Why Men that Like Transactional Sex is Called Misogynist?

Why many people accuse me of being a misogynist? Do you know how many women I have killed or punched? Okay, I spank a few. But the girls wanted….

I go to Mcdonald’s buying burgers, do I hate mc Donald? I hire people to do many chores? Do I hate employees?

I want all sex to be transactional because that’s what’s working and what’s natural. Rather than marrying, I think men should just pay women to give heirs. Why am I a misogynist?

Why marry a man that makes $50k a year, if a woman can share a sugar daddy, earning $1 million a year, and offer the woman $50k a year?

The second one is far more reliable because the $50k is just a small portion of his wealth. Chance is the kids will be richer and smarter too and have more inheritance.

Yet suggesting this makes me a misogynist? Why? What is the connection between paying and hating?

I thought women prefer the rich? Just ask for money and women will get the rich.

Weird Dream

I have this weird dream of dating a man in a woman’s body.

No she’s not a trans. She’s a real woman. She thinks like men though. She’s good at Math and wants to earn money. But she is a woman. We both like women and she told me to hunt for more chicks together.

Makes me wonder what is the meaning of a man in a woman’s body.

Masculism

I jokingly said I want to empower rich men. I am actually an egalitarian.

What I mean is I want to empower all productive people. I simply realized that smart pretty women can be more productive in a very different way than men. Onlyfans pay for women, for example, is far higher for women than for men.

So women are more productive than men by showing skins in onlyfans. A men with a similar IQ, for example, will be earn more salary by just being programmer. What I found repulsive is if the state actively encourages smart pretty girls to be programmers like men instead of earning more money in onlyfans.

We can measure productivity by salary. By that definition, sugar babies are also very productive and should be empowered too so they don’t have to settle for mere husbands, for example. Well, it turns out, whatever I think there is already some white guy that thinks the same way as I do and I agree with many of their concern.

https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Masculism

Notice that feminism actually has lots of men’s influence. Men compete against other men and tend to be more hostile to fellow men and more protective toward women. So many of the issue is actually natural and can’t be changed.

Also, many of the issues, is thankfully, not an issue in Indonesia. We don’t go to jail for not paying child support. That being said, the laws tend to favor poor men by encouraging marriage instead of sugar relationships.

Some of the idea that I agree with is

portrayal of “violence against women” as more important than other forms of violence, including “violence against men” (e.g. “never hit a woman/girl, but it is acceptable for a woman to beat a man”) [1]depiction of violence against men as humorous, in the media (e.g., the movie I Love You to Death) [1] and elsewhere (see Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them!), when women are equally violent. Kenshin Himura keeps being beaten up by Kaoru in the Anime

https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Masculism

I got to admit it’s funny as fuck. I am concerned only when the law actually punishes differently.

equality in child custody, such as shared parenting
pregnancies carried to term despite agreements ahead of time that they would not be, subjecting men to unwanted parental responsibilities and/or child support expectations (see Dubay v. Wells)
The opposite of the above, where a man who may want to have a child also has no right to decide if his wife/girlfriend/etc. decides to abort (see paternal rights and abortion)
Legislation that addresses women’s needs without considering the corresponding need in men (e.g., Women, Infants, and Children Act; Violence Against Women Act)Biases in the justice system against men, such as higher incarceration rates and longer sentences for men (compared to women) for the same crimes; (see Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo)special government agencies for women’s affairs with no corresponding agencies for men’s affairs
men being incarcerated for the inability to pay child support payments [11]lack of legal ramifications or enforcement for paternity fraud

https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Masculism

Also, I think many people that got rich productively are not empowered enough. So I may need a term for that. I am not sure. What’s the opposite of socialism?

Porn and Prostitution Eliminate Poverty

We know abortion works.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect

Abortion Reduce Crimes

Abortion reduces crimes and poverty. Instead of putting more funding on public schools and stuff, we should just legalize abortion and watch crimes plummet.

Kids that will be criminals do not need to get smarter or wiser or more educated. They just need to not be born.


So why not go all the way? Anything that reduces the number of kids with poor parents from being born, or even conceived will eliminate poverty with even less government.

I wonder if access and legalization of prostitution and porn can eliminate poverty.

The idea is that poverty is not normal under pure capitalism. People become poor because their parents breed and their parents breed because they are married.

Poor people want sex anyway, not heirs.

So anything that destroys marriage among the poor and doesn’t reward them for breeding should eliminate poverty.

Porn and prostitution, are samples of alternatives, usually non-reproductive, access to sex. It also allows women to make cash instead of breeding. Public schools and welfare are the opposite. They reward poor people for breeding.

I would say, we should just eliminate welfare and public schools, and legalize porn.

See poverty plummet in one generation, like in Japan.

The extra money can go to lower taxes. It’s win win for capitalism because we win twice. If there is welfare anyway, we can arrange that welfare money go to poor people with no kids that use the money to get rich instead of breeding.

The poor can use the cash, unhindered by the necessity to raise children to start small bizs or investing instead.

Instead of welfare for poor people with kids, we should have tax cut for the poor that want to be rich.

Poor people will also have choices. They can breed now and starve with all their children, or get rich first.

