The Case For Renting Women
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to get stock tips or have investing ideas delivered to your email. I'm also on The Twitter.Thanks for visiting!
You might remember, about a week ago, where I went on a bit of an anti casual sex rant at the beginning of the Sunday morning dump. I stated that sex should be reserved for people who at least care about each other, and that casual sex was nothing better than renting women. I longed for the good ol’ days of men actually courting women, not the promiscuous reality we have today.
And guess what? I couldn’t have been more wrong.
The problem with my stance on casual sex is that it was based on a moral issue – the moral issue being that sex should be something that’s treated with respect. It shouldn’t be something that should be simply exchanged, I thought, it should come from something deeper. Sex should be special. You’ll notice the underlying theme with the whole argument – that sex is something of value, something to be cherished.
But, what if you looked at sex from a strictly economic perspective? We all want sex, those of us not getting it regularly from another person routinely perform it on ourselves. Most people want the real thing though, because it’s pretty awesome. What’s the most cost effective way of getting it?
Let’s look at the traditional relationship. Since we’re all PFers, let’s assume that you and your sweetie split everything 50-50. You split every bill at every restaurant evenly. You both drive each other around equal amounts, and you spend equal amounts on gifts. Your net cost is, seemingly, zero.
But hold on a minute. We all know, especially in those first few months of a relationship, there’s always this desire to do stuff with your special friend. I’ve easily spent hundreds of dollars per month for the first few months of a relationship, and I’m betting you have too. This settles down after a while, but the cost persists throughout. I never minded, since I just looked at it as a cost to getting laid regularly.
The bottom line? Being in a relationship costs hundreds of dollars each month. And let’s not forget big expensive down the road stuff like rings and 38 different paint colors because the WOMAN CAN’T MAKE UP HER DAMN MIND.
Meanwhile, let’s take a look at casual sex. What’s the cost involved there?
There’s probably going to be a few dates involved at the beginning, since you have to make sure she’s not a serial killer. There’s probably a bit of an ongoing cost, you’re going to do stuff with each other at least a bit. But that’s it. There’s no spending every night together. There’s no special weekends away. It’s just an exchange of sex. From an economic standpoint, it makes far more sense.
Both parties bring something to a relationship. Generally, men think women are hot, while women are attracted to a man’s status, confidence, sense of humor, etc. From a purely economic standpoint though, we have a problem. Over time, a woman’s hotness will fade. But generally, a man’s social status, confidence and sense of humor will at least stay constant, if not slowly increase over time. Which is why, economically, men should rent sex.
I’m not saying the guys reading this should never end up marrying their special lady. If she brings enough to the table, by all means make it permanent. But the beauty of a casual sex relationship is that both parties can get to know the other one before things become official. Think of it as taking the car out for a spin a few times before writing a cheque for it. (Because car payments are a special kind of evil.) Sure, courting your special lady accomplishes the same thing, except at a much greater cost.
I know a girl (who, admittedly, I had no chance with) who was stunningly beautiful. Like I’m talking hotter than the imaginary offspring of Taylor Swift and that smokin’ hot Italian chick from the Food Network. She had it all – gigantic boobs, a terrific ass, great smile, nice hair, you name it. There was just one little problem.
She was kinda miserable.
She is the perfect example of what I’m talking about. I pined after this particular girl for YEARS, even though she kinda drove me insane. I could see nothing but the hotness. So yeah, I can understand why you’d be tempted. By all means, go ahead, assuming you rent that ass. That is not ass you want to buy.
Ladies, this applies to you too. Just flip around everything I said and ignore the part about boobs. Unless you’re into boobs. Take your prospective man out for a test drive too.
That’s why, at least from an economic perspective, casual sex (or, as the kids call it, friends with benefits) makes all sorts of sense. I’m not sure if I buy it from a moral argument, but I at least get the economics behind it. It’s just more cost effective sex.
