American Women and Getting Paid

I dont NEED a man to by me a fucking thing ... I will however ALLOW someone special to enjoy treating me as a Lady.

It is not about "getting men to buy me shit" .... it is about being fully capable to take care of myself and to show respect to someone SPECIAL in my life by graciously ACCEPTING his attention and gifts and not cutting off his balls.

Lina Originally Posted by Sensual Lina

I was waiting on someone to make this connection. Hi Lina! Missed you darling...

Men need different things to feel special. What those things are is slowly evolving. But it used to be showing a lady that she was worth his efforts to court her. Even in the animal kingdom the female picks the male who can ensure strong offspring, and bring home the bacon. You would never have to tell a real woman who makes just as much or more than her man to help pay bills, or at least come to some type of mutually beneficial arrangement.

There are way more single women in the world than single men. We're earning more degrees than men now, earn our own money, and take care of our own families. Women have a stronger fortitude than men because we have to. When a man can leave a woman pregnant to live his life without responsibility, women have to stay and deal no matter what option she chooses (not that women don't run). We have children, go to school, pay the bills sometimes all at once, and try to still have room in our hearts to love. Don't talk about how we should FEEL like we don't need a man for a fucking thing. We don't. But it's nice to have one show his face from time to time. A real one though. And a dick swinging between your legs doesn't qualify you for the race.

When dating a lady who takes care of herself, there is nothing wrong with her letting a man treat her to a good time (Some guys only go after needy women. Their need to be appreciated supersedes their reasoning, I guess). Her income doesn't mean she is not worth that courtesy. I have never met a gentleman that would let me pick up the check, even when I invite, and expect to. I've only seen men expect a woman to go dutch when there is only mutual friendship between them (Hint: it's also a sign she doesn't like you.). I have rarely seen a lady pay the check unless it was a business meal or event. I only hear the younger boys complain about paying the check. I have 19 year old brothers who listen to songs about an independent woman who wouldn't dream of letting a man pay. Most real men would call that immasculating.

We all know that both money and sex are the great equalizers. In civilian dating, he who has the money controls the relationship. When a woman pays the bills, either because of the man's inability or unwillingness to get a job, he only has the wiggle room she gives him. If her main source of income is from this industry, his pride is doubly hurt. I could break out the horror stories, but I won't. Let's just say he shows it (and I'm not saying this is what happens with all relationships in the industry. Some poly-amorists and swingers I know have this down to a science. But even then all parties contribute to their households).

The problem with society is that people value money more than they value humanity. Relationships are not about love, but about what both parties bring to the table. However, admiring a person's drive to attain a better lifestyle is understandable. It just shouldn't be the only thing that matters. Newsflash guys. If you don't think a lady is worth your time and money, don't give it in your real life or this industry.

Yep. Not to make broad generalizations, but often american born/raised women forget that in order to be with a MAN they should let guys BE one. I covered the bill for my SO's birthday outing. Next time I pull out my wallet on a date will be ..... his next Birthday
Lina Originally Posted by Sensual Lina

Alternatively, some of us do not buy into preconceived notions of what a "real man" or "real woman" is. As Chevalier pointed out, such views are "rooted very heavily in antiquated gender stereotypes", as is the whole chivalry thing. I will note that I appreciate and expect chivalry from the man in this line of work. In my personal life, however, my belief on it is that such chivalry is based on views of women as lesser beings than men. Benevolent sexism is still sexism.

Instead of berating Leah for what she expects a man to bring to bring to the table why aren't people (that disagree so profusely with what she says) asking what she will bring to table that she sees of equal value? I think that's reasonable. Of course, you may disagree in what Leah perceives as value but aren't you even curious to see if it would affect your opinion?
C Originally Posted by Camille

Sure, I would be open to hearing what she has to say. I suppose the offense I have taken with the OP is the notion that men are "supposed to" carry the financial burden in their relationships and that women are "supposed to" have some other set role in relationships. I think a couple should strive towards a relationship that works for them, not one that has been laid out for them before they have even met.

I've only seen men expect a woman to go dutch when there is only mutual friendship between them (Hint: it's also a sign she doesn't like you.). Originally Posted by Tiffani Jameson

I disagree. I have gone dutch with or footed the bill for men I was truly interested in- and enjoyed doing so. Boy, do I feel in the minority here...

Well then, that explains it....





Who attacked anyone?
I do think Lina has backtracked a bit but she has not attacked me, nor I her.



Good point....did anyone feel attacked? I did not. That is all I can speak for. I hope nobody felt attacked by Chevalie!






Exactly and this is where it seems you have backtracked. Leah seemed to have made a blanket statement. One that you agreed with at the time. I pointed out that will not work all the time in a Western progressive society. Not that it still does not apply but times are changing.

You and Naomi seem to think that the backward way of doing business is the best way.....what if we went back even further in tradition and advocated that women could not drive or vote as in some say Muslim countries. Their arguments are much like yours.....that great tradition is much better than a progressive approach.

