When it comes down to it all women are prostuites?

Anonymous

If you think about it, men pay for dinner, flowers etc all to get laid. Yeah they may genuinely like her, but every guy wants sex. If you do things for her, you get sex is return. Technically speaking that makes a girl look like a hooker

1 0

Most Helpful Guys

Shyguy_1988 Yoda
+1 y
I think you got the whole relationship thing down wrong because of pop culture and what society seems to betray it as. Its not about getting laid, not always. For me its about finding soneone you want to spend the rest of your life with, who you love and completes you, you support each other. Yes, sex may come into play but in my opinion that shouldn't happen until there is love that is mutual so it has meaning and isn't just sex.
2 1 0 1
Anonymous
+1 y
Correct. You're one of the few women who can see the truth through all the rationalizations most people use to protect their emotions and egos.
0 2 6 2
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  So all women are only good for sex?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Of course not, but that's not what I said, is it? Sex is a currency that women trade for male utility. Do you not see that?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  So sex is the only thing a woman is good for since its the only value thing she is able to offer
- Show All Show Less
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Of course not, but that's not what I said, is it? Why are you struggling so much with this?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I'm not. I just repeating what you're saying in other words. You said sex is a woman's currency to trade. So it must be only value thing that she has to offer.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I said "a currency", not "the only currency". Think now...
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  You didn't say that there were other currencies. Plus the same can be said about men, using sex to obtain things. So men are prostitutes too.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I also didn't say the sky is blue, but...
  
  link
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Since that is understood, are you implying that it's understood that women are prostitutes?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  And why am I in denial? Is it because I don't agree with the question?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I'm implying that women trade sex for things. They use it to get what they want or to thank men for things. They use it as currency. link
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  The question stated "all women are prostitutes." You said "Correct," so you agree and stated " women trade sex for things." Which is not true for some or most. There is a such thing as a woman who knows that her body is worth more than material or little things. If you want to generalize, its something that both genders do.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Although I'm sure it happens, it is rare that a man will trade sex for some other benefit. The reverse is much more common. In either case, there is nothing wrong with it. It's human nature and has been happening since the dawn of time. Most people, like yourself, are just too narrow minded to see it for what it is. Read the link I provided and then let me know if you still have questions.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  A quote from the study: "In addition, there are predictable, sexual differences in the types of exchanges attempted. Men are more likely to attempt to exchange investment for sex, females were more likely to attempt to exchange sex for investment"
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Actually its not rare for guys to do the same, but hey you see what you want to see. You've never heard of relationships where a man and a woman lives together. The woman does everything and the only thing the man can provide is sex? There are plenty of those relationships, whether if the role is switched or not. I can see that this only implies to SOME people, but not everyone. For example, those who are celibate. Where do they come into this equation?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  So you're basing everything on an article? Anyone can write anything these days, stuff like that generalizes. Show me other proof.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  That's just like saying men are prone to cheat and women are gold diggers, etc
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Going back to what you said: if sex its our way give thanks and receive things, men do good deed and give things just to receive sex. Its what they expect, nothing more.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I don't deny that guys do it too. It's just not nearly as common. Regardless, as I said, there is nothing wrong with it. It's you who seems to think it's a negative thing, not me. It's just human nature. As for proof, I'm not going to spend my day trying to educate you on something that has been proven out time and again by numerous studies. It's just a fact of humanity that some people have a hard time wrapping their minds around.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Of course men do things for women in exchange for sex, or to thank them for sex. You seem to be catching on...perhaps there is hope for you after all. :)
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  All I'm saying that everything isn't so black and white. In other words, this doesn't apply to everyone and it's not mostly just an one gender thing. Since when has being referred to a prostitute seen as something positive?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  See SOME men do that. Not all or even most. If that's the case, men aren't genuine in their kindness.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Also, you never answered how those who are celibate are effected by this theory.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  affect*
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Celibates obviously don't apply, and of course it doesn't apply to everyone. But it is a sociological fact that it applies to most, although as I said, most people are not capable of or willing to parse it out that way in their minds. Whatever...I really don't care about the willful ignorance of others. Cheers
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Why doesn't celibacy apply? You said that's how women get they want and why men do favors for women. The question is talking about "all women" and "every guy" and you agreed.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I ask again, how is it not negative to be referred to as a prostitute? That's what this question is about and you called it "human nature." And how am I being "ignorant" if I'm not being biased .
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  If anything, I'm being open minded :p
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I am not going to waste any more time on you while you insist on ignoring what I've written and twisting my words. Bye.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I'm not twisting your words. I'm just repeating what you're saying in other words :p They both have the same meaning.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  What I wrote: "...of course it doesn't apply to everyone. But it is a sociological fact that it applies to most" What you then wrote: "The question is talking about "all women" and "every guy" and you agreed." Just one example of how you are NOT repeating what I'm saying. Please stop playing this childish game.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  You wrote that later after I mentioned it earlier. Why not state that in your original answer? This question is talking about "all" and "every" one each gender. So you saying "correct" isn't you agreeing with it?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  No, you wrote that after I wrote what I did. It's all below for everyone to see. Why not respond to what I write rather than what you think I think? Seriously, how old are you?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  What haven't I responded to that you've written? Show me exactly where you said " of course it doesn't apply to everyone." I had previously stated "I can see that this [ the theory] only implies to SOME people, but not everyone."
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I meant show me where you've written that before I previously stated that. And how old are you?

