The other day I had a meeting with two women (vendors of the company).  One was an older plain jane type woman (hey I like plain Jane's).  The other was a tall conventionally attractive brunette.

Now, the plain woman was very knowledgeable and well spoken.  The conventionally attractive woman didn't have much to say.  After it was over I said to myself "was I paying more attention to the attractive woman even though she wasn't talking"?  Was this due to my hobbying?  Or just bias towards attractive women in general?

So I started to think about this more in-depth and here is my conclusion.  Yes, Hobbying is unfair to non-Providers (and in a big way).  

On the day of that meeting I had been under intense pressure (several days of 10+ hours working on various projects).  I had not had sex with my wife in two weeks - kids home from school due to the holidays and I purposely had not masturbated because I wanted to save a big load for the wife (ya know what I mean).  At that point sex was not on my mind it was like that old commercial "a hot frying pan is your brain and then a you fry an egg on the hot pan and that is your brain on drugs".  (for the clueless, my mind was the frying egg)

As men who pay conventionally attractive women for sex we have become very biased without even knowing it.  I think that we have come to see Plain Jane women as not worth our time.  Why?  Sex/Women have become a consumer product for the Hobbyist.  You buy it, use it then discard it.  That can't help but manifest itself into your personal life.  I think Hobbyists have come to treat "regular" women like Fast Food (I'll take it when nothing else is available).  

But in hindsight this has come to hurt conventionally attractive women as well.  They are now put on a pedestal they don't deserve.  Why?  Potential of sex.  As a hobbyist you are giving these conventionally attractive women attention they don't deserve because you are actively/subconsciously seeking sex without actually acknowledging this behavior.  

Ok, what does this mean?  Simple economics/psychology my friends.  Scarcity increases value.  For the Hobbyist Women/Sex are no longer scarce.  Thus, the value of Women has an inverse relationship to your level of hobbying.  (in layman terms - the more you Hobby the less you value women, when one goes up the other goes down).

Sad but true my friends.  Sad but true.

-- Modified on 1/11/2013 9:30:41 AM

"The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."

much of what you said. How many times have we seen guys here type, "I could have sex with my wife, but knowing I can get a perfect 10 on demand, makes her less attractive?" Once you focus and lust over women who look better and perform on demand, it would impact a marriage. Still, it is the man's choice to NOT come here.

If I were married to an aging, balding 60 year old and all I did was look at half naked guys who resemble Jason Statham, of course that is going to damage my attraction and lust for the man I have at home. Regardless of what people say, what goes in your eyes and ears gets further than that, and certainly affects how you look at women/men in general.



-- Modified on 1/11/2013 12:53:42 PM

but just myself. I treat both super hot and average or even very unattractive women with same amount of respect and attentiveness when dealing with them in civvie life. If the situation demands me to go off on the deep end, I wouldn't give rat's ass whether the women is 2 or she is 10.  Why? Because I am not interested in sex with either of them...I can have a 9 or 10 on DEMAND... Just call couple of regulars or agencies and I can get laid within hours. I just don't feel the need to kiss ass or suck up to hot women for the sake of impressing them..

Again, not speaking for all the MEN in the world. Just speaking for myself..

Not a bad post Tucky...Especially given your past history....

See not having SEX or NOT masturbating is actually making you a little smarter... like George from Seinfeld.

-- Modified on 1/11/2013 1:02:37 PM

no matter whether they be providers or civvies.  Hot girls get more job offers too.    Ask Brent Musberger.  I'd eat the corn out of this girl's poop.

So let's see.

You are horny. You do not think you are thinking about sex. Two ladies come to see you and one is pretty, the other not so much. You pay more attention to the pretty one than to the other, though the pretty one appears to be mostly useless to you in the situation. You hobby.

Did I sum this up correctly?

From this set of observations, you conclude that:

You paid more attention to the pretty one because you hobby, and that this is an inevitable and universal result of hobbying. Really?

If you did not hobby would you have paid more attention to the less attractive one? What would you have done before you hobbied? The hobby has nothing to do with it - almost every guy is going to pay more attention to the attractive woman. Look it up - attractive people attract our attention.