I vote on the side of choice...if you want to sit around waiting on someone to pay the bills fine by me but that is not what I would teach my daughter even though my Mom was fine in that type of system. Originally Posted by WTF

Actually I never agreed with OPs initial statement but rather stated my personal position.

MY PERSONAL position is that I will never put myself into situation where I NEED a man to pay my bills. As long as I don't NEED someone to buy me stuff I will ALLOW someone SPECIAL in my life to act as a man should. I pay my rent, utilities and all my bills all on my own. But when I go out with my SO - I have no wallet. It does not exist. I am sorry, but by tender age of 40 plus (I prefer to date men of age) Gentleman should be able to afford to take his GF out to dinner. If he can't, he should seriously review his career choices.

So where did I backtrack?

Lina

I was waiting on someone to make this connection. Hi Lina! Missed you darling...

Men need different things to feel special. What those things are is slowly evolving. But it used to be showing a lady that she was worth his efforts to court her. Even in the animal kingdom the female picks the male who can ensure strong offspring, and bring home the bacon. You would never have to tell a real woman who makes just as much or more than her man to help pay bills, or at least come to some type of mutually beneficial arrangement.

. Originally Posted by Tiffani Jameson

Been busy little bee out getting some bacon so I can be strong independent woman and pay for my BF's dinner

On serious note, you said it best. Men and women need different things to feel special. We women want LOVE and men want RESPECT.

xoxo

Lina

I disagree. I have gone dutch with or footed the bill for men I was truly interested in- and enjoyed doing so. Boy, do I feel in the minority here... Originally Posted by gfeamanda

I don't say that it never happens, it's just something that I don't witness. And I don't think that you're a minority, not at all. Women making the first move is not all that uncommon nowadays. Sometimes very good men need a bit of help getting to the yes. But I disagree with this approach, because guys like that tend to just go with the flow with whatever lands in their lap. It tends to lead to the lady trying harder than him to make the relationship work. The relationship tends to be a cerebral decision, rather than one based on love and consideration.

Empirically my experience has been different than the OP. The SO's in my life have taken me out. Sometimes they offered to pay on other occasions ... and sometimes I have let them; they were rather appreciative that a guy didn't feel like his honor or self-respect was being questioned by the offer or by the acceptance.

And, yeah, I have had ladies in the P4P take me out for a meal or two on a special occasion or if we were on an extended date of a week or more and they wanted to treat one night.

Different strokes for different folks.

What if I started a thread, "I am constantly counseling guys to stand up for themselves. Get as much tail as possible while minimizing financial and emotional investment. Learn how to identify and exploit vulenerable women.....(& on & on)...."


Imagine how much I would (deservedly so) get flamed?

Been busy little bee out getting some bacon so I can be strong independent woman and pay for my BF's dinner

On serious note, you said it best. Men and women need different things to feel special. We women want LOVE and men want RESPECT.

xoxo

Lina Originally Posted by Sensual Lina

Good for you, girl! I'm sure your SO appreciates your efforts to meet his needs.

It seems we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't on this one. If we're too independent we don't know how to be ladies, and if we're submissive and traditional we're gold diggers.

My point is, you guys don't have to be dense and just sit in a relationship or a courtship with a selfish person. The problem with guys today is they're nice to the wrong women. If your needs aren't being met, don't be afraid to end it. If not offering to buy you a meal makes her selfish, I think you should stick to pay for play.

What if I started a thread, "I am constantly counseling guys to stand up for themselves. Get as much tail as possible while minimizing financial and emotional investment. Learn how to identify and exploit vulenerable women.....(& on & on)...."


Imagine how much I would (deservedly so) get flamed? Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Actually hobby boards have threads like that all the time.

Lina

I really like Nina Sastri's post on 'Powerful Women'.

It provokes me to mention something I mention often and am required often to work on in my other/main life:

I am constantly teaching American women to get looked after/paid for by their men.

I tell them are they INSANE to pay half of dates, and the very real fact is that people pay for what is emotionally important to them. So if a guy is not paying for you, in whatever world you're in, he thinks very lowly of you.

How could he not?

A much older girlfriend tried to explain the b-----it she had been dealing with in her newish relationship to me recently, and how my words to her had pulled her through. She insisted he pay all bills for an upcoming trip. Duh.

She tried to explain to me the terrible debt American 'feminists' are paying now - "We burned our bras...".

I cut in in - "We did that in Britain too. Then we took their wallets.".

Any gentleman worth his salt knows he has to pay for his date. That's what I'm teaching American women that I meet - the more a man spends on you, the more he respects you.

Once they hear my logic, women always say "Well, yes!". Young or old.

It's a matter of respect.

Not that all women don't know that of course... I'm just repeating ancient sense.

