe the issue is when it becomes a habit and the only means to get sexual intimacy from a woman. Especially if you are under 45. If you are over 50, wealthy, but maybe your sexual market value has hit a downfall. Then I can see why many wealthy men will settle for just paying for sex. And even in the "escort sexual market place" there are still standards of women.

However, lets not ignore the fact that some men actually pay for the hooker's time. Meaning they go out on dates with them, take them shopping, take them out for dinner and pay for all their time spent with them. Now its not just about paying for sex, but more about paying for a women's companionship. Would he still be considered alpha at this point?

The truth is, a man should be his highest best self in every way; business, fitness, finances, control of his emotions, and yes even seducing women. If you're solely relying on paying for hookers because you dont want to waste precious time in getting to know a woman (which actually makes a valid point) then you're half way there.

 

[ZosoWicca]

However, lets not ignore the fact that some men actually pay for the hooker's time. Meaning they go out on dates with them, take them shopping, take them out for dinner and pay for all their time spent with them. Now its not just about paying for sex, but more about paying for a women's companionship. Would he still be considered alpha at this point?

That's pretty simp actually.
Paying a hoe should be just to smatch her @ss and get the dik wet, not feeding her ego, just treating her as the piece of meat as she can offer herself.

However, what if a succesfull guy like Richard Gere hires a hoe like Julia Roberts (Pretty woman). He is already alpha, hiring a hoe doesnt reduce or increase his value.

 

[ZosoWicca]

The truth is, a man should be his highest best self in every way; business, fitness, finances, control of his emotions, and yes even seducing women. If you're solely relying on paying for hookers because you dont want to waste precious time in getting to know a woman (which actually makes a valid point) then you're half way there.

Exactly. If it is the case, it shouldnt be a problem at all. If it is affecting some other abilities or the self-steem, then it is a problem. It depends on the context someone is.

 

[corrector]

Paying a hoe should be just to smatch her @ss

This. She can sit on your lap too.

 

[SW15]

"Alpha" and "beta" for humans depends on the social context. My boss at work is the alpha at work. He's a beta with his wife. Middle-managers at work, the "betas" are alphas in their social groups. They are also betas in social groups they're not as established in.

It's context-dependent. But generally, "alpha" is a man who behaves in accordance with high testosterone levels. It doesn't mean everyone supplicates to him, or that he's the leader of everyone.

So many white collar manager bosses are alphas in the context of their work but betas in romantic relationships.

As I've often said on this forum, a first date with a woman should never involve expensive wine 'n dine venues. It should be at a casual bar or lounge where costs can be moderated and it's clear that you're not trying to impress anyone. Don't take her to a dive. Just an unpretentious, nicer upscale bar, pub, or lounge. If the date goes well and it's clear that she's attracted to you, then you can take her with you to eat somewhere. If the date is not going well and she ejects after 2 rounds of drinks, you're out $35-40 tops. Big deal.

This is good advice provided that you don't have too many first dates that fail. Those $25-$40 failed dates will add up. Swipe apps lead to the highest quantity of failed dates.

This is because...

• men can get more first dates from swipe apps in a lot of cases than they would from cold approaching because they can be in more places at the same time.
• interactions behind electronic screens are mostly useless. They can't predict anything about the in-person experience. A lot of men have good texting and possibly phone call sessions but the interaction falls flat in person. A 5 minute in-person interaction can save a bad date costing hours and $25-$40. Video calls can help with this which is why I don't oppose them. However, video calls are still less efficient than cold approaching.
• cold approaching is the most brutal thing out there. Swipe apps can pump you up with false hope but cold approach never does that. In cold approach, you are what you are.

The most common type of date from a swipe app is "one date, no sex, no second date". That's a complete waste. Men are better off going on fewer dates and avoiding that type of date. That type of date can happen from cold approach but in less volume.

There's a lot of post-feminist b!tching and moaning about paying the date tab on this forum, that women should pay half etc etc. THE MAN PAYS. He's not paying because he wants poon from her. He's not paying to impress her and simp. Doing either is a huge turn-off to women. He's paying because he's the man, and the man leads, the man takes care of people under this charge, the man is responsible. He takes care of his lady. Because he demonstrates that he is a masculine alpha man who protects, provides, and takes care of people, the lady is attracted to him. NOT because she wants his money.

I do not appreciate having to pick up tabs on early stages. At various points in my life, I have paid the tabs on dates for women with higher salaries than I had at the moment of the date. It is a bit of an outdated thing. With all of this said, I do it. Women's vaginas are in such demand that if I don't do it, the next guy will do it.

I don't fully agree with your premise. I think it's a combination of wanting to lead her and impress her. There's also the notion of "Whoever asks, pays" and most men are the askers for dates.

taking care of a woman on a date, which she agreed to attend because she is romantically/sexually interested in the man, is NOT THE SAME as a man hiring a professional skank to touch his d!ck. Not in any way. The only similarity is monetary expenditure, which you need to do in order to pay your rent, eat, get to work, fill your car with gas, copay a doctor's visit, whatever.

This is like saying "banging a hooker is no different from making a mortgage payment, because you have to spend money either way." Spending money on dates, and spending money on hookers, are not the fvcking same. In any way.

There are a lot guys on this forum who I very much doubt have any interest in actual pickup and seduction. They want to complain about women and Chad, and justify why it's better to bang hookers than to learn social skills with women.

It depends is the answer to most of this quote.

There are instances when "professionals skanks" are physically attracted to a client. I agree that taking a woman on a traditional date indicates that the woman is considering the man for sex.

Men pay for sex in every instance of sex. They either pay directly or indirectly. We're evaluating how direct a man is with his payment for sex.

You're correct that this forum needs to be pickup and seduction focused. Social skills and indirect payment seductions of women are difficult skills to gain. A guy who pays directly has a high cost per bang. It's always going to be high. Guys who pay indirectly are more likely to achieve a lower cost per bang if they can get a good grasp on social skills and charisma.

 

[ZosoWicca]

There are instances when "professionals skanks" are physically attracted to a client. I agree that taking a woman on a traditional date indicates that the woman is considering the man for sex.

This is something that ugly guys don't know. That's why they are very insecure about going to hoes as they think it makes them seem more betas and are in fact undesirable guys for every girl.

 

[Lover_boy]

This is something that ugly guys don't know. That's why they are very insecure about going to hoes as they think it makes them seem more betas and are in fact undesirable guys for every girl.

Again, so if you’re internal belief of yourself is that you’re a wimpy beta, unattractive and bad with women. Then that will reciprocate with every woman you encounter, if hookers.

But if you’re internal belief is the opposite

 

[Lover_boy]

Again, so if you’re internal belief of yourself is that you’re a wimpy beta, unattractive and bad with women. Then that will reciprocate with every woman you encounter, if hookers.

But if you’re internal belief is the opposite

But if you’re internal belief is the opposite, that you’re alpha. Then again that will show and women will respond accordinly, even hookers.