@kense .... could she tape the bills together as “ fig leaves” and wear them ?
There ... no more nakedness.
Man some of you guys have no hesitation wading into very charged topics... maybe let’s back off the rape topic.
@DarrenWalker I actually think it’s the other way around... women aren’t inherently more worthwhile because bride prices exist(ed). Instead, bride prices exist(ed) because women are inherently more worthwhile.
Isn't a dowry, the opposite of a bride price ? It depends on the culture.
In "The Handmaid's Tale" reproductive females are very scarce, but that doesn't help them very much.
Yeah... that's life man. Each sex has their positives and negatives.
I nominate the Best Post on the Topic Award to @youngChurro.
AND he's got some fabulous kicks in his Profile pics!! Welcome to the site Mr. @youngChurro
@geoff1000 Dowry is kind of an inverted bride price, but as far as I know usually the dowry actually winds up being the property of the bride, not the groom or his family.
I think women are less likely to reach out in general. I say hi to people that visit me etc. other than that I do not assume that people are up for a chat
@mb0 suggests that "women aren't inherently more worthwhile because bride prices exist(ed). Instead, bride prices exist(ed) because women are inherently more worthwhile."
As someone raised in the Christian church, I question the idea that a society which tells a man to buy a woman from her father like she's a cow or a sheep (albeit a very expensive one) is doing it because the woman's "inherently more worthwhile" than the man. And, @geoff1000, since a dowry is given to the new husband rather than taken from him like a bride price is, I guess it is the opposite. But still not all that great for the woman.
Bride price: the woman's father gets the money. Dowry: the woman's new husband gets the money.
The groom's supposed to use a dowry to take care of the bride, but that doesn't necessarily mean she's gonna see a penny of it. Of course, if she's lucky, the groom will give her a dower. The woman gets to keep that. (Traditionally it's for in case she gets widowed—because we all know women can't earn their own living.)
The whole thing, though, comes down to seeing women as expensive things to be bought (while men do the buying).
Not sure it's awesome on either end.
"Not sure it's awesome on either end."
The only advantage to being a woman, is that when a baby is born, she can be sure that she is one of its biological parents ; whereas a man needs to ensure his wife's fidelity, to avoid being misled into supporting another man's child, hence the term cuckolding. However, modern DNA testing is now so quick, cheap and reliable ; that any suspicious man can find out very easily if he has been misled, so has much less reason to surveil his wife 24/7.
The modern wife, however, still has no idea if her husband has been playing way ; and is spending some of his time and the household income, to support another woman's child. The contraceptive pill gave women some sexual freedom, but the rules are still biased in favour of the men. Imagine men and women playing a game of paintball, and while the men wear padded overalls, the women wear bikinis ; the greater risk of getting hurt, is sure to make them much more cautious.
Well, there's that advantage. And then there's the fact that women, on average, live longer than men.
But on a site like this one, what we mainly see are male enthusiasts trying to hire female pros for a totally non-sexual thing that nonetheless mimics the century-old idea that men buy while women are bought. And so we hear stuff like "It's the ones you don't pay for that cost the most"—talking, obviously, to the purchasers, not to the merchandise.
@DarrenWalker I deeply appreciate you.
Aw. Thanks, @littermate. It's nice to be appreciated. I try, but sometimes I think I'm mostly just trying....
@DarrenWalker
@DarrenWalker Any idea why male enthusiasts are trying to hire female pros for non-platonic purposes, when they could probably find sex workers instead ?
Any female pro who would willingly be non-platonic for money, is effectively a sex worker, so why are such men not looking in the place where they are more likely to find what they are seeking ?
I think you are right, I just don't understand it. Why buy a ticket in a raffle, when for similar money, one could buy the prize ?
In places where it is illegal to buy sex, a legitimate female pro with covert CCTV would catch them anyway.
