[Nyororin]

Originally Posted by xyzone

For one thing it’s illegal, but it’s up to anyone else if they want to get involved in that. Second, you pay far more being in a relationship or even getting a girl into bed than "paying for it". Time, effort and even money. And not that I would know for sure about the latter but the former seems like a much better thrill.

I was under the impression that there were legal brothels - though I can`t say I would know where, or if they would be within traveling distance of everyone out there. I agree that you pay more for getting into a relationship - which is why I brought that up in the first place.
I can`t comment on the thrill, as I`ve never been involved in a relationship that was not serious.

Whether they actually do it or not is irrelevant. The greater point is that most women would want to if they did. If they jumped into bed with someone, a boring nice guy would not be their first choice, not even their 10th choice. Sure, if the 11th choice is all they can get, that’s what they’ll go for. That’s just how they’re set up regardless of whatever conscious merits they have. And college age people are going to do this a lot so if you want to play the game (and all guys do), might as well learn to play it well and there's no regrets later.

But this has no connection with marriage and getting into a lasting relationship. It has no connection with the rate of divorce, etc... It`s just about picking up short term flings and getting into a girl`s pants. You may be entirely right about what the regular woman looking for sex would go for - but I have a feeling the type of woman a man looking for sex with is not necessarily going to be the same type of woman a man is going to want to be in a long term relationship with.

Besides that flawed definition of “nice guy”. The regular nice guys, that is, the ones a notch above sociopaths are going to fail at getting what they want also if they don’t quit being obsequious pushovers. Nobody wins there except perhaps entitled girls who devour random attention so they can grow their entitlement ego even bigger. And those girls are still going to love giving it to the jerk regardless.

After reading through your rant about nice guys, I realized that I sort of screwed up on interpreting the phrase. I didn`t really know there was a whole category and set behavior for a "nice guy" - I was taking it at literal value as an honestly nice guy.
Yes, no one is going to go for a pushover. This doesn`t matter whether they are into jerks - it`s just uncomfortable because it usually seems fake, plus that type of "nice guy" usually has been "nice" to another girl in view.

But still, I really get the feeling that you`re up in arms about women and who they choose to have sex with - not anything about long term relationships and marriage. The dynamics of relationships that are not serious or that are only physical are worlds away from those of serious relationships.

Maybe, maybe not. But in the U.S., the statistics suggest otherwise.

They suggest that relationships that don`t commit to marriage last longer than those that do? Where does that figure come from?
I am saying that the type of relationship which would work well with a non-legal commitment is the same type of relationship which would work well in a legal marriage. The attitude toward commitment is the issue, not the method of committing.

Do you think that if marriage was abolished, and individual commitments took it`s place... That there would be fewer relationships ending? Do you think there would be less pain involved in the break up of a relationship if it were a private commitment and not a legal one? Even without legal backing of a commitment NOW (marriage), mothers can secure financial support from fathers. Long term partners can receive settlements when the relationship ends.

Obviously the divorce rate would go down as "divorce" wouldn`t be necessary. But the problem would still be there with another name.