Almalieque wrote:
I was wondering what was taking you so long to respond with that. Unless you're doing one-night stands every night or every other night, then my point still stands. That's why I said "average" woman. An average woman may very well have one night stands, but if you're having them every other night, then you're no longer the "average" woman, because you know the average woman doesn't do that.
The average man isn't looking for sex every night or every other night, either. Nice try, though.
Almalieque wrote:
LOL LOL LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
no seriously...
HAHAHAHAH HAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA
OMG...*breathing hard* OMG.... really, I don't even think that nonsense needs to be addressed. You knew that was BS before you even wrote it, hence why you said I wouldn't agree with you. If that were true, there wouldn't be prostitution from either angle.
I must have just blown your mind.
Almalieque wrote:
I never said that or implied that. Once again, that's your own failure of interpretation. My point is and has always been that the average man will typically not be able to have sex UNLESS he pays for it or engages in a relationship.
Noooo. Your point was and always has been that a man has to pay for sex one way or the other. Either with cash in hand, or through a relationship.
Almalieque wrote:
You totally overlooked my contradictory thoughts. My original claim was that I don't like to pay for anything that I could get for "free". That's the most common non -moral reason against prostitution. Why pay for it? It's mostly an Ego thing for many guys, but purely financial for me. The most common counter to that is "you're paying for it anyway, because you can not obtain sex with out paying additional money that you wouldn't normally spend.".
That statement was to counter the belief that you shouldn't have to pay for sex. There's much more to it, but there's no need to get there if you can't even understand this simple concept.
That statement was to counter the belief that you shouldn't have to pay for sex. There's much more to it, but there's no need to get there if you can't even understand this simple concept.
My point is, if you're going to insist that a man has to pay for sex via a relationship, then a woman is paying for sex via a relationship, as well. That is... if you think that the only thing a relationship is good for is sex.
Almalieque wrote:
/smh... Money hungry is when a woman wants money or stuff. No where did I say or imply that. Money being spent is not the same thing as spending money on you. Like I said before, we could go on a date and split the bill. That doesn't make you money hungry, but I still spent money on a dinner that I probably wouldn't have spent if I were by myself. Now, if we met up for lunch during work or a favorite place that I normally eat at, then that would be different.
Oh, Alma. Where did this hatred for women come from, I wonder?
Almalieque wrote:
As soon as you truthfully answer my question that you ignored, please.
The one about why didn't I decry sexism in a thread that I didn't post in at all? Do I have to post in every single thread...?
Mostly, it's hilarious watching you stumble around, trying to defend yourself when I call you a woman hater. You dig yourself deeper, and you look so funny, I enjoy it.