Porn and Prostitution

I wonder if access and legalization of prostitution and porn can eliminate poverty.

The idea is that poverty is not normal. People become poor because their parents breed and their parents breed because they are married. Poor people want sex anyway, not heirs.

So anything that destroy marriage among the poor and doesn’t reward them for breeding should eliminate poverty.

Porn and prostitution, are samples of alternatives, usually non-reproductive, access to sex. It also allows women to make cash instead of breeding.

Public schools and welfare is the opposite. They reward poor people for breeding.

I would say, we should just eliminate welfare and public schools, and legalize porn.

See poverty plummet in one generation, like in Japan.

The extra money can go to lower taxes. It’s win win toward capitalism because we win twice. Poor people will also have choices. They can breed now and starve with all their children, or get rich first.

Strange Behaviors

Will US be a better country if governed by UN? Will Israel be a better country if governed by Nazi? Will your marriage be a better marriage if you register your marriage officially and let the state govern your marriage?

If your answer differs on any of those questions, please explain why.

Why Inconsistencies

I wonder why conservatives like free market but not commercialized sex? It’s okay for some guy to make tons of money. It’s okay for shops to get lots of customers. It’s okay for large corporations to capture the whole market share and deprive small bizs out of customers.

Yet, when it comes to sex and reproduction, suddenly, trades are not okay, in the eye of conservatives? Most conservatives have knee jerk reaction that sex must be within monogamous marriage, that transactional sex must be illegal.

Yes, the liberal are that way too but many Christian conservatives are even more so. Why the inconsistency? If I ask liberals/progressives, their answer will be consistent.

They think greed, in general, is bad and capitalism is bad. So they think prostitution is rich guys exploiting women like rich guys exploiting workers.

I disagree with liberals/progressives. However, at least their answer is consistent. Greed is bad in their eyes for both most goods and reproduction.However, with conservatives, there is this inconsistency. Why?

Ideas to Eliminate Poverty

I have many ideas to lessen poverty all over the world.

The main cause of poverty in this world is that kids are born from poor parents. Poor parents have less money, less business connection, fewer biz talents, etc. Well, their parents are poor and they produce another being just like them.

If there is any predictor of whether a kid will be rich is whether his parents are rich or not. That predictor will be even stronger if we eliminate welfare and public schools and income tax. Without all those, kids with poor parents will literally starve to death, and kids of rich people will just invest money and earn more.

Governments act often make it worse.

So the solution is to arrange that more kids have richer parents. Kids don’t choose their parents, but their parents do, and governments influence that a lot.

Just pay people to have fewer children.

Alternatively, give money to everyone but tax children. Say every child is taxed $50k. Or give $100k over a lifetime for every adult but deduct that amount when they start having children.

Rich people will just shrug it off and keep breeding. The poor have two choices. He can use the money as capital for his business and get rich first and then have children. Or he can breed like rabbits and have his children starving due to LESS instead of more welfare.

Currently, many government projects, like public schools, give incentives for the poor to have children.

Imagine 2 twin brothers, Adam and Bob. Adam work hard all his life and Bob just breed. Governments take money from Adam through income tax and use the money to subsidy Bob’s breeding. This is forcing people to breed.

Instead, Government should tax Bob for having children, and give money to Adam. Adam will get rich faster. Once he is rich, he can have children and pay for his own schooling. Bob, knowing that he will be taxed if he has children, will also try to get rich first.

Then far more people will have rich parents.

Of course, taxing children and rewarding financial incentives to childless people only work for the poor. Millionaires and billionaires will just gladly pay say $50k child tax per child and breed like rabbit.

What else? Promote non reproductive sex. Prostitution, porn, whatever. Discourage marriage.

Most poor people don’t want to have children. They have children because they get married. They get married because societies indoctrinate them to get married.

When poor people go to prostitutes and watch porn instead of getting married they have fewer children.

Many women have sex for free with poor people.

Prostitution allows them to aim for the rich. Legalizing prostitution will encourage sugar relationship. So rich people can pay sugar babies to give them children, poor people can just use prostitution or watch porn till they are rich. Again, kids will have richer parents on average, less poverty.
If everyone does this, poverty will be gone.

I checked this myself. A billionaire in Indonesia has 40 children. Guess what? None of his children starve. Okay, I don’t even have to check. We all know it’s true.

Greed is Good

Greed is good. Guys wanting lots of money and build big corporations like Microsoft make all of us better off.

Basically, as long as no fraud or force involved, and the guy pays his tax, which isn’t high for the super-rich, societies tolerate that kind of guy. Societies that tolerate extreme wealth, called capitalistic societies, are way richer than those who don’t.To make more money, many shops want more customers. They greedily capture the whole market share driving many other shops to bankruptcy. Again, this is normal. We don’t count this as externalities or problems or anything.

My question is. It’s okay to want lots of money. It’s okay to want lots of customers. Is it okay to want lots of women and produce many children?

Is greed in wanting lots of biological children a good thing? No force or fraud involved. The man uses his own money so no government subsidy. The women also agree consensually, perhaps paid, instead of married.

Will this make everyone better off?