Putting a price on love

[Kashyr]

Or go on Craigslist.

I'm not sure that level of desperation is possible.

[Wilgrove]

Or go on Craigslist.

I'm not sure that level of desperation is possible.

You'd be surprised.

[Mosasauria]

Considering that both parties give consent in this, I have no problem with this.
Who knows? They might even end up truly falling in love.

[Czardas]

With each post ITT, I get less and less sure I even understand why you're arguing this in the first place, let alone understanding what standard you use to make being presentable equivalent to paying for attention/sex.

Well, 1. I am interested in seeing how people do explain the difference between spending massive amounts on dating (albet indirectly) vs. just paying for the attention.

Note "indirectly".

I mean when you are going to a club you're not going just to find a date. Sure, that might be your primary intent when going there but it is also to a great degree a social bonding thing. Music's capacity to form bonds is well documented (actually I have a paper on that :<), there will probably be alcohol which stimulates dopamine and etc, dancing hence serotonin and so forth, and you will generally be surrounded by people as opposed to sitting around at home on your butt clicking buttons on a box with moving pictures transmitted via variations in an electron stream across its surface. Dating is inherently social. Observing people directly to find out if you want to meet them gives you the full picture: what they look like (>60%), what they sound like (~30%), what they actually say (<10%). You get pheromones. Regardless of perfume, you can smell fear and emotions and whatnot and will instinctively stay away from people who look dangerous or unpleasant and gravitate towards people who are confident and stuff.

Idrc how well this lines up with my earlier arguments. Basically reducing dating to "shiny things go in, boobies come out" ignores all the additional factors that really make dating what it is. This site takes the "gamey" approach to dating and removes many of its natural disadvantages (i.e. real-world interaction), all in the interests of tradition. I've explained elsewhere why I think that tradition is bad.

[Norstal]

Thoughts, NSG?

...

Godamnit, someone stole my idea for a website. *Goes into a rampage*

[Vettrera]

Yes I know this will sound weird but I do put a mental price tag on people. I value people, and can put a monetary amount on it. I can't put a price on love though, to me love is when you'd take a bullet for someone without a secnod thought. This site seems lime it would end up like Craigslist rather than eharmonyq

[NERVUN]

Well, 1. I am interested in seeing how people do explain the difference between spending massive amounts on dating (albet indirectly) vs. just paying for the attention.

Note "indirectly".

I mean when you are going to a club you're not going just to find a date. Sure, that might be your primary intent when going there but it is also to a great degree a social bonding thing. Music's capacity to form bonds is well documented (actually I have a paper on that :<), there will probably be alcohol which stimulates dopamine and etc, dancing hence serotonin and so forth, and you will generally be surrounded by people as opposed to sitting around at home on your butt clicking buttons on a box with moving pictures transmitted via variations in an electron stream across its surface. Dating is inherently social. Observing people directly to find out if you want to meet them gives you the full picture: what they look like (>60%), what they sound like (~30%), what they actually say (<10%). You get pheromones. Regardless of perfume, you can smell fear and emotions and whatnot and will instinctively stay away from people who look dangerous or unpleasant and gravitate towards people who are confident and stuff.

Idrc how well this lines up with my earlier arguments. Basically reducing dating to "shiny things go in, boobies come out" ignores all the additional factors that really make dating what it is. This site takes the "gamey" approach to dating and removes many of its natural disadvantages (i.e. real-world interaction), all in the interests of tradition. I've explained elsewhere why I think that tradition is bad.

Ok, taking that though... wouldn't that also apply to matchmaking services, speed dating, and so on?

[Dakini]

I wouldn't bid on a date with a stranger.

That said, my relationship has cost non-trivial amounts of money, mostly for travel (flights to Japan aren't cheap) and soon, some food expenses for a while. I'm happy to pay this though.

[There is no cow level]

I don't agree with the concept. When I think about it, I get a paranoia that it will lead to some members of the "fairer" gender to exploit the site to make a quick buck. From my experience, the dates that were most successful were the ones that I spent the least amount of money on. (first date/hangout with current gf consisted of nothing more than walking around the city from 6pm to 3am doing nothing at all, I even bought a pizza and she just sat there and watched me eat it lol. Total amount spent on her at the end of it $1 on an arizona ice tea)

[There is no cow level]

Considering that both parties give consent in this, I have no problem with this.
Who knows? They might even end up truly falling in love.

But only if the guy pays her enough money

[Dakini]

I don't agree with the concept. When I think about it, I get a paranoia that it will lead to some members of the "fairer" gender to exploit the site to make a quick buck. From my experience, the dates that were most successful were the ones that I spent the least amount of money on. (first date/hangout with current gf consisted of nothing more than walking around the city from 6pm to 3am doing nothing at all, I even bought a pizza and she just sat there and watched me eat it lol. Total amount spent on her at the end of it $1 on an arizona ice tea)

Yes. The blame rests entirely on women for men spending money on them and of course, now that someone has invented the concept, every woman is going to jump on board. That's how the female hive-mind works.

[Bottle]

This is hideous. Sure, Traditional Values dictate that women have no desires of their own and that men are supposed to view women as objects to be purchased and used, but you're not supposed to say so out loud! You're supposed to, like, make trivial and ultimately worthless gestures (like getting down on one knee before you purchase your woman-servant) and everyone is supposed to pretend that you're total equals while she does all the housework and childcare and provides you with blowjobs on demand.