As for your economics argument, I must admit that one is even more half-baked. Please define what you mean by value, because in purely economic terms, and when you start talking about scarcity and value that seems to be where you are going, it is hard to argue that some guy who is spending a few grand a month on providers puts less value on women. Econonomically spreaking, he places more value on them, than another guy who spends his disposable income on cars, clothes, food, golf and vacations.

There is a whole different discussion about how men tend to see women as objects and how this world (and I mean the whole world, not just the hobby world) definitely encourages us in that. The interesting question on that front is whether it is worse or better here, to the degree that the objectification (ugly word, but I do not know any other way to say it) is mutual, consensual and honestly and openly acknowledged. If London wants and encourages me to look at her with lustful desire, is it a bad thing to do so?

Sorry, guys, I can't agree that this post is more than a narcissistic, half-baked exercise in airing the OP's self doubt yet again and clothing it in the appearance of thought when there is little apparent.

It makes me fucking crazy when people take two almost totally unrelated things and conclude that because they have some small bit of commonality (I hobby with women, and these two ladies are both women), superficially sound a little bit like they might be related (I treat providers one way and since they are all women, I must be learning to treat all women the way I treat providers) and both came to mind at about the same time, that the one explains and causes the other (I pay more attention to the more attractive woman because hobbying has changed me). If there is causality in this particular situation, it most likely is in absolutely the opposite direction - your attitude toward women lead you to the hobby, not the hobby formed your attitude toward women, at least as I see it.

Part of why this aggravates the hell out of me is because it is the primary mechanism for most marketing and manipulation, including all the misinformation that passes for political debate. I want to be young and sexy, and I see a really hot guy wearing Old Spice with lots of pretty girls oohing over him, so if I wear Old Spice will it make me sexier? No, in a word.

Personally, I like to get up early and take a dump, and have noticed the sun comes up while I do it. Now I am afraid that if I sleep in, or do not take that dump before dawn, the sun might not come up any more. What should I do now?

zig

I have noticed that I've been a lot bolder in terms of talking with women.  More of a "well, it's just sex" attitude which is quite a change for me.  

I dipped my toe in the hobby water because I am recently out of a long term relationship and just don't want to deal with dating (I don't have the want or the energy right now).  My intention will be to not hobby if and/or when I do start dating.  I wear my heart on my sleeve and I just couldn't do it.  

Also, many people in here seem to have that burning desire to be with a lot of different women.  I really don't have that inner drive.  I've been in plenty of relationships with very satisfying sex lives....and I do like sex that DOES include an emotional connection.  Pause....while I go clean the sand out of my vagina.

But as for it affecting how I might treat a lady in a social or work setting, nada.  I certainly notice attractive ladies in the work place, but I also notice dynamic, interesting people even if they aren't on the top of the attractiveness scale (God knows I'm not...lol).

John Elwayish if you ask me.  Just not my cup of tea, but that's why it takes all kinds.

Remove every instance in your post where you refer to hobbyists and replace it with just you and you got a point.

Years ago I realized that women were taking over the world

And decided to go with it rather than fight the inevitable.

When I was interested in adding staff...the candidates that I would interview were mostly women.  Some I hired were true 10's (not this TER nonsense).  However I didn't know what a gal looked like till she walked into the office for the interviews.  There were times that some really scary looking gals showed up...but I conducted the interview as if she was a 10.

The reality is that each gal had or didn't have the requisite skills to do the job I was offering.  If she did, and our personalities meshed...she was hired.  If not...see ya later.  Didn't matter to me what she looked like, as long as I liked her and she could do the job.

Did I ever tell you about the young Scandinavian gal that came in for the Administrative Assistant position?  Holy Shit...this gal was aobut 5'9"...gorgeous and smart.  I knew that I had to somehow let her go after she showed up one day in a dangerously short skirt, buttoned down blouse and ankle sox.  Fortunately she married a clients IT guy shortly after that day  LOL

BTW...she had the job as soon as she walked in for the interview.

And for those who understand the symbolism of this    

Yep...a meeting is set for next Friday for lunch  LOL

into multicollinearity ("It makes me fucking crazy when people take two almost totally unrelated things and conclude that because they have some small bit of commonality superficially sound a little bit like they might be related").  Is very interesting in and of itself.  An entire book could be written on this subject alone.