@geoff1000: No matter what the men are trying to buy the women for, the dynamic's the same and it's what leads to the difference in responses the OP noticed. All that flattery, the barrage of friendly messages? The purchasers are trying to get hold of the merchandise. Boy, wouldn't they love it if the merchandise tried to get hold of them?
I think it'd be awesome if everyone just treated one another like human beings. But (as many posters on this site have noticed) that's not how things are. And it's not because women are inherently more worthwhile.
@DarrenWalker You have the dynamic here 100% backwards. That's because you confuse the "seller" with the evils of men trying to "purchase" women. In a dowry or marriage situation, it's usually the Father of the Bride-to-be who is making the sale (or other members of the family - not the Bride-to-be).
Here, it is the WOMAN HERSELF who - through her own choice and volition - puts a price on her time as a means to earn income. So it really makes little sense to disparage those who would seek out her services as "men trying to buy a woman." That actually runs counter to the spirit of the site (and of cuddling) itself and presumes that anyone who hires a Pro has some kind of misogynistic or hedonistic ulterior motive.
It's usually unfair and unwise to paint everyone with such a wide brush due to the behavior of some outliers.
"I think it'd be awesome if everyone just treated one another like human beings. But (as many posters on this site have noticed) that's not how things are."
Yep, thats exactly the same conclusion i came to and the same ideal i would love to see here.
Isn't part of the problem that a man with several female partners, is regarded differently by society, to a woman with several male partners ? If the ratio is naturally 50 :50, and some men take more than one, that skews the ratio a little. Now subtract an equal number of each, for the monogamous relationships, and it becomes very skewed.
@StoryDoctor1138: So after centuries of being bought and sold, women have internalized the idea that they're valuable merchandise and have started selling themselves so they can at least get something out of this whole "women as product" thing. Doesn't make the dynamic any better.
And it is the dynamic I'm objecting to, not the people who're messed up by it. Who wants to have to buy someone to love? Who wants to have to sell?
It's unpleasant on both sides, and both sides do what they can to make the best of it. That's human. And yeah, @geoff1000: a person who rides a lot of different motorcycles, say, is seen differently from a motorcycle that's ridden by a lot of different people. Same problem, different angle.
@DarrenWalker Sorry, but I don't believe the women on this site are acting based on "centuries of being bought and sold." That doesn't even enter into most people's consciousness. I also don't think they - or the majority of guys - think of this as a "women as product" situation.
This seems like a concealed complaint about Pros charging for cuddling that you don't feel you should have to pay for and trying to blame centuries of "bad behavior by men" as the reason. It's just not ringing true. Not to me, anyway.
@StoryDoctor1138: You don't have to believe that societal beliefs and actions over centuries still affect people's behavior today in order for it to be true. Institutionalized behaviors exist even when no one acknowledges them—I'm just pointing out that "woman as product" is a thing that's been going on for centuries and still affects human behavior today.
Maybe I see it better because, depending on what people assume I've got between my legs, I get treated both ways: as purchaser and as merchandise. For instance, I can tell what you're assuming....
@DarrenWalker "For instance, I can tell what you're assuming...." Really? Do tell. I bet you can't.
I'm not going to argue your point of view because you seem dug in pretty tight, but I disagree that you see things "better." I think you choose to wear glasses of a certain color based on your own experience and they show you what you believe to be true. Objective reality differs.
In any event, you seem upset that women choose to charge money to be a Pro on this site and that makes them and others treat them as a "product" - and that somehow that is the fault of men dating back generations. If you had a more clear vision - if you saw it "better" - you'd realize that they're offering a service that can be desperately needed by too large a portion of the population by both men and women. Some of us are happy to pay for a hug and, surprise, discover a wonderful friend in the process.
@StoryDoctor1138: I note that you're assuming I feel entitled to cuddles from women.
