flashing ticker
To interact with this page you must login.      Signup
ask a person to answer this questionAsk to answer

What do you think of the attitude that says that relationships that include sex are just another form of prostitution?

Many answers to questions about prostitution seem to equate any relationship -- BF/GF, F+B, Marriage -- with prostitution.These answers seem to be coming from male Quorans, for the most part. The answers see some sort of exchange taking place that results in sex. The currency may be money, but it can also be security, nice things, a rewarding lifestyle, but in any event, something is being given with sex being received in return.

Are these male perceptions accurate?
tynamite's avatar I think that marriage is a form of prostitution, but I don't think the women who get married are prostitutes. I can give reasoning for this.

For starters, marriage is a form of Communism, the abolishment of private property, because when you get married, you give your assets to the state. Then when you divorce, your ex will get 50% of your assets. We live in a world where women, not men, are stereotyped to to be gold diggers, and Tiger Woods ex wife got a mansion for divorcing. It's safe to say that his ex's body is worth millions of dollars. If that's not prostitution, I don't know what is. Women are increasingly paying alimony as the pay gap lessens, but that is not the point.

In China, there are 120 males for every 100 females due to the One Child Policy. Because of this, 20% of men will never marry, which has caused women to have more sexual leverage over men, so now they only marry for money and not love. You can see this "Chinese Cockblock" episode in VICE S01E04 from The Pirate Bay. Basically the more men outnumber women, the more hypergamous and money orientated women will get, as shown in China. It's natural human extinct and evolutionary biology.

You might think this is not true, but it is backed up with research. According to this study, men with fancy cars enjoy a success rate of 24% when approaching women. Men with “average cars” enjoy a rate of about half that. And men with “poor cars” only succeed about 8% of the time. Hypergamy, Cars, and Phone Numbers. It is very easy to get a girl's phone number off the street if girls think you're a professional footballer.

Another reason, is that a study has shown that a third of men admit they would marry a woman they were not in love with. I think we all know what reason they're marrying for.

Also if you look at /r/deadbedrooms, you'll know that there is no point in marrying someone and expecting lifelong commitment, if you're not willing to have sex with them. What would be the point? Why expect that your partner should not have sex with anyone else, if you won't have sex with that partner? Some men go abroad to find a mail order bride, even though prostitution is legal where they live, but would they choose a woman who would not have sex after marriage?

If you look at the average woman's inbox on a dating site, it'll look like this.
the average woman's dating inbox

Ask yourself what percentage of men initiated their contact with a message a woman finds decent, not one to reply to, but decent, that doesn't focus on sex or physical appearance. Then ask yourself what percentage of those men only initiated like that because they thought it would be a good strategy to get replies, to not be sex obsessed.

OKCupid is owned by IAC, which also owns Plenty Of Fish, Fling.com, Adult Friend Finder, Tinder and Match.com. It's safe to say that IAC monopolises sex. In fact, many men pay for dating sites such as My Provider Boyfriend, Carrot Dating, etc. Now why would someone pay more for a dating site (sometimes $100 a month) than they do for their mobile phone? Why are women worth that much? Would they pay that much for Facebook or Whatsapp?

If men had access to sex on demand with multiple women, a significantly lesser portion of them would marry and be committed. From an evolutionary biology standpoint, men only get married because it's cheaper than prostitution. This is evident how in Amsterdam where the red light district is, significantly less men are getting married because of it, in comparison to America where prostitution is illegal.
The Dutch Don’t Care About Marriage. Americans Should Imitate Them.

Any man who thinks that mating season is over after marriage is wrong, because he's obligated to perform for birthdays, valentines and anniversaries.

Under marriage, the government is the pimp.

I am going to write a long answer for this. Let’s examine some analogy first:
Say you are farmers of mangos. Say there are those willing to pay a lot for those mangos.

You have several options
1. You can give the mangos away for free.
2. You can let your mangos rots.
3. You can sell your mangos to “small buyers” with great discount for those least able to pay for it.
4. You can max out your profit by selling it at market price?

Question: If 4 is illegal, will price for mangos go up or down? Does it make sense that some people want price to go down?

1. is free sex
2. is abstinence
3. is marriage
4. is prostitution

Obviously very few would do the first 3 if 4 is legal.
When it comes to mating, women are like mangos farmers. Their offers expire quickly.

Both men and women got things to offer to each other. Each of us want to get the best offers. Our offers’ market value drop as a function of time.
Women’s offers drop very fast.
Yet, government prohibits humans to freely exchange what they have. The only alternative to government endorsed marriage is celibacy (option 2), and free sex (option 1).


In US, she can only marry single men, which usually of lower quality for not being able to attract even a single mate. Or she can sell her self for free which is just below her market price. Same reasoning. Congress has effectively become the pimp against women’s wish.

Marriage means women need to charge less to poorer males. A housewife is a job with low salary and high severance pay. What kind of job have that kind of arrangement? The one whose deal made by government rather than consenting parties.

That effectively kick the rich out of mating market. As all price control, it causes market distortion and inefficient allocation of resources, which leads to poverty. Now, this market distortion is the biggest market distortion ever. It’s virtually the single cause of all poverty in the world.
The mere act of pointing this out will often meet harsh ad hominem attack by facists for no logical reason.
By getting married government has power to define what marriage mean. Government can ration mates in equal share for everyone by allowing people to only pick singles.

Pusha T said it best. "Every bag, every purse, every bracelet. Comes with a price tag, baby face it." The more you think about that lyric, the more sense it'll make.

If you're not paying for it directly, you're paying for it indirectly.

Ask yourself this. Would you marry someone and not have sex with them? Would they want to stay with you if you didn't? Why or why not?
report this post permalink
What's an assertion, and what should I type in?

Compesh is a question and answer (and debate) website, so before you make a debate, you better learn what an assertion is. I suppose you already know what a question is, and that you've typed it in the box. ;)

An assertion, is basically a statement you can make, that is either true or false.

Richer people have better health.

The question for that would be, Do richer people have better health?

And don't forget to make your assertion, match your question.

Compesh logo