Most Helpful Girls

Anonymous
+1 y
I don't really think of things as being that black and white. Especially because in all of my relationships, we gave to each other, it wasn't just him giving to me. I paid for dates sometimes too (actually more than they did, because I always asked).

Relationships are about reciprocation, not trade.

Prostitution is about trade.

Therefore, they're different, to me.
1 0 0 0
- FierceMegan2
  +1 y
  ^^Best Answer^^
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Thanks :-)
jslxoxo Xper 6
+1 y
Like someone else mentioned , I really doubt this is a woman asking this. If so, you must really have low esteem and a lack of self worth. Most guy wouldn't do that for a women if all he was looking for was sex. Guys who are just looking to get laid aren't going to spend money on just any woman.
3 2 0 2
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  If this was the case, every guy who's girlfriend/wife/admirer ever bought them a gift, taken them out, or given them money is a prostitutes as well.
Anonymous
+1 y
Gee, I was thinking all these years that I wanted sex for sex. Maybe I'm dating prostitutes myself! :o
2 2 0 1

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!

What Girls & Guys Said

1 3

sovetskii13 Master
+1 y
Interesting thought. But not all guys want sex in return for whatever nice things they do for the woman. And not all guys get sex in return. And just because guys pay for most of the stuff doesn't mean the girl is a hooker. That's just how society or culture is.
1 0 0 0
bubbletrouble Guru
+1 y
Let me guess, a dude with no life at all trolling...
3 1 0 4
- FierceMegan2
  +1 y
  I thought that too!
Anonymous
+1 y
I agree. I don't think there's anything wrong with either. People are just hypocrites.

