escorts vs civvies

[GoodMan32]

If you're familiar with me, chances are you're aware that, while I have banged civvies, I mainly utilize escorts (Other than a one-and-done from 2021, the last time I banged a civvie was 2015).

I compiled an explanation of why (from my perspective at least) escorts are better than civvies:


There are so many complicated rules to follow when trying to get sex from a woman, even if the woman appears to be into you.

If you come on too strong, she’ll change her mind about giving you sex (because you come across as desperate).

Then on the flipside, if you don’t come on strong enough, she’ll also change her mind about giving you sex (because she’ll think you’re not interested, she’ll think you haven’t done enough to prove yourself “worthy,” etc).

If you say or do the “wrong” thing, even once, she’ll change her mind about giving you sex.

It’s extremely difficult to find the precise balance a woman wants. I (along with a lot of guys) have come to the realization it’s more logical to go the escort route. With escorts, you don’t have to worry about the tentative intercourse getting revoked over a slight misstep. Nor do you have to wonder if you’ll get sex; you know for a fact you’ll get sex with the escort.

What are your thoughts?

 

[EyeBRollin]

Thoughts? Believe it or not, there is more to women than sex. If sex is all a woman can do for you, keep doing what you are doing.

 

[SW15]

You have to keep paying the escort every time you have sex with her. That can be costly.

 

[EyeBRollin]

You have to keep paying the escort every time you have sex with her. That can be costly.

Escorts are cheaper than civvies.

 

[SW15]

Escorts are cheaper than civvies.

With an escort, a man is directly paying for sex. In conventional dating, a man is indirectly paying for sex. Either way, a man pays for sex.

It's quite difficult to assess which one is more expensive. It would depend upon many variables. Frequency of sex in a conventional relationship would be one of the many variables.

Some men might also need to take on expensive status symbols in order to get sex indirectly. There are men that buys Rolexes and expensive cars in order to get sex. Without those possessions, it would be far more difficult for them to get sex. The costs of those have to be factored into the indirect cost of getting sex. Every repair bill and insurance payment on a BMW or Mercedes-Benz would factor into the indirect cost of sex.

 

[corrector]

With an escort, a man is directly paying for sex. In conventional dating, a man is indirectly paying for sex. Either way, a man pays for sex.

It's quite difficult to assess which one is more expensive. It would depend upon many variables. Frequency of sex in a conventional relationship would be one of the many variables.

Some men might also need to take on expensive status symbols in order to get sex indirectly. There are men that buys Rolexes and expensive cars in order to get sex. Without those possessions, it would be far more difficult for them to get sex. The costs of those have to be factored into the indirect cost of getting sex. Every repair bill and insurance payment on a BMW or Mercedes-Benz would factor into the indirect cost of sex.

Sounds way cheaper with the escort. The OP had a low paying job and is visiting them twice per month (as he is older and his libido is lower). If you have a very low libido (ie esp once a month) and a low paying job to boot where you have to mortgage yourself into debt to get the indirect status symbols then the escort thing sounds cheaper.

 

[corrector]

The problem with the OP is that when he hits retirement and is on pension then he wont be able to afford that. Low wage jobs sound like a retirement catastrophy.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

Another obvious difference: One requires skill, the other a credit card.

Also, just wondering if someone is just fracking prostitutes, why would said person care about seduction and becoming better at it?

 

[Plinco]

What's a civvie? And wouldn't it be better to have a girlfriend that you didn't have to pay for sex?

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

Guys who fack pros presumably use the term as an extrapolation of the word civilian, used to describe someone who is not a military combatant (in this case, prostitute). Still, the term has been misappropriated by several sectors of men (often) with no military experience, such as the police or members of gubmint - it's a way to dehumanize the subject.

What's a civvie? And wouldn't it be better to have a girlfriend that you didn't have to pay for sex?

 

[Hamurabimbi]

If you're familiar with me, chances are you're aware that, while I have banged civvies, I mainly utilize escorts (Other than a one-and-done from 2021, the last time I banged a civvie was 2015).

I compiled an explanation of why (from my perspective at least) escorts are better than civvies:


There are so many complicated rules to follow when trying to get sex from a woman, even if the woman appears to be into you.

If you come on too strong, she’ll change her mind about giving you sex (because you come across as desperate).

Then on the flipside, if you don’t come on strong enough, she’ll also change her mind about giving you sex (because she’ll think you’re not interested, she’ll think you haven’t done enough to prove yourself “worthy,” etc).

If you say or do the “wrong” thing, even once, she’ll change her mind about giving you sex.

It’s extremely difficult to find the precise balance a woman wants. I (along with a lot of guys) have come to the realization it’s more logical to go the escort route. With escorts, you don’t have to worry about the tentative intercourse getting revoked over a slight misstep. Nor do you have to wonder if you’ll get sex; you know for a fact you’ll get sex with the escort.

What are your thoughts?

Escorts vs Women. The use the term ‘Civies’ is like calling normal people’Cis’.

 

[corrector]

Escorts vs Women. The use the term ‘Civies’ is like calling normal people’Cis’.

It is how they refer to them on escort review boards (ie have not personally logged in to one over the past two years, so I'm not sure if THEY have changed that definition, but the last time I checked, that is what they call them). An escort is a woman (ie at least if you are a hetrosexual male), so therefore saying Escort vs Women is dehumanizing as it implies an Escort is not a Woman. However, an Escort vs Civvie, implies both ARE in fact women and therefore it is better to say that then somehow implying the other is not a real women, or something less then a real women.

 

[corrector]

Guys who fack pros presumably use the term as an extrapolation of the word civilian, used to describe someone who is not a military combatant (in this case, prostitute). Still, the term has been misappropriated by several sectors of men (often) with no military experience, such as the police or members of gubmint - it's a way to dehumanize the subject.

