Many feminazis complain that men see women as sex objects and whores.
I personally never want women as mere sex objects or whore. Not anymore. Boring. If I wish, I can just pay whores easily. Instead, I tested sugar babies IQ hoping she can give me heirs and be my biz partners and live together happily with my friends and other sugar babies.
To other sugar daddies, sugar babies are whores. To me, if she has a high IQ or likes my lifestyle, she is the one or one of the ones I want to spend my whole life with.
I just prefer paternity tests to decide who my biological children are instead of a complicated marriage. I also prefer to make my own arrangements with women instead of entering government infested marriage. As a libertarian, I believe the government should not have much say on what marriage should be.
However, I think seeing women as objects and whores can help men understand women more.
What is a whore? The ancient definition of a whore is a woman that has sex with many guys. It’s not so much about being paid. Even a wife was paid and bought by bride price. It’s the number of guys the woman have sex with.
Because a whore has sex with many guys, there is no way to know who the father of her children is. So her children didn’t get inheritance.
If that’s a whore, then I don’t want it. Why would I want to abandon my own bloodline? I have enough money to afford and raise 10-20 children and I have only 2 now.
However, the modern definition of whore is very bizarre. It’s defined as a woman that does prostitution. Prostitution means having sex for consideration. I am confused. So women must not consider anything when they have sex? They may get pregnant for 9 months and do the bulk of child rearing and she shouldn’t expect financial or any consideration? It doesn’t make sense.
I asked lawyers what does it mean by “consideration”. The lawyer said, anything given in exchange for sex. I asked again, what about if a woman demands marriage before she has sex? Is she a whore? The lawyer said, legally no. Common laws dictate that marriage does not count as consideration for the definition of prostitution.
That is a very bizzare definition isn’t it? Why it’s not okay to demand money for sex but okay to demand marriage, which can be much more expensive than money, for sex?
I am often 100-1000 times richer than the smart pretty girl I like. So she can have sex for free for me or she can demand marriage but anything between is illegal?
In any case, I found that seeing women as whores and sex objects can help build mutual understanding and hence more beneficial arrangements.
I’ve heard a case, for example, that a man does everything to make her wife happy. The wife simply “doesn’t like the man” and leave the man and fuck poorer guys for free.
Normally, it will be very difficult to understand the situation. Why doesn’t the wife like the man? He did everything to make her happy. Also if she doesn’t like him, why marry him?
However, seeing a woman as a whore will make situations simple. She is a whore because she got cunt. Maybe the man is rich. Marrying the man means she got money. In normal western marriage, marriage means a huge financial obligation for man and no extra right whatsoever for the man. This ridiculous trade is usually explained away by religious and common bullshit nonsense called “love”.
She doesn’t have to like the man at all. All women around me want marriage. It seems that they like any kind of arrangement as long as it is called marriage. That explains why she marry the man.
The downside of marriage is actually like the downside of prostitution. You can end up with a girl that doesn’t like you at all. However, if you bargain like fuck before you pay, then the chance of getting a sugar baby for life is quite good.
Of course, after marriage, she gets paid anyway whether she fuck or not. So she left the man and fuck other guys she prefers. Actually, a woman is freer to fuck other guys within marriage than outside under modern marriage. Before fuck a poor guy and she doesn’t get money. After marriage, she gets money anyway from husband or ex husband or suckers, and she can fuck anyone she wants.
The law in some states stupidly stipulates that an ex-husband obligation to a woman ends when the woman marries another. Very stupid laws. The woman can just marry a rich guy, divorce, cohabit with poorer guys.
Basically, once a girl is married, she can often lose interest on her husband. She no longer has a financial incentive to make her husband happy. Also, deep inside she will realize how much an idiot her husband is. People explain this as “love fade”. Whatever.
Seeing women as whores give us insight on understanding women and making more mutually beneficial arrangements with them.
What about seeing women as sex objects?
I have no idea why anyone complains about it. Everything is an object, why not women? Also, if not human females, what else are sex objects? Pigs? Cats? If our ancestors can’t figure out that human females are sex objects, they would have gone extinct a long time ago.
Would you dad marry your mom if sex isn’t included? Would your mom marry your dad if your dad doesn’t provide financial support? At least 60% to 100% of all relationships have a feature where a woman is a sex object and the man is ATM. Of course, I prefer something more than transactions. That being said, when with me, it’s the women that prefer that sort of deal. How the hell I am supposed to see differently? It’s just a realistic feature in any mutually beneficial arrangements.
What do you do to objects that you don’t do to people and via versa? Do you blame objects for your problem? No. You understand objects. You blame people. Seeing women as objects mean men rarely blame women. We just try to understand women and make fair deals. Isn’t that a good thing?
What’s wrong with that?
What’s wrong is that relationships may not be monogamy and women can end up with far richer guys. Democracy is a government of, by, and for losers. Anything can be consensual. However, if women ended up with the rich and richer guys have an edge, someone somewhere somehow will say it’s wrong.
That’s why feminazis and many people consider paying for sex is wrong. Because it’s very effective and because that’s what rich guys like to do.
And that’s precisely why we should avoid what’s politically correct and acceptable in many things, especially sex. The idea of romance, monogamy, and feminism is simply incompatible with capitalism, and hence evil.
Transactions, however, works. Mutually beneficial transactions make people do nice things toward one another and facilitate long term repeat order relationship.