Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It strikes me somewhat oddly that one might pay so much for something that literally half the people on this planet is equipped to provide

You're paying for looks, ease, simplicity, no strings, and so on... I get it. But idunno, that is a lot of money for one nut.

Also suprised the San Diego price is so high, when there is a red light district literally on the border in Tijuana, and those girls charge $60-$100/hr US to gringos (and less to spanish-speakers, locals, and people who pay in pesos)



This is the high-end price. It's not for every man and definitively not for every woman. While some intelligence is required to charge these high prices, some genetics lottery luck is also required.

> It strikes me somewhat oddly that one might pay so much for something that literally half the people on this planet is equipped to provide

High-end is basically differentiating yourself from average.

> You're paying for looks, ease, simplicity, no strings, and so on... I get it. But idunno, that is a lot of money for one nut.

It's cheap if you are rich and worried about lawsuits, law enforcement, blackmailing, your reputation, etc... Suddenly, $1200/h is quite cheap.


> It strikes me somewhat oddly that one might pay so much

$1200 an hour, with a minimum 1.5 hours, so $1800. In addition to a 20-minute roll in the hay, you get an attractive, intelligent person for company, who is skillful at flattering men.

So these "half the people on the planet": if they're not prostitutes, then you will have to date them. You are not going to cop if you take your date out to KFC. Even taking them to a posh restaurant won't guarantee you'll get your end away.

So let's say you manage to get a date 6 nights a week, and you shell-out for a meal and a show ($350 each?). Let's say half of them are people that interest you. Let's say half of those would consider bonking someone on the first date.

So you're out-of-pocket $2100, you've spent three evenings chatting to someone that didn't interest you, and two of the others want more meals and shows (but how many?)

I think my guesses are wild overestimates. I have no idea how one might ever get 6 dates a week. Most women won't bonk you on the first date. Far less than 50% of women are "interesting" (FSVO interesting).

If your time is scarce and valuable, your standards are high, and you have enough money to e.g. take holidays in nice places, then spending a couple of grand on a classy girl for the evening, with a guaranteed payoff, doesn't look insane.


This sounds completely off the mark for anyone that is moderately attractive, outgoing whilst possessing intelligence and social skills (I know, such a high bar to clear amongst SV types). The fact is, if one is above average in these areas, sex with attractive females doesn't cost one anything besides the time one puts in for the experience itself.

Throwing money at escorts is such a loser move (and the experience so far away from sex with a woman that truly desires you) that only someone who's never experienced the latter would seriously argue for paying 1200$ to have 20 minute sex with "an attractive, intelligent person for company, who is skillful at flattering men."


> The fact is, if one is above average in these areas

I'm 65. When I was 18, I was very scruffy, probably smelled bad, and had no money and no car. Women didn't exactly jump at me. I didn't try very hard to persuade them to. And there were no dating apps, and no websites.

I've never been into the "fuckem-and-chuckem" school of romance - I had a few one-nighters with pretty girls. If I was up for paying an escort, I'd pay for a nice one.

> the experience so far away from sex with a woman that truly desires you

So you've had the "escort experience"? Odd, then, that you'd say "throwing money at escorts is such a loser move". Maybe you chose badly?


I don’t need to have the escort experience to know it sucks. Not only have I had close friends that did (there was a group at Google that started out as typical virgin nerds and dabbled in high class escorts) but reading those escort testimonials should make it more than clear that the forced for-money experience is far inferior to actual sexual chemistry.


> This sounds completely off the mark for anyone that is moderately attractive, outgoing whilst possessing intelligence and social skills (I know, such a high bar to clear amongst SV types). The fact is, if one is above average in these areas, sex with attractive females doesn't cost one anything besides the time one puts in for the experience itself.

Sounds on the mark to me. I'm extroverted AF, intelligent, can make just about anyone laugh, and can form deep bonds and have deep conversations with people I literally run into off the street. Trying to date in SFO though? Purgatory. I'm not tall - I'm 5'10". I'm not muscular but also not fat - I'm 140lb. I'm a niche good - I don't have the universal appeal of Chris Hemsworth. Therefore, real life is where I'd sell best because I do well in conversation and - unfortunately - that takes so much time. Sooooo much time. The biggest issue is just getting in front of a beautiful woman. Once I'm in front - I can shoot myself in the foot and be okay with it. But, the fact that I can't even get in front of one is the hugest barrier to my lack of dating horror stories to tell friends. It's depressing.