Very few men can get genuinely free sex. That requires skill.
0 1 3 0
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  There's nothing wrong with using people?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  It's not using people if you're honest. Anyone with intelligence and without hypocrisy recognizes what most interactions between men and women are: sex for money.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  What are "most interactions"? Most people aren't going to tell you right off the back that they are doing this or that for sex. By the way, you don't have to have skill to get a woman to have free sex with you. Some are just looking for a good time too. Other ones are either easy or just have low self esteem.
- Show All Show Less
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I meant most cases of sexual interactions, i.e. sex. No, it does require genuine skill. You have to seduce a woman by not buying her a drink, not paying for a date, not paying for a taxi. That's some skill. And even if you manage that, in a sense, it might not be free. Did you exchange for sex the implicit promise of any of those things in the future?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  And doesn't it say a lot about people that most of us commenting here don't expect a woman ever to criticize her own gender? We would sooner believe that the woman is really a man. No one's accusing the Anon who speaks of "a sad lonely guy" as being a secret woman.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  As I said, I don't mind. I just wish people would be honest. So much unnecessary suffering has been caused to men and women because most of us just aren't honest. We're living in an era when political correctness trumps factual correctness.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Not to "objectify" women, but if you want a high quality woman, you're going to need skills. It doesn't require skills to pick a low quality woman. No, I've never exchanged sex for anything like that.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Its not unheard of a user pretend to be something they're not to be bash whatever they are posing to be. If this is a woman, she really needs build some self-esteem and talking to whatever guys she's been talking to. He or She is judging everyone on based on her/his experiences.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  No, no, no. I think it says a lot about what we expect of women that people jump to conclusions about those who dare to criticize women, and it's not flattering, is it? 'High-quality women'? That's hilarious. 'High-quality', whatever that is, it's irrelevant.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  If you're saying that male anonymous user should be accused of the same thing, why not Shyguy despite him having pic of himself? Its not unheard people stealing other people's identities online.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Sure, OK. But I don't think you're getting my point. My point is, we're so unused to women having the open-mindedness and humility to criticize their own gender, that we assume that such a critic on the Internet must really be a man. We don't assume that a male critic of men must really be a woman. That inequality is sad, don't you think? It's very unflattering towards women.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  The same can be said about those who criticize men. However, depend on what is said and the person, mostly people who share a certain criticism about whoever have similar experience to each and have never seen thing different. My definition "high quality person" is just someone who have realistic , standards, have self worth, independent and trying to do something with themselves. To get someone like this, you're going to need skill. Someone who likes to dependent, immoral, with no kind of ...
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I wrote that before seeing your comment
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  No, no, no. People don't go around claiming that a man who criticizes a man must really be a woman. Get real. We're used to men criticizing men. Yet, three people on this thread have already suggested that QA might really be a man, because we just can't imagine a woman criticizing her own gender.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  And as for high quality, I'm sorry, but most women who think they're high-quality are not. Most women (and most men) are mediocre. The difference is, women often have inflated egos, because they get approached, which is totally understandable.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I never said that women thought they were "high quality." I said that was my definition of a high quality person, which isn't my complete definition. And both applies to each gender. The reason why some have expected the user being a male, not a female because most of there are more bitter questions about women than men on THIS site. Most are asked by the same people, trolls.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Well, you're really just proving my point.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  How? The possibility of this QA being a male still hasn't being ruled out. Anyone can anonymous.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  It's for the person making an accusation to prove it. You have no evidence. The reason that three of you have made this accusation is that nonetheless you can't quite believe it. Why? Because you know from experience that women do not criticize their own gender. Isn't that really sad? Or do you not care that women have that bad reputation?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Actually us four have no evidence if this is a woman or not. On the QA knows. And you're making assumptions on my experiences. No where did I say that women do no criticize other women or me caring about women have this bad reputation. Someone of the opposite gender doesn't have to do things for you because they are expecting sex. This is true for some, but not all.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Plus the QA, isn't criticizing women. She is saying that all women are just prostitutes to men, which generalization. Some men exchange gift and sex with women, and vise versa. That's that's not every man's goal to nice things to get laid.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Hahaha. Right, so you just decided on a whim that despite the lack of evidence you suspect that QA is a man. You're not drawing on your own experience of women's unwillingness to criticize their own gender. Whatever you say...
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Ooh, you're right. There's a fourth person now. You know, I might even join you guys. You're right: a woman is very unlikely to criticize women. It probably is a man, LOL.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Actually you're the fourth person to assume whatever the gender of the QA is. You too do not have any evidence. For all you know, I could possible be a male as well. Again, when did I say women do not criticize other women?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Like I said, the QA isn't criticizing, but instead, is making generalizations
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  and assumptions
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I would be the fifth if I were to join your sexy, little crew. We have miss bubbletrouble down there. You didn't say it. But it's necessarily implied in the otherwise baseless assumption that QA might be male.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  OK, well, how ever you want to phrase it, he is making negative comments about women. We don't expect women to do that.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  At this moment, according to the time stamps, I was referring to you as being to the 4th person 44 minutes. Missbubbletrouble answered 38 minutes ago, which makes her the 5th person. If you reread my answer, I said either the QA is a man or woman with low self esteem or lack of self-worth. I've never implied anything about women criticizing each other. I said that if its one, its the other way as well.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  You said, "I really doubt this is a woman asking this." You had no reason to say that, if not for your outside experience. Apparently, one woman and two men agree with you.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Making a negative comment doesn't always mean criticism. Something negative is being said by both genders. Despite a man "genuinely [liking]" woman, the goal is sex; which is the reason behind him for to treat her with material things. And that women are prostitutes for accepting it.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I don't know what you're trying to say. Call it criticizing; call it making negative comments; call it whatever you want.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  One woman and two men doesn't equal 4 people. And if you're going to quote me, quote the whole thing. My next sentence starts with "If so..." meaning it can be one other. Also meaning that I haven't made an official guess of what the gender of the QA is.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  You don't know what I'm talking about? How is the QA criticizing women? What in the question or detail is the QA faulting what women do. The only thing she is talking about are the things men doing and comparing it to something else.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Oh dear God, this is sad. Let's have an arithmetic lesson. One woman plus two men plus you equals... four! Do you need an English-language lesson too? Do you not know what 'seriously doubt' means? What would make you have any doubt, let alone SERIOUS doubt, that QA is truly a woman, if not your outside experience? You're really clutching at straws here.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Well, actually you're right: he isn't necessarily criticizing women. Maybe he doesn't think being a prostitute is something negative. But you certainly took it that way, didn't you?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Lol I was referring to your "one woman and two men agree with you" comment. I had 4 arrows up before then. Last time I checked, you can't give yourself an arrows up. I know what "doubts" mean, but I countered that with "If so," meaning there's a possibility. I doubt a woman who has a self value or and doesn't have low self esteem would ask this. In other words it could be a bitter man or a woman without any self worth would ask this. I never officially said a gender. If I did, show me.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Everyone knows that prostitutes are only used for sex. According to the question, men only do nice things for sex. In other words, use women. How many men do you know respect prostitutes, or even date or marry them? Pretty woman doesn't count. Prostitution comes with quite of negative associations, with most are true. When has it ever been something positive, to be referred to as a prostitute?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  No. I was referring to the people who actually made comments. Well, of course, I never claimed that you said you were 100% certain. No, you can't rewrite what you said. You said you really doubt it's a woman, but that if it is she doesn't have self-esteem. You didn't say you really doubt it's a woman with self-esteem. Big difference.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Prostitutes are only seen as sex objects. They are used then throw away. A lot of them have diseases. They are mistreated, treated as property, and. Most people look down upon them. How is being compared to that not negative?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  "How is being compared to that not negative?" You tell me.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  And I was referring to arrows up. What are you talking? What am I writing? I just said the same thing. Like I said, if this is a woman, she must have low esteem? How many women with average or high esteem are going to compare themselves to a prostitute?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I just told you why it is viewed as something negative. You tell me how someone could think its not.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  "Like I said, if this is a woman, she must have low esteem? How many women with average or high esteem are going to compare themselves to a prostitute?" You tell me.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  plus you said that " he is making negative comments about women." You that QA might think of them as negative, but you just said that he was.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  If you can't see the difference between these two statements, there's something wrong with you. What you said just now: "I doubt a woman who has a self value or and doesn't have low self esteem would ask this." What you said originally: “I really doubt this is a woman asking this. If so, you must really have low esteem and a lack of self worth.” You’ve gone from really doubting it’s a woman at all to merely doubting it’s a woman with self-esteem.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Lol dodging my questions , aren't you? Can't answer them?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Which questions do you want me to answer? I never said being a prostitute is not negative. You need to learn some reading skills. You're mentally deficient at the moment.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Lol both of my statements have the same meaning. You're just trying to see something that really isn't there. My original statement goes either way, saying that it could be a man or woman asking this. The 2nd statement refers back to the 2nd sentence of my answer. If this is a woman, she has these traits. I asked how can anyone ( the QA) not think of prostitutes as something negative? I mentioned this, you said " you tell me." If I need some reading skills, you need comprehension skills
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  OK, so I am dealing with a mentally deficient person. At first, you really doubted that it was a woman. Then I pointed out how sad it is that people don't expect women to have the humility to criticize their own gender. You then changed your story, saying that you doubted that it was a woman with self-esteem. You're making a smaller claim the second time around.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  I also asked "How many women with average or high esteem are going to compare themselves to a prostitute?" I asked this because you said that I took what the QA was saying as something negative, even though she might different. A woman with good enough self esteem and self value would think of all women being this way.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  "even though she might different"... OK...