PK:
October 10th, 2012 at 8:40 am
It’s like that quote – “sex for money is much cheaper than sex for free”. Well, if you’re into that sort of thing. From a non-moral standpoint, I’d wager that sex for money (or even casual sex) is riskier than the long-term monogamous type of sex, and the combined number of partners in any encounter is likely higher than for an older married couple.
Paul N:
October 10th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
Nelson, as usual you are the man!
I don’t think there is any safe comment on this post without feeling the wrath of many ladies. I have to agree with your thoughts as usual. I would like to direct you to this page to start some real controversy…. (If I may, if I’m not breaking any rules here)
http://massageplanet.net/forum/archive/index.php/t-31653.html?s=a9718394871da68c1d8df00530d6cf56
I’m in the GTA. Recently on the radio they read a letter over the air which started a half hour of heated phone calls regarding “not getting some… at home” and what one of the alternatives are. I think adding the fact that over time some people change then what’s a person to do. Locking yourself in a closet with a photo of jessica simpson, like Louis C.K. (and getting caught by his tv wife) is not an answer for the averge joe. Partaking of some beautiful attendants at the local “stress relief clinic” is a much better alternative. I agree with PK, dangerous yes but it seems an alternative to a messy divorce. And cheaper.
So honey.. yell at me all you want, I’ll be back in an hour or two, just going to the gym… Lets face it. Most guys like a lot of sex, and they want fantasy sex.. It’s like eating ice cream for us. Also you shouldn’t have to beg for it, or do a chore for it like a trained monkey. That is paying for it in a different way, so really what is the difference?
Rachel:
October 10th, 2012 at 3:21 pm
Ha! You think the woman’s going to pay her share on everything???
It’s hard to find a woman these days who would be willing to pay her half on a first date. some will start paying a bit later on. But despite declaring their independence, most women still expect the man to do most of the paying. I’d add quite a bit onto your money estimates.
If you want sex, it’s way cheaper to just pay for it directly. If you want sex and companionship and the other things that can come out of a relationship, it can be worth it to look harder for an appropriate partner and date instead. but for any man just looking for sex, it’s way more expensive when it’s indirect.
Rachel:
October 10th, 2012 at 3:29 pm
There is a difference between a single guy paying for sex and a married guy paying for sex. You’re single, you have no obligations to anyone. Have sex for money or not, whatever. If you have made a commitment to another person, a decent man honours that commitment. Just as does a decent woman. Don’t make a commitment to someone who doesn’t have what you’re looking for, but once you’ve committed, stick with it.
And hey, if you can find a girl who is worth marrying except for the sex part and she’s willing to let you get that outside the marriage, have at it. I’m not opposed to anything consenting adults choose. But that needs to be part of your agreement.
Partaking at your local stress relief clinic is dangerous (to your wife) aside from the moral aspect.
If you don’t want a messy divorce, don’t marry a woman in the first place.
If you’re not the sort of guy who’s going to be satisfied with one woman, don’t get married.
Then again, in this age of stacked family courts, my general advice to all men is don’t get married.
Paul N:
October 10th, 2012 at 3:50 pm
Hi Rachel,
So what would your advice be to a man for example if while they dated certain activities were hot and heavy? Then they got married and one or two years later, everything changed? She berated the man for asking for some nookie, saying he was childish, or the joke about what kind of food makes a girl alergic to oral sex comes true… (wedding cake). Then she threatens to financially destroy him if he tries to divorce her.
I am a manager at work I have seen quite a few strong men reduced to shells from messy one sided divorces. You can feel so trapped. I don’t agree with this alternative as you say for a married person. But I can see its allure. What can a person do if all other alternatives have been tried?
Rachel:
October 10th, 2012 at 4:58 pm
That is certainly why I advise modern men to simply not get married. The deck is too highly stacked against them.
I am a firm believer that monogamy means sex with one person, and not sex with no people. So I see a good argument for if your wife has completely stopped having sex with you, she’s already broken the contract, and go ahead and get some on the side. If you’re never having sex, you’re not going to pass anything on anyways.
