Expectation of action after spending money

[Pandora]

My little feminist friend thinks its wrong for a guy to expect action after spending alot of money on a female. She tries to shame me for saying that if a guy spends alot of money on a chick then he should expect action. I am not saying that he should rape her or force her. I am saying that it should not be a shock to the female if the guy dumps her for not putting out.

My female friend says that if you pay on a date then the female should not be expected to give anything in return. She considers that prostitution. I tell her that if females expect to go on nice dates, then they should also not be surprised when we expect something in return. So its ok for females to want to be taken care of when it comes to food and movies, but its not ok for us to want to be taken care of when it comes to our needs.

I really think going dutch is the best thing. If a female has no romantic interest in a guy, then she should refuse him paying for her on dates. Period. Feminist and women want to play both sides of then fence on this one. Its ok for us to give them our money, but its not ok when we get pissed that they dont want to make out. I respect girls that say you are not paying. It lets me know where i stand. But if you accept multiple dates and then act like it came out of the blue that this guy wants to get romantic with you...thats bs.

 

[Down Low]

Agreed. The whole culture of gift-giving dates back many thousands of years. Gift-indebtedness is more ingrained into society than are the much later inventions of slavery, serfdom, and wage-employment. Everybody is taught as a young child not to accept gifts from strangers, since there's always a string attached.

The minute a woman put herself in a situation where men commonly offer gifts to women, she already prostituted herself. "No I didn't" and "it was him not me" are so juvenile you'd have to be developmentally arrested to use them.

All women are trained from birth to be wh0res. Wh0res get paid for sex. It's customary to hire a date-wh0re with a payment in advance (or soon into the date) with food and some sort of entertainment. A wh0re who refuses to put out after accepting the customary advance payment -- is both a wh0re and a thief.

 

[samspade]

I agree with your little feminist friend, but not because of some new age equalist b.s. reason.

On the first date, the guy should (generally) pay, and no he shouldn't expect anything in return. As difficult as it may be for some men to accept, a guy does have to work for it. That's what Game is all about - the shortest, cheapest path to sex.

Women are the selectors in the sexual market. They carry the precious cargo. No matter how well you "flip the script," they will choose, and you will compete. Even rock stars like John Mayer and Gene Simmons had to compete for the "easy" sex they got/get at some point.

The good news is, once you've properly gamed her, a woman is putty in your hands. In fact, I often find that after paying the first 1-2 times and sexing her well, a woman will start paying for ME. An interested, hooked woman will pay your way if she wants to keep you.

Just remember, the SMP (Sexual Marketplace) is not a human invention. It governs us all. And yes if you do want guaranteed action for your money, prostitutes operate at the most elastic end of it. But the idea that a date is quid pro quo is male logic, and while it may make sense to us, that's not how the female mind thinks. And that's the mind you have to persuade.

 

[Megaman XIV]

On the first date, the guy should (generally) pay, and no he shouldn't expect anything in return. As difficult as it may be for some men to accept, a guy does have to work for it. That's what Game is all about - the shortest, cheapest path to sex.

Women are the selectors in the sexual market. They carry the precious cargo. No matter how well you "flip the script," they will choose, and you will compete. Even rock stars like John Mayer and Gene Simmons had to compete for the "easy" sex they got/get at some point.

Ah, someone who realizes that women do the choosing at the end of the day. Game can only do so much for you. Rock stars who've got fame are indifferent by default because of groupies.

 

[samspade]

Ah, someone who realizes that women do the choosing at the end of the day. Game can only do so much for you. Rock stars who've got fame are indifferent by default because of groupies.

They still had to work hard to become famous and successful. That's the competition part. They weren't born with beautiful women on their c0cks. Someone born into more wealth may have to work less, but there's still effort to be put in. It's a market out there and you've got to commodify your skills, appearance, resources, etc. Game is still the most efficient way for men to sell themselves.

 

[Big Pappy]

wow.wow. WOW!

Look - I know this may be a foreign, different idea than what some of you are used to.

If you buy a gal dinner - it can be for rewarding good behavior.

Ultimately, though, the best policy is to be gracious. You buy a gal dinner or buy her stuff because of who YOU are. It has nothing to do with her. You do the asking, you do the paying. If she isn't into you in that physical/romantic way - why are you asking her out? If you're not sure, lay the smack down on her and find out. (Puh-lease tell me you've spent some kind of time with her - don't go kissing gals you just met and say "Well, Big Pappy told me to!". )

 

[Burroughs]

BRIFFAULT’S LAW:

The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.

Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

Any agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit

A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current/future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male.
__________________

 

[( . )( . )]

The whole discussion seems like a non issue for red pill men. This isn't 19th century old England, it's 2013 Western woman. If your paying for an unproven woman you haven't yet banged you deserve to be used for her free meal or whatever with nothing in return. I might also add: :crackup:

Your little feminist friend is correct. Alfa fux beta bux all the way baby, is actually the point she was trying to make in her own way.

 

[LiveFreeX]

I don't buy women anything on dates... well when I did date. I'm happy to pay for my wife and I to eat though because she's my wife and have access to her skirt whenever I choose BUT I make 10 times her income. Back to dating, you shouldn't give a chick anything on a date, I don't care who she is.

 

[whoneedscialis]

relationship always depends upon mutual understanding

Sexual relationship always depends upon mutual understanding of both the partners. Paying for a girl friend with expectation to get her indulged in sexual activity is wrong. Similarly, girl too should must make clear her stand in this regard.