"This seems like a concealed complaint about Pros charging for cuddling that you don't feel you should have to pay for," you said. Of course, there are male pros on this site—and intersex ones too, for all I know—but not only were you talking about "the women on this site," you also followed up with a helpful clarification in your latest comment, saying that I "seem upset that women choose to charge money to be a Pro on this site."
So I feel entitled to cuddles from women—I don't feel I should have to pay to cuddle with them. This is a very interesting assumption. It's also incorrect, but never mind that for now.
Stereotypically, who feels entitled to cuddles from women and is upset by "having" to pay for them? Is it a woman? Is it an intersex person? (Do we even have any intersex behavioral stereotypes?) I conclude that you were assuming—at least in this comment—that I was assigned male at birth. My response may have made you less certain....
...you seem upset that women choose to charge money to be a Pro on this site and that makes them and others treat them as a "product" - and somehow that is the fault of men dating back generations.
Incorrect.
I'm bothered by the fact that society has put men in the "buyer" and women in the "bought" position for centuries, thus leading to a current state of affairs in which men are expected to purchase a woman's attention, affection, etc., and women are expected to be purchase-worthy. I'm bothered by a world in which women try to be physically attractive and men try to be financially attractive.
I'm bothered by a male/female dynamic that means men have a hard time selling themselves as warm, friendly, and safe, while women are chased by men who expect all that safe, friendly warmth no matter what the woman is or isn't offering. Throw enough money at it and you'll get what you want, right?
I don't like the state of society—going back centuries—which treats men and women so differently, and isn't good for anyone.
Darren i see it similarly as you stated it in the last 3 paragraphs. And your sharing is most appreciated especially from your unique experience seeing it from both sides.
@DarrenWalker I've read your posts before and you're always very quick to point out that you have assumed the role of different genders in different places at different times... so I didn't presume that you were a "male." I simply looked at your words and commented on the opinion.
Therefore, you have proceeded from a false assumption. That's all I'll say on that matter because I do not want to get pulled into a discussion about gender politics and terminology and related topics. That wasn't the subject of this post.
I didn't mention stereotypes (that was you) nor do I default to thinking of people that way. You seem to paint everyone with that brush, though... as either looking at everything stereotypically or choosing to live up to what their "stereotype" is. I think that's a huge over-simplification and treats people as being incapable of making any choices that "society" hasn't put them in the position of making.
I think you're overthinking it and making more of a direct correlation of the male/female dynamics on this site to generations of society's directives and "bride price" than actually exists. This is a place where people are looking - some desperately - to connect with other people physically and emotionally through cuddling. Some charge. Some don't.
Storydoctor great sharing and dialogue with Darren. There is no right or wrong view all views are welcome and help us to see clearer. Thanks so much for your participation.
Ah. So, @StoryDoctor1138, you'd be just as likely to look at this post...
PrettyPosy On a site like this one, what we mainly see are male enthusiasts trying to hire female pros for a totally non-sexual thing that nonetheless mimics the century-old idea that men buy while women are bought. And so we hear stuff like "It's the ones you don't pay for that cost the most"—talking, obviously, to the purchasers, not to the merchandise."
...and see a concealed complaint about pros charging for cuddling that she doesn't feel she should have to pay for. An interesting claim; pardon me for not believing it.
I think you're overthinking it and making more of a direct correlation of the male/female dynamics on this site to generations of society's directives and "bride price" than actually exists.
Overthinking is something I get accused of a lot. Sometimes I wonder if any thinking at all is "overthinking" for some people.
"Why do we respond differently to men and women on this site?" someone asks. "Women, even women in their fifties, even women with no pictures, get bombarded with messages (while men in the same situation get no messages). If a man writes something really good and deep on the forum, hardly anyone seems to notice (while a woman writing the same thing would be flooded with compliments from men)."
I point out that this dynamic is hardly a new one. Men pursue, women are pursued. Men buy, women are bought. Men have the money, women have the gentle softness. This dynamic, I point out, has existed for centuries (and people have adapted to it).
How is this overthinking?