Glad to see another Hobbyist has taken this post as seriously as it was intended.  

Even though our different dissertation conclusions are divergent of the initial hypothesis.

This takes me back to Statistics 101 class in college.  The Professor was such a quant he could weave statistics into philosophy.  He got me hooked.  

I am sure he would be surprised to see this stat/philosophy subject combined on a sex board!!!!!

Are men always going to be attracted to pretty women - yes.  But there has to be something else there.  It is unlikely you would want to see her again if she made racist comments, beat her dog, stole money from the church...  There is a limit to physical attraction.

And if that is all there is for you, then I pity you.  You are missing out on AMAZING sex because you cannot see the value of being attracted to someone based on more than the physical.  A true erotic charge comes from being attracted to every part of the other person, not just the outer shell.  

He said you're a narcissist.

And I did email your old Prof...he is embarrassed for you!

Also he said you still need to pass the final exam to get your AA degree.  

but Zig intentionally or unintentionally segued into statistics.  

I am a Quant by trade and I could simply write all day about numbers and numerical analysis.  If I combine that with sex.  I could write all month

So you could say I am a Narcissistic/Quant/Sexaholic.

and that is that MEN ARE VISUAL.

I don't think the hobby has anything to do with your paying more attention to the attractive woman.  I think ALL (straight, and many gay) men will ALWAYS pay more attention to an attractive woman over a plain woman.  

This is why cosmetics is a $50 BILLION industry, in the US alone.

Simple as that. Some of us are more narcissistic than others, but it is safe to say we all are quite involved with ourselves, much more than the average.

As for the stat side, I have more than a passing interest in science of all sorts, and am infatuated with Nate Silver, Bill James and pretty much anyone who makes an attempt to separate meaningful data from noise, no matter what the subject (reference to book title intended).

And there is so much noise. It is easy to sit in traffic, for example, and rage at the stupid driving of the person in front of me, when it is perfectly clear that if that person was not there nothing at all would change. I still rage. We do love to see immediate, manageable causes for everything that happens, we are disposed to find those patterns, it is our primary strength and a major weakness.

For most of us here, I suspect that how we view and relate to the opposite sex is more cause than effect. That does not mean that the hobby does not change us all, man or woman, but like most things the voyage is one of discovery more than transformation. Having said that, your initial post was making a simple situation way too complicated - you looked at the pretty woman because she was a pretty woman and you are a guy. That is what happens whether you are a priest and she is a Sunday school teacher, or you are a drunken truck driver on a Friday night and she is the star stripper at the club. The reasons for it are mostly survival-related - the species does best if each male does his best to impregnate every likely female he can find.

Of course, being the civilized man you are, RT, you just looked and did not act on that primitive impulse. Then you went two steps further, recognizing what you had just done and considering why you may have done it. But, no, I do not agree that hobbying has much, if anything, to do with how you view and value women. And I can say that with the total confidence of someone who does not know you at all. No facts to destroy the perfect beauty of my thesis.

zig

I love how folks project on here  

And YOU know I'm not just a narcissist....but a professional hobbyist  

Yep...one size does indeed fit all  LOL

It may be a little unfair to non providers that I hobby. Now those women that used their looks as a tool to manipulate me don't succeed in doing so any more. As Curly put it I treat super hot, average or even unattractive women with the same attention and respect. I've noticed some attractive women being frustrated by the fact that their flirting or pretending to flirt doesn't work with me, and it's amusing. I feel empowered now, when before I hobbied I felt like I had to react to these tactics even though I was well aware that I'd never have a chance with them anyway. So the unfairness is that by hobbying I've nullified their super powers, and I still get what I want with who I want, when I want and for how long I want and I know exactly how much it'll cost me. Perfect for me, not so much for civie women. Also, I don't have to settle for some woman that I could attract, I can be with a woman that wouldn't look twice at me if it weren't for the hobby. Money I have, looks, youth and patience not so much.

but what providers have taught me is that appearance matters less to me.  It is performance which counts.  An ordinary looking woman who rocks your world will be cherished.  I do not devalue my Favorite (Repeat) ladies.  On some level we are friends to friendly aquaintances...

And don't forget the Sarcasm meeting of the Professional Hobbyists starts at 10