I look repulsive and my personality isn't much better. Hookups are quite out of the question. But it must be nice to be attractive and have enough money to go out clubbing.
Stop being such a goddamned quitter. Go to r/pua or r/seduction, r/fitness and r/malefashionadvice and follow the advice in the sidebar. If all you want to do is get laid even with a repulsive personality it’s a numbers game and the highest value is in the PUA stuff. Having a body that works like it’s supposed to will both help you with getting some and your mental health. Dressing well is the least important. If you just don’t care about that go all Steve Jobs about it and wear the same outfit all the time, whether it’s a suit like Vonneuman or a tracksuit that fits.
And don’t put yourself down. Other people are happy to do it for you.
If I can meet biological needs like eating by paying some one and not having to hunt and farm, why shouldn't I have the option of doing the same with sex?
I’m not saying you can’t. If you want to, go for it. But feeling that you are charmless and ugly is unpleasant even if you can buy sex. Even if you never want to have sex with someone you’re not paying I’d give the same advice to any man who felt he had a poor personality and physical experience. These are problems that are at worst, and I do mean worst, ameliorable.
> I look repulsive and my personality isn't much better.
If you tell yourself those things often enough, which frankly sound like what other people have said about you in the past, eventually you start to believe them as fact.
Both looks and personality can be improved upon, even if you are on a budget.
Glad you've been lucky, but don't make assumptions from data set of 1. It's trivial only for the most attractive and charismatic males. OkCupid has published some nice research on it
Luckily charisma can be learned and overcome all but the most outlying unattractive.
But yea prostitution is the world's oldest profession for a reason - sometimes people just want a transactional sexual encounter. For money, one can have no "equal parts" requirement - no need to reciprocate. It's not for everyone (or for me) but I can understand the attraction.
That is true for maybe 3-5% of the human race. Some people can indeed easily attract casual sexual partners in a matter of minutes or hours in almost any environment. But the vast majority of the population cannot. That’s why prostitution will never go away, regardless of how many laws are passed trying to limit it.
Yes I know, but there’s a massive societal expectation that it’s ok for a woman to beat her boyfriend if he cheated on her, even if it’s not married.
And “cheating” is up to the solipsism of the woman to decide, anything between kissing and looking at a girl on the street and thinking about a woman is considered cheating, at least because society believes the woman at face value.
So no, casual relationships are, depending on the subject, no different from marriage, juges recognize men as fathers even in casual relationships, and there’s no way today to make the contract clear with a woman today. Hence, prostitution would contractualize the casualness of the relationship and it’s not allowed today.
> prevailing concept that "consent" can be revoked AFTER you have consented
No, it can't; but what does happen is people taking "she didn't complain" as evidence of consent rather than evidence of coercion into not complaining.
Well, yes it can. You have to dismiss massive amounts of male testimonies to say that consent has never ever been removed after the fact.
Reasoning recursively: To dismiss males’ testimonials, you’d need to take girls’ words at face value, which, in itself, demonstrates that girls’ words are taken at face value by a lot of people in society, hence the recurring massive problem of false convictions.
The idea that there's a recurring massive problem of false convictions for rape is bizarre. In most countries it's extremely difficult to get alleged rape prosecuted in the first place and the conviction rate is low. I'm not going to dispute that it might have happened in some cases but it's a comparatively rare problem.
(Also, I'm going to assume you're not a native English speaker - the contrasting group nouns should be "men" and "women" not "males" and "girls")
>The idea that there's a recurring massive problem of false convictions for rape is bizarre
You are talking convictions, the OP seems to be talking Accusations and where the latest trend is to gain a conviction in the court of public opinion and to inflict punishment outside of a judicial system
This parenthetical is an odd leap. Perhaps it was meant to suggest that the author (who is certainly fluent in, if not a native speaker of, English) shouldn't use the word girls to refer to women?
Seriously, dude, if you're a "hungry man", open Tinder or just go to a local hook up bar. Hooking up for a one night stand is trivial.