Leah Ireland Originally Posted by Leah Ireland

I just wanted to repost the original thread starter.....lest we forget what some of us are responding to with less than applause....

Actually hobby boards have threads like that all the time.

Lina Originally Posted by Sensual Lina

Yes, hobby boards. I thought this discussion was about civie relationships. But since you brought it up, it is fair to say that the world view of the OP and others may be shaped by what they do for a living....

Yes, hobby boards. I thought this discussion was about civie relationships. But since you brought it up, it is fair to say that the world view of the OP and others may be shaped by what they do for a living.... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Ha! Interesting point. Are POVs of those who post here result of their "hobby" experiences or have we become providers/clients due to these POVs?

Lina

What if I started a thread, "I am constantly counseling guys to stand up for themselves. Get as much tail as possible while minimizing financial and emotional investment. Learn how to identify and exploit vulenerable women.....(& on & on)...."


Imagine how much I would (deservedly so) get flamed? Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Aww babe, I don't think she meant it like that. I know the wording's a little "tricky" but I believe she meant that all women deserve to be treated by a man in a courtship situation. Just think about it. You meet the woman of your dreams, and she is literally perfect except she doesn't pick up the check. She has brought you gifts as tokens of how she feels about you, so you know she's not selfish. She makes her own money, has her own property and you two are evenly matched financially. You bash her for not picking up the check and expecting you to be a gentleman? I think not.

And she really didn't lie when it comes to a man and his money. He will spend it on who and what he feels is important. Any parents out there know that you can't go too many places without finding something that would be cute for your kid, whether they need it or not. I think we should all ascertain what we consider important in the people we interact with.

I am completely uninterested in an emotionally intimate relationship with any woman with this attitude. Such women with the attitude you espouse reduce themselves to merely a sex object; property.

Further, I doubt that a thinking provider would expect her personal relationships to mirror her hobbyist in this way, and still hope to be happy. Originally Posted by Black Sedan

Black Sedan,
I agree with you! If I were a man, I wouldn't be interested in a relationship with a woman with this attitude either.

Regarding who pays for a date, it doesn't matter whether the man or the woman pays. I think it's common courtesy for the person who invite the other one on a date to pay. It's just my opinion. If I like a man and ask him out to lunch or drinks or whatever, it would be on me. If it's platonic, then we'll go dutch. But it's just me!

Nevertheless, some men have no problem screwing women (escorts) for free without offering them legitimate or "first class" relationships (which means anything other than being a secret or a second class citizen next to a wife. That is what i found interesting in the US. Sometimes i witnessed escort - client relationships go private without any "real" change other than the client not paying anymore because the escort was in love. :-(. Originally Posted by ninasastri

sorry, but i am going to call you out on this one. the payment that is received is different. the way i see it, when a gentleman is compensating me hundreds of dollars for just an hour of my time, that is ALL he receives -- my time, the promise that i will do my best to master his pleasure during our time together and deliver as promised, along with the promise of my discretion and secrecy, and the promise that i will GO AWAY after our time is up -- and all *i* receive is his time, money, and the satisfaction of playing him like a violin to watch his response.

when the walls crumble and the monetary aspect is eliminated; "payment" is still extracted in other ways. the expectations i have of a lover are vastly different than the requirements i have of a client. a lover needs to give me his free time, shower me with compliments, send me little messages throughout the day just to tell me he is thinking of me, write me long letters by hand, prioritize me and show me that i am one of his highest priorities, whether or not i can ever be his wife, in any number of ways. all i require of a CLIENT is that he pays his fee and treats me with respect. frankly, i think the gent in the latter category has it a hell of a lot easier.

that said, i am talking about a situation within which the parties are legitimately in love. for me, love and money simply do not mix -- and it goes both ways. i have had to end provider/client relationships because the gentleman in question fell in love with me and i felt as if by taking his money, i was exploiting a weakness. whether or not it's true, it's how i feel and it is how i approach things. a sugardaddy or mistress type of relationship, where the parties involved may care about each other but are likely not powerfully in love with each other, would be different for me.

sure, i don't mind allowing a date to pay for me once in awhile. if it really was crucial to the health of a mate's ego, i'd allow them to pay for every date if that is what they really wanted. but i don't EXPECT it regardless of external factors that may influence the relationship.

i believe in showing respect to the relationship model that works for any particular couple (or, you know, group, in the case of triads, line marriages, and the like). for example -- what works for lina, works for lina. even if i did not totally adore lina and consider her a friend, which i do, i would still respect her & her boyfriend's choice to do whatever works for them within the framework of their relationship. i am sorry, but crying that she is emasculating her mate when you don't know the first damn thing about him or his personal needs -- not as a man, but as an individual human being -- is not only insulting, but patently absurd. if she was greedy, she'd have stopped working by now to let this dude support her but as you may have noticed, if anyone who lambasted her here has been paying even one iota of attention, she continues to insist on being overall financially independent.

and thus ends my random contribution.