But personally, I can’t think of many situations where that kind of hostage situation would be worth it. Divorce her and charge abandonment. She may well still take you to the cleaners, but to me, poverty and freedom seem better than living and just waiting for the hammer to fall. That’s the really trapped situation.
My Own Advisor:
October 10th, 2012 at 5:33 pm
From an economic perspective, casual sex makes tons of sense.
If the feelings are mutual, knock your socks off kids…
Martin:
October 10th, 2012 at 9:57 pm
I won’t get into too much details, but I have extensive experience with both. I’ve had an even amount of positive/negative experiences with both.
Every relationship I’ve been in has cost me tons of money, from dates to gifts.
Casual sex is strictly business. The most you offer is some drinks or food, and maybe a place to stay.
The negative is that having sex in a relationship is amazing because the person knows what you prefer and you guys care about each other.
Casual sex works best when both parties understand that’s what it is, want to have a good time, and don’t worry about the long term.
Btw Nelson, what’s your relationship story? Single? Ever close to married?
IMHO:
October 11th, 2012 at 8:02 am
In the end, there is no such thing as a bad orgasm.
Casual sex = orgasm.
Married sex = orgasm, with strings attached.
AS far as I know as long as the man gets there he’s happy.
He’s only unhappy when
1. he doesn’t get there,
2. he feels guilty for how he got there or
3. he resents what he did or had to do to get there.
I swear men are like dogs. Occasionally you have to express their anal glands in order for them to be happy. Same idea.
Joe:
October 11th, 2012 at 2:54 pm
Prostitution is economically-efficient for exactly the reasons you cite. Where there’s a free market for it, it tends to be an “inferior good” much like alcohol, tobacco, lotteries, etc. — i.e. its share of income is inversely correlated with income. Why? Well, it’s much cheaper (and again, we’re talking a free market where it’s widely available and relatively inexpensive — I can ONLY ASSUME — compared to going market rates) than maintaining a relationship. Unless you have an awesome life partner who understand the concept of building wealth and who is actively helping you toward that end — then being in a relationship is not only awesome, it’s cheaper and helps make you rich.
Paul N:
October 11th, 2012 at 3:23 pm
I think it’s a lot easier to write that you would prefer to live in poverty then to live it.
I took your advice by the way. Nice for a girl to actually confirm it has been the right move. (I don’t think my mom likes or understands it though).
I have always had the thought a pre-nuptial should simply be mandatory for every marriage. That would take the awkwardness about bringing it up to your partner. I think it would be a great start. Plus limiting support payments to a maximum, and have it on a declining scale over a set number of years, with no chance of going back 20 years later. Just some quick ideas to level the playing field….
Paul N:
October 11th, 2012 at 3:27 pm
Unfortunately for about 50% of people it doesn’t work and it cost quite a bit more. In many instances you simply will never retire if you go through a messy long divorce where everything is contested.
Nelson Smith:
October 12th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
There was one girl I was close to marrying. I started hinting it was time for the next step, she got scared and ran away.
And now I blog and masturbate. I is sad
Nelson Smith:
October 12th, 2012 at 11:02 pm
I encourage links in the comment section to interesting things. And that link certainly applies.
Mochi and Macarons:
October 17th, 2012 at 10:46 pm
What do you think dating is?
It’s been proven in studies that men can’t think when beautiful women are around. Or at least, they think less, and aren’t as rational.
It is not until they’ve married their irrationalities that they realize they’ve just ruined their life and halved their net worths.
The key is to find someone beautiful AND smart AND interesting to talk to, even once the beauty fades, as it always will.
Can You Please Stop Buying Drinks For Girls - Financial Uproar » Financial Uproar:
November 20th, 2012 at 4:20 am
[...] wrote about renting women on here before. I pretty much disagree with Nelson’s views on sex because I love it too much [...]