This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I am not trying to be salacious here, but can you go into more detail? I'm wondering what you mean exactly.
Why I ask is that I am concerned this behavior pattern will become psuedo-normal across all of society and, to some extent, already is.
Theyll get into temporary relationships with men, and try to get them to pay for their nails, make up, or straight up ask for money from them. They hookup with these men much more then they really date them.
This is not prostitution since that implies a much higher frequency and a more direct means of payment, regardless, I wish them the best and hope they can mend their ways. This behaviour is quite common in all classes, women need providers and sometimes sleep with them so that they continue providing. I do not fault her sisters as much since this screams lack of money. It is not ideal and they would stop if they were to escape their financial hardship.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Pseudo sugar baby behavior ‘dating’ men who provide ‘gifts’.
Tagging @Nerd as well.
Understood, and thanks for the elucidation. But, as @mrvanillasky says, this isn't prostitution not only because of the semantic or technical arguments on frequency, solicitation, clearly stated exchange of services for money etc, but because the way in which these women think about themselves is different and, yes, that does matter.
This behavior is probably anti-social. It is definitely extremely poor mate selection followed by even worse "relationship" management. It's trying to paste over some very real material needs with a cheap concept of a relationship.
But it is categorically different than intentionally selling one's body and sexual services. When this occurs, things get even darker and less likely to be recoverable. In this case, a person has made a commodity of themselves physically (and, some of us would say, spiritually as well. Let's leave that aside for now, however). It's a de-agency-ification of the self and that turns into a permission slip for all sorts of destructive and anti-social behavior. Often, the psychic strain creates deep substance abuse issues. There's an increasingly likelihood of involvement with a grey-market economy and the many sleazy characters who involve themselves with it and, sometimes, even outright integration with organized crime (old school biker gangs still "run girls").
Again, all of this isn't to say that your girlfriend's sisters are "doing just fine." This is bad, anti-social behavior and I hope they change their ways.
Still, I'll fight the fight about the specific use of the word "prostitution" which, in my opinion, needs to be treated very differently and very severely. The "two consenting adults" midwit argument papers over the fact that to the extent current day slavery exists, it's largely sex trafficking for purposes of prostitution.
thanks. providers or beta buxxers are not the same as men paying for prostitutes and all women indulge in this behavior to some capacity, OPs girlfriends sisters are on a very high percentile.
My perspective is more cold approach inspired. Most women can get away with guys paying for their things, they reward them with crumbs of attention, sometimes it can be the pretty girl making the nerd do her homework and smiling at him, other times it is this case or it can even be seeking arrangements, the sugar daddy website. Most guys are not "lovers", they cannot give the girl a good time and if you are strapped for cash, having a guy cough up things for you is not irrational.
Their behaviour is anti-social because they are doing this with multiple guys and not just one which might be because of the sexual revolution allowing women to reduce the consequences of sexual activity. Also, sex is not very frequent in these types of scenarios, most guys barely get to kiss the girl, let alone make love. If you come off as a guy who can be made into a paypig, you will be a paypig. So now you can send time with the lover, commit to the provider when you cant get the lover to commit and the provider willingly accepts the ordeal.
yep, same boat as you and appreciate the effortpost @100ProofTollBooth. Prostitution is also far more traumatic for the girl and the guy involved whereas beta buxxing mostly only hurts the guy. I have personally seen girls ditch providers for exciting guys and openly talk about using guys for buying them stuff for free, sometimes they might kiss them and rarely they would have sex with one of the many on her hook.
I don't doubt this phenomena exists, but I've never witnessed it first hand. Maybe people I know don't give off simp vibes?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link