Saying that an escort is not a real woman is dehumanizing. The civvie term maintains the diginity that they are both women. Escorts are behaving differently from other women, but are not fundementally different or less than a real woman.

 

[RickTheToad]

If you're familiar with me, chances are you're aware that, while I have banged civvies, I mainly utilize escorts (Other than a one-and-done from 2021, the last time I banged a civvie was 2015).

I compiled an explanation of why (from my perspective at least) escorts are better than civvies:


There are so many complicated rules to follow when trying to get sex from a woman, even if the woman appears to be into you.

If you come on too strong, she’ll change her mind about giving you sex (because you come across as desperate).

Then on the flipside, if you don’t come on strong enough, she’ll also change her mind about giving you sex (because she’ll think you’re not interested, she’ll think you haven’t done enough to prove yourself “worthy,” etc).

If you say or do the “wrong” thing, even once, she’ll change her mind about giving you sex.

It’s extremely difficult to find the precise balance a woman wants. I (along with a lot of guys) have come to the realization it’s more logical to go the escort route. With escorts, you don’t have to worry about the tentative intercourse getting revoked over a slight misstep. Nor do you have to wonder if you’ll get sex; you know for a fact you’ll get sex with the escort.

What are your thoughts?

From the title, I thought this was a thread about Ford Escorts vs Honda Civics.

 

[pipeman84]

I think if you're an authentic guy who doesn't like BS, acting and manipulating, a guy in touch with his masculinity, escorts are an answer to the primal need of unloading.
To each their own, but if we remove sex, I don't think there are many guys who enjoy spending time with women they refer to as plates or FWBs. There's nothing in our evolution as males that makes it pleasurable to spend hours listening to a woman blabbing, have her drop her baggage on our backs, no biological urge to want to make out or do foreplay. What we're evolved to do and enjoy it is to have sex, period. That's why I said that if you're authentic, you go the direct route. If not, you'll go 3- 4 dates bamboozling a woman from Tinder before you get sex, although you realised within 2min of first meeting her that she's just fvck material.

Another obvious difference: One requires skill, the other a credit card.

Also, just wondering if someone is just fracking prostitutes, why would said person care about seduction and becoming better at it?

Seduction and becoming better at a relationship are for a special person (generally speaking a virgin) you have real chemistry with and with whom you connect on several levels. One can spend time with ran through hoes and fool himself that he's becoming better at seduction ... seducing ran through hoes? That doesn't sound like a desirable skill.

 

[zekko]

Thoughts? Believe it or not, there is more to women than sex. If sex is all a woman can do for you, keep doing what you are doing.

This is very true, but is a point of view I've rarely seen on this forum.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

I think if you're an authentic guy who doesn't like BS, acting and manipulating, a guy in touch with his masculinity, escorts are an answer to the primal need of unloading.
To each their own, but if we remove sex, I don't think there are many guys who enjoy spending time with women they refer to as plates or FWBs. There's nothing in our evolution as males that makes it pleasurable to spend hours listening to a woman blabbing, have her drop her baggage on our backs, no biological urge to want to make out or do foreplay. What we're evolved to do and enjoy it is to have sex, period. That's why I said that if you're authentic, you go the direct route. If not, you'll go 3- 4 dates bamboozling a woman from Tinder before you get sex, although you realised within 2min of first meeting her that she's just fvck material.

Seduction and becoming better at a relationship are for a particular person (generally speaking a virgin) you have real chemistry with and with whom you connect on several levels. One can spend time with ran through hoes and fool himself that he's becoming better at seduction ... seducing ran through hoes? That doesn't sound like a desirable skill.

Again, to each their own. But if you believe every woman you meet is a "through hoe," at the age of 39, how do you think you're going to find your virgin? I think one's beliefs greatly affect how one experiences women and what is enjoyable with them. And anyone who's doing more than two dates with women and making no progress is a fool. Personally - I LOVE women, just love them, the smell of their skin in the sun on the beach, the way they look at you when they love you, their girlish demeanor when they give you a gift they've been waiting to give you for a while, their laughter, the impish smiles you get from across the room, their tussled hair after a good romp in the early afternoon on a random Tuesday. God bless em. I LOVE WOMEN.

I don't think there are many guys who enjoy spending time with women they refer to as plates or FWBs. There's nothing in our evolution as males that makes it pleasurable to spend hours listening to a woman blabbing, have her drop her baggage on our backs, no biological urge to want to make out or do foreplay.

Again, if that's how you view women, then absolutely have at the prostitutes. As long as you're not delusional and think they somehow count as notches, like many do here. That's like claiming you're Chuck Yeager because you got a single-engine certification last week.

 

[GoodMan32]

You have to keep paying the escort every time you have sex with her. That can be costly.

If you have daily (or even weekly) sex, yeah.

Having sex with an escort twice a month, however (which is how often a lot of married couples do it), is probably cheaper than a wife

 

[GoodMan32]

The problem with the OP is that when he hits retirement and is on pension then he wont be able to afford that. Low wage jobs sound like a retirement catastrophy.

I hadn't even thought that far ahead. Yikes.

 

[GoodMan32]

Another obvious difference: One requires skill, the other a credit card.

Also, just wondering if someone is just fracking prostitutes, why would said person care about seduction and becoming better at it?

You're right, there's little to no incentive for becoming better at seduction when you go the escort route. That's one drawback of escorts.

That being said, even in my days before I utilized escorts, I met my sex partners online. Seducing a woman in person has never been a strongpoint of mine.

Interestingly, the 2 sex partners I met in person came after I had developed my escort habit (one came a few months after; the other one came 6 years after)