[Kashyr]

This is hideous. Sure, Traditional Values dictate that women have no desires of their own and that men are supposed to view women as objects to be purchased and used, but you're not supposed to say so out loud! You're supposed to, like, make trivial and ultimately worthless gestures (like getting down on one knee before you purchase your woman-servant) and everyone is supposed to pretend that you're total equals while she does all the housework and childcare and provides you with blowjobs on demand.

To be honest it would really be a step forward to stop hiding behind all this 'romance' bullshit and go back to the good old days of slave auctioning. At least everybody knew where they stood.

[New Rogernomics]

$10,000.

[Dakini]

This is hideous. Sure, Traditional Values dictate that women have no desires of their own and that men are supposed to view women as objects to be purchased and used, but you're not supposed to say so out loud! You're supposed to, like, make trivial and ultimately worthless gestures (like getting down on one knee before you purchase your woman-servant) and everyone is supposed to pretend that you're total equals while she does all the housework and childcare and provides you with blowjobs on demand.

To be honest it would really be a really a step forward to stop hiding behind all this 'romance' bullshit and go back to the good old days of slave auctioning. At least everybody knew where they stood.

Uh... slave auctioning was usually for slaves, not romantic partners. If anything, parents arranging marriages was more the "good old days" before romance.

[Ashmoria]

Thoughts, NSG?

thats not love.

but, it could lead to love as long as you dont mind limiting yourself to pretty women who are willing to sell themselves to strangers or men who were content to buy your affections.

[Stefannica]

I, can't and won't put a price on 'love'. And with regard to the rest of the matter, I personally don't approve.

[Bottle]

This is hideous. Sure, Traditional Values dictate that women have no desires of their own and that men are supposed to view women as objects to be purchased and used, but you're not supposed to say so out loud! You're supposed to, like, make trivial and ultimately worthless gestures (like getting down on one knee before you purchase your woman-servant) and everyone is supposed to pretend that you're total equals while she does all the housework and childcare and provides you with blowjobs on demand.

To be honest it would really be a really a step forward to stop hiding behind all this 'romance' bullshit and go back to the good old days of slave auctioning. At least everybody knew where they stood.

I must admit, I certainly would prefer if people stopped trying to tell me that it's "romantic" to adhere to patriarchal traditions which directly reflect the belief that men are meant to own women as property.

[Mosasauria]

This is hideous. Sure, Traditional Values dictate that women have no desires of their own and that men are supposed to view women as objects to be purchased and used, but you're not supposed to say so out loud! You're supposed to, like, make trivial and ultimately worthless gestures (like getting down on one knee before you purchase your woman-servant) and everyone is supposed to pretend that you're total equals while she does all the housework and childcare and provides you with blowjobs on demand.

Both are consenting in this situation, and as such I do not see the problem...

[The Congregationists]

To be honest it would really be a really a step forward to stop hiding behind all this 'romance' bullshit and go back to the good old days of slave auctioning. At least everybody knew where they stood.

A step forward? No. But romance has been an utter and complete failure and it's time we faced and acknowledged that.

[Ashmoria]

To be honest it would really be a really a step forward to stop hiding behind all this 'romance' bullshit and go back to the good old days of slave auctioning. At least everybody knew where they stood.

A step forward? No. But romance has been an utter and complete failure and it's time we faced and acknowledged that.

utter and complete?

no

iffy, yes.

but buying brides is not going to be a step up. maybe arranged marriages. but as americans i dont see it being better. we are people who are not inclined to put up with easily negated bad decisions. a bought bride is just as likely to walk away when "daddy" stops spending extra money on her.

[The Blaatschapen]

I don't know how you date, but generally I don't pay people for them

^this.

If the girl isn't willing to go dutch, she isn't worth the effort.

Seconded, I don't pay for her experience. Maybe only the first drink (because my female friends really told me that's still expected ).

Also, if you want to have sex, why do people use dates for that? Just doing random hook ups in bars seem to work fine, no?

Now, if you want to get into a relationship you need a bit more than the random hook up, but nothing stops a random hook up from blossoming into a relationship through dates (and other ways).

On the topic: I go dutch, but I do try to dress nicely when going on a date. I do not equate dressing up nice to paying her for a date. Because if I did that I'd probably still dress up nicely. Also I consider myself interesting enough to not have to really buy her attention.

[Kashyr]

To be honest it would really be a really a step forward to stop hiding behind all this 'romance' bullshit and go back to the good old days of slave auctioning. At least everybody knew where they stood.

Uh... slave auctioning was usually for slaves, not romantic partners. If anything, parents arranging marriages was more the "good old days" before romance.

Touche.

I must admit, I certainly would prefer if people stopped trying to tell me that it's "romantic" to adhere to patriarchal traditions which directly reflect the belief that men are meant to own women as property.

One of the reasons I never intend on getting married. I don't particularly want to own anybody.

[The Congregationists]

utter and complete?

no

iffy, yes.

but buying brides is not going to be a step up. maybe arranged marriages. but as americans i dont see it being better. we are people who are not inclined to put up with easily negated bad decisions. a bought bride is just as likely to walk away when "daddy" stops spending extra money on her.

As the basis of adult relationships, yes romance has failed. It creates extremely unrealistic expectations that just end up leaving people bitter and dissapointed in the end. And people are starting to lose faith now. Just look at the tone of popular culture today compared to that of fifty, or even twenty five years ago and you'll see what I mean.

[Dakini]

To be honest it would really be a really a step forward to stop hiding behind all this 'romance' bullshit and go back to the good old days of slave auctioning. At least everybody knew where they stood.

A step forward? No. But romance has been an utter and complete failure and it's time we faced and acknowledged that.

Just because your romances are failures doesn't mean you get to presume to speak for anyone else in this matter.