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Again with the "criticizing" The QA isn't criticizing anyone and I never said or implied someone criticizing a woman has to be a man. My "if so" counters my "doubt," which means there is a possibility of either gender. I've been saying the WHOLE time, a woman who thinks this way has low self esteem and doesn't have much self value. You're kind slow
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  You still haven't answered my two questions.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Well I don't know what phrases like "even though she might different" mean. Please enlighten me. No, you're the slow one, which is typical of people like you. I'm going to explain one last time: you went from really doubting that it's a woman at all to merely doubting it's a woman with self-esteem. You did this in response to my comment that it was sad that people expect women not to have the humility to criticize their own gender.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  and the point of you quoting me? The only way for someone to not look as prostitutes as something negative is if they lived a VERY sheltered life and didn't know good from bad.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I'm going to explain that one last time too: I NEVER said prostitution was not negative. Where the hell did you get the idea that I thought that? I long for the days when mentally deficient people would shut up instead of asserting themselves like this. You're embarrassing yourself.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Nope you :p and Like I said, in my originally answer. I doubt this is a woman. If so, mean the its possible for the QA to be a woman or not woman, that she doesn't have self esteem or self worth? Why is that so hard for you understand? I keep repeating myself. I've never said anything different. And like I said, no one is criticizing anyone. Show me some criticism between you, me, and the QA. And how do you not know what that means? You said I took this question as something negative and the QA
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  might not think so. That's how she might be different and I didn't say that you said it. I said how can SOMEONE think its not negative. You keep pulling stuff out of thin air and have comprehension problems.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  If you don't think labelling someone a prostitute is a criticism, that's your opinion. But if that's what you really think, why write everything you've written? In your original statement, you're not reducing the bounds of your assertion by making the point about self-esteem. In your revised statement, you are. Perhaps I'm expecting too much of you by expecting you to understand the difference. It's like the difference between 'which' and 'that', to give an example from the field of grammar.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  The longer you go on, the more degenerate your language becomes. Soon you'll be transcribing animalistic grunts. I can't understand your half-formed sentences. I'm sorry.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Lol so now you're disagreeing with me?Its not criticism. It would be criticism if the QA would have said that all women let men use them for sex, just to get gifts out them. In my second statement, I clarified what I meant, while restating my original. I never changed anything. And don't worry about my grammar. You're focused on the wrong thing ;P It doesn't matter to me, as long as my point get across. You seem to me missing it and making up things. Silly boy
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Look up the difference between 'that' and 'which'. It's very analogous to the difference between your two statements. Well, you should worry about your grammar. When you write ungrammatically, people won't understand what you're trying to say.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Lol , you should look up "if so," because you obviously do no know with it means. Obviously you do not have that hard of a time understanding what i"m saying if you keep responding back. This is just your way of changing the subject.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  didn't
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  Well, some of what you write is grammatical and understandable. Some of it is not. I think you need to understand the meaning of what you write before you commit to it. 'If so' in no way restricts what comes before it: it merely elaborates.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Also if my grammar bothered you so much and to the point you could not understand, you would have mentioned so earlier. No one has perfect grammar, not even you. And if I was so "mentally deficient" why bother even arguing with me? What did I say that was so idiotic or dumb?
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  And didn't I elaborate my thoughts by saying if this a woman, she has to have low esteem and no self value?
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I mentioned it as soon as it did bother me. I explained to you at the time what it was that I considered to be a sign of your mental deficiency.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  You're trying to get on to me about one for using one word over another? Something that most people probably do? You called me "mentally deficient" because you misread what I said. You assumed I was talking about you when I clearly said "someone"
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  "You assumed I was talking about you when I clearly said "someone"". I again have no idea what you're talking about. This time it's not the grammar, though.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  Previously, you keep saying that I said I said you thought nothing negative of prostitution. You mentioned how " Maybe he doesn't think being a prostitute is something negative. But [ I] certainly took it that way..." How am I not suppose think being compared to a prostitute as something negative? I responded " You tell me how someone could think its not." And like I later said, the only way for someone to not view this as something negative is for them to live a VERY sheltered life.
- Opinion Owner
  +1 y
  I was responding to what you said. Read again.
- jslxoxo
  +1 y
  And what were you responding to, since it's the main and first time you called me "mentally deficient." Or are you talking about your response, "you tell me," since I had already told you. And why would I have to explain if you thought so too?
- Asker
  +1 y
  You're right
Anonymous
+1 y
This looks like a question written by a sad lonely angry guy, trolling on a female anonymous account.

I find it hard to believe any girl could be this stupid. This level of stupid usually requires a dick.
5 1 0 4
- Shyguy_1988
  +1 y
  Hahaha, I actually thought this as well, but still answered the question seriously.
- SweetSurrender
  +1 y
  hahahaha