You're not the one who likes eating poo, are you?

I morally object to the idea of paying for sex.

Get a fuckbuddy. Well, a non-fuck-buddy, as the case may be, but still.

Is it really that obscure and grotesque you cant find some open minded poly lass on Fetlife?

If you'd care to share your kink, I might be able to recommend someone.

>>31015

The last deviant I remember was arsepisser.

>>31016

Fetlife is too old Internet.

>>31017

Severe tease and denial with various humiliation, financial domination and similar.

>>31016
What is so bad about paying for sex? Especially for those who can't attain it?

>>31018
Findom will rapidly destroy your relationship if it actually involves money changing hands. You know how fetishes work, you'll want to escalate.

>>31020

Sex simply should not be a commodity. The existence of a black market where sex is exchanged for currency only makes it harder to attain for those who can't acquire it by natural means. That has social repercussions. It's a vicious cycle that harms both genders and their relations to one another, in a society which is already considerably atomised and estranged.

But this isn't the time and place to have the discussion. Much like healthcare, I strongly beleive sex is something that should never be a for-profit industry.

>>31018

>Fetlife is too old Internet.

So where do people go to score a kinky fuck buddy nowadays?

Asking for a friend.

>>31023
Feeld.

>>31022

chronic masturbator detected

I have paid for a femdom session a couple of times (though not while in a relationship). It was fun, but did not scratch the same itch as being in a relationship that involves those elements. Even though the mistress I visited was genuinely into the service and clearly enjoyed it, it just wasn't the same. And quite frankly it'd have been an expensive thing to do even semi regularly.

Is it really that hard to find a woman who'll treat you like shit and take all your money? I've got a few exes you might get on with.

>>31026
>was genuinely into the service and clearly enjoyed it
How can you tell? It's their job.

>>31028

You can tell, it's like the difference between a museum guide who is really, really into the unparalleled marvel of steam powered lawnmowers or whatever it is they're showing you, and one who is just there because it pays £20 an hour. Even if the latter is a good actor, I don't think you can fake actual enthusiasm.

Maybe I'm giving myself too much credit on how well I can read people, I don't know.

>>31028
I can often tell when people are shit at their non-sex jobs as well. I've never done it in person, but on the phone there are a couple of main types - the ones who are all "ooh, so sexy, mmm, sensual, OOOH" and they can do one, they likely fall into the camp of day job and even if they like their job, they do a terrible job of letting that be known and come across like some sort of shit 90's sex AI. Then there's the ones where you have a bit of a chat and some banter, maybe a sideways "haha, yeah it's a silly fetish isn't it. Now pass the rubber ducky, mum" because if they don't have a sense of humour about it then they're not for me. And they kind of...interact with you more? You can tell that it's at least not a chore and they're not watching the clock.

As for in person, if I do go down that road I'm going to take completely the wrong approach and try and get them to express genuine attraction to me as a person. Seems like doing 'the chase' on extra hard, which sounds fun.

>>31029
Yeah, doubtless we overestimate our abilities, but we can say for sure that we're quite good at detecting people who *don't* want to be there, so we've certainly got some insight.

>>31016

We all pay for sex one way or another

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aGO7dJb2po

>>31045
There's a certain type of woman who loves that abuse. Ask one of those horrible men to set you up with a demure librarian; they will fail utterly. If you have your eye on a specific woman, and she isn't into being treated horribly, kindness will win her heart. It's just that being a cock overrides the mental state of the sort of woman who loves being abused, so they all swarm around the twats in the pub and it looks like they can have any woman. Ask your female friends. They think he's a cock too.

>>31047
> Ask your female friends.
I, for one, don't have any female friends.

>>31047

This is a bit of a tangent, but through age and experience, looking back at all my previous successes and failures with women, it's not about being a bad boy arsehole. It's not about being a womanising cock who women hate but can't help getting wet over. It's just that if a woman desires you, she will give you almost unlimited second chances and let almost anything slide. It has no relation to what they say, or even what they think they want. I've treated some women in my past absolutely horribly, not intentionally, but just by being a bit clueless and not really sure in myself what I wanted at that time. But they were always willing to stick around, they put up with my shit for far longer than I ever would have the other way around, until I truly closed the door on things (often to my later regret.)

Anyway.

>>31045

No. Having worked as a “high end” escort I can say from mine, and colleagues (there are several discussion and info groups for pros, mostly for safety) experience that there are plenty of desirable, and highly desirable men, who pay for sex because of time restraints, convenience, indulgence or OP type “special” reasons. Don’t cry poorlad.

The Guardian's new agony aunt did a good response the other week to someone concerned that their 'perfect partner' wasn't doing it for them. She said that the letter writer was addicted to 'adrenalised love' whereby she'd get a rush from positive attention given by a partner whom she didn't know exactly where she stood with whereas someone who doesn't give you the lows and negative attention can be taken for granted.

>>31050

>Having worked as a “high end” escort

You've got skin in the game then, really, no?

If they're loaded or look like a Calvin Klein model, but haven't got the time, patience, or social skills for a simple one night stand, I would still categorise them as undesirable. They're married to their career and would only end up with a troubled relationship if they were to enter one, they're unable to hold one down for other reasons, whatever it might be, hence it suits them to transact financially for their intimacy.

The sadness I feel here is in sympathy for them, honestly. The state of the modern world is such that many find it easier to pay for companionship than find it in a natural and ultimately much more rewarding way. That's sad.

>>31045

>This isn't chronic sissify MRA talk

Yes, it is.

>>31054

The problem with a one night stand is that it lasts an entire fucking night, and, depending on where you are, costs about the same as an hour or two with one of adultwork's finest like >>31050.

I can't think of anything more rewarding than paying a bit of cash to get my end away and then be able to immediately leave and get on with my day.

It might not be hard to find a shag on Tinder or a bar, but the surrounding effort is not worth it and is certainly not natural or rewarding.

>>31057

Is it any wonder the world is in such a state when you entitled millennials can't even stomach spending the night with a woman and waking up early to sneak out? You've just had your attention span fried by all your instant dopamine video gadgets. It's a wonder you can even cum in a bird's fanny at all if she doesn't make noises like a loot-box opening.

>>31058

I know you're probably joking, but I'm almost certainly older than you.

>>31054

>The state of the modern world

There's a reason why they call prostitution the oldest profession. Until the Victorians invented prudery, most towns in Britain had at least one "Gropecunt Lane".

There's nothing weird about paying a professional to cook your dinner or give you a massage. Paying for sex is only weird if you choose to view it that way.

>>31058
I can't nut into.a woman, presumably due to all the wanking I do, which I do due to awkwardness and wimpiness and lack of sexual history. Please don't make out that it's a moral failing.

I've always wanted a reason to say this.

But nutting inside a woman doesn't feel good. Or rather, it feels too good. A bit overwhelmingly good. There, I said it.

>>31062
Try grabbing her tits from behind like bike handlebars, and biting down hard on the area between the shoulder and the neck like a vampire while you nut. I don't know if it is only me, but I can pass out if I do that, and wake up confused.

Maybe it is do to with poor circulation and lack of breathing...

>>31063
How do you grab bike handlebars?

>>31064
The fancy ones that the roided racers use. Like milking a cow. The weird downwards ones that look uncomfortable. Apologies lad, I never got on a bicycle since I was 15.

>>31059

You can be almost a full ten years older than me and still qualify as a millennial, and I'm in my 30s. Sorry mate.

>>31060

Yeah and back in those days they also had witch burnings and the black death, there's nothing inherently noble about something being around a long time, or even about it being "normal". Remember that until relatively recently it was "normal" to give your wife a good smack if she got your dinner wrong.

>>31066

He didn't say it was inherently noble he just pointed out it's nowt to do with
>The state of the modern world

>>31066

If your argument is that paying for sex isn't natural, then you can't really use that argument. It's as natural as cooking food.

>>31068
Raw vegan here, I find this offensive.

>>31068

At no point has that been the argument. The argument is that commodified intimacy is bad for you whether you realise it or not.

You're perfectly entitled to say "No, I enjoy it!" but plenty of people like cracking cocaine, don't they, so.

>>31070
No it's not. It can be, like anything it can be bad if you depend on it or are addicted to it, or use it to replace the pursuit of organic intimacy.

But simply hiring someone for a shag? That's really neither here nor there, and speciously broad points like "bad for you whether you realise or not" are, well, pointless. You're perfectly entitled to say that but plenty of people are capable of visiting a prostitute and leaving happier than/that they came. On top of that, sex carries varying levels of intimacy for different people. You're implying prostitution is unilaterally bad, "whether you realise it or not", which is a bit of a loaded statement. You're also perfectly entitled to make an indepth argument as to why it's unilaterally so, and also admit whether you have any biases on the subject. That would be informative and useful, as opposed to blithely judgemental.

>>31070

Are you one of those people who says wanking to porn is also bad for you? If not, what's the difference?

>>31072

You don't have to pay for a wank.

Unless you're the kind of div who can't get off unless he's buying a bird a £150 handbag off her Amazon wishlist.

>>31073
You really don't make any sense.

>>31073
Can you got back to /b/, or preferably another website?

Let's get back to the findom stuff, I'm losing my semi. And OP, if your moral compass allows it then go for it. Obviously might be better overall if you can get your wife on board, but if you've weighed everything up and want to do it, it's probably either going to be a nail in the coffin, or make you feel closer to her. Or a mix of both. If we're not here to help you through the moral dilemma, is this basically just a post on how to find good hookers?

>>31071

Otherlad, here. I have to say, I don't think it's much of a stretch to define sex as an inherently intimate act, just by virtue of what you're doing. Separating the act from the intimacy, to me, seems very difficult without either emotional numbness or some degree of pathology. "Bad for you whether you realise it or not" is broad, but also quite correct.

As always, there's tradeoffs. Do you spend a bit of money for stress relief, intimacy, fulfilment of a very powerful and primitive (or perhaps niche and otherwise unattainable) need, at the risk of potentially changing your experience of sex in the future, perhaps to the detriment of a later relationship?

>>31080

>>or some degree of pathology

Hmmm. I honestly think this is way more common than we want to think it is.

>>31082

Is it really pathological to take the easiest route to a shag? I truly don't understand how it's any 'worse' than going to a club and finding some lass who is about as drunk as you are to take home for one night. Explain how that's any more intimate.

>>31083

Exactly. I for one want to have sex tonight, but I hate Tinder and can’t be arsed to go out so instead I have arranged for an escort. Victorianvalueslad might not approve, but I don’t care.

>>31083

The same reasons cooking your own food is more rewarding than ordering a takeaway. Now, I'm not going to stop anyone ordering a takeaway if that's what they really want, but nobody gets nearly so defensive when you point out that the takeaway is bad for them.

>>31085
"More rewarding" isn't the same thing as good for you. You can just as easily cook an unhealthy home meal.

>>31086

I think what we're really talking about here is the difference between instant and delayed gratification.

I'm a hedonist so I believe in all things in moderation, but in nearly all circumstances I have observed that delayed gratification is more rewarding in the long term, and leads to a healthier mindset/lifestyle. I can't be arsed to find out if there are any real studies on this but most pulp-psychology advice bollocks I've seen throughout my life seems to align with the hypothesis.

I've fucked a prostitute once in Amsterdam. She was very attractive and very good at what she did, but at the very moment of ejaculation I knew I had wasted my money. I could have easily had a long, stoned wank when I got back to the hotel and come away just as, if not more, satisfied, but without having dropped €60 on it.

>>31087

Right, I'll hire a prostitute to sleep with me but only in six months from now. Also, I'm going to start eating at restaurants instead of cooking for myself but insisting the food not be served until at least half as long again as it would take me to cook the same thing.
That's super delayed gratification, has to be the most healthy way of all.

Meh, I'll start a cult, as usual, and get the enthralled cultists to fuck me. No transactions, nice and intimate, just me and a handful of oiled naked acolytes. It'll take me a few months to get he compound set up and fortified, so plenty of delay for the gratification.
This is such a weird discussion. Such firmly held beliefs with so little evidence, and the burning urge to get others to obey.

>>31089

I don't think there's any way you can seriously deny, that would be more fun than hiring a hooker.

It's like we're always telling depressed lads on this board. What you need is a hobby.

>>31090

You could turn shagging prozzies into a hobby, too, a bit like trainspotting. Carry a little notebook about, log the time, their name, and their national insurance number, maybe a short description of any rare or unique attributes like a missing leg etc.

>>31090
I'm in the initial stages of writing a how-to book for starting a cult. It's very similar to starting a dictatorship really, the main difference is scale.

>>31091

>>31091

I remember a story in a guy who did more or less than and used the results to publish a sort of hookers guidebook. It’s was obviously on Eurotrash or similar.

>>31091
Sounds like punternet.