It's the land of 49ers and an escort like Aella sounds appealing to me. I don't know if I'd ever do it for two reasons though. Firstly, I'm a bit too dedicated to a woman's pleasure and I'd worry an escort would be too much in their head to actually enjoy themselves fully. I already have to deal with that with women as it is. I cannot imagine how much in your own head you are as an escort. There was an aspect she touched on in her article that I was thinking myself as I was reading - which is that at least now she gets paid to have mediocre sex. I'm not really into mediocre sex. She did enjoy some but I wonder what it takes for an escort to enjoy it. I've only engaged in sexual acts with women who were obviously very into me (if only for the moment due to some hormones but at least they were into me for that night or two!). I don't doubt her abilities to fake it well but I also think many men are blind, apathetic, or as self-absorbed as many women I've encountered... and I'm not. So I don't think the sex would be good for either of us unless she was into me. Thus, would it be a good experience even if it was free? Probably not. If she was into me then why are we not just dating instead of some paid transaction? I mean if we're dating then she should really be trying to convince me to buy the $3m house like my last partner wanted... $2k transactions are cheap in comparison!

Secondly, the money aspect is very real to me. I might have a couple million in the bank and a 1%er income but the value proposition just is hard for me to reckon with. I think, "$2000+ for a nice night out with a pretty lady who will only see me as long as I keep paying $2k+ for every interaction... or my soft and delicate keyboard warrior hand for the low low price of self-loathing and depression?" For someone who is a comedian in his social circle - it's quite obvious which I'm going for. Self-hatred is just too good to pass up.

Also - 20 minutes? You're with a total babe and you're gonna just spend 20 minutes? What the f. Whenever that kind of opportunity presents itself to me - you have to wheel us both out after.


Equipped to provide does not imply willing to provide.


Indeed, everyone has a kidney, very few are will to provide it.


Kidney is a fixed zero sum resource. Sex is not.


This is a fascinating topic!

There's depths to it like you can't even imagine.

Sex is a market, and like any market, it has theories that can explain it.

For example: in most places, most of the time, prostitutes charge the same "rate" as wives do, because they're suppliers in competition, and the market sets the price.

Oh, you think your wife doesn't "charge" you for sex? How quaint and romantic! Of course she does. You're paying more rent. You're paying for more food. You're paying with expensive gifts, trips, and most importantly, you're paying to raise one or more kids. In many countries it's literally a crime for men not to pay child support.

If you step outside of your world for a second and look at it from the outside like an anthropologist might, you'll note that $1200/hour is about right for the "market price" in an nicer part of the world for affluent men. Most men have sex once or twice a week with their spouse, and more than half of their disposable income goes towards their partner and their kids.


> You're paying more rent. You're paying for more food.

Why?

> You're paying with expensive gifts, trips

Willingly

> you're paying to raise one or more kids

How is that a payment to wife? Those are my kids, it was my decision to make them so now I support them.

> In many countries it's literally a crime for men not to pay child support.

What does paying your social duties has with "payment to your wife"? What, society should raise your offsprings for free?

> Most men have sex once or twice a week with their spouse, and more than half of their disposable income goes towards their partner and their kids.

Partners are not exclusively for sex, partners are someone you want to spend your life with and, optionally, make kids.

Do you have problems with your wife or smth?


> Oh, you think your wife doesn't "charge" you for sex? How quaint and romantic! Of course she does. You're paying more rent. You're paying for more food. You're paying with expensive gifts, trips, and most importantly, you're paying to raise one or more kids.

What a strange perspective. In the US at least, having a wife makes you richer, as most women work, and you still live in a one bedroom, so your total income is significantly higher but your costs are only marginally higher. Getting married to another member of the workforce is a great way to build wealth.


You can buy a phone with the same spec as an iPhone for an eighth of the price. You can buy a car that goes from A-B for a fraction of the price of your Porsche. Those selvedge RRL jeans you like for 269 - Uniqlo do a version for 35. Is that Michelin star really better than Domino's? That is a lot to spend on just a phone, something to get you from A-B, something to cover your legs, something to fill you up, etc etc.

She sort of addresses it in the sentence that ends: "...and might be more likely to attract higher power men who are looking to “unlock” something they feel few other people have seen – your nudity."

I guess it's like anything. Things with a higher price feel more exclusive and we desire the things we can't have. If you can afford it, why would you skimp? If it's less affordable - maybe you'd prefer it to feel like an experience (at least in your own head) rather than 'one nut'?!


>It strikes me somewhat oddly that one might pay so much for something that literally half the people on this planet is equipped to provide

People will pay for convenience.

Also, if you are the higher paid earner in stable relationship I invite you to tally up the monthly cost sometime.


> It strikes me somewhat oddly that one might pay so much for something that literally half the people on this planet is equipped to provide

This is a luxury high-end part of the market. Ruled by the same dynamics as $200 steaks or $2000 bottles of champagne.


> $200 steaks

No steak is worth $200. But several people up-thread have made the point that $1200 per hour isn't that much, if you consider the alternatives (e.g. getting married - and if you can afford $1200 for a night out, then the divorce is probably going to be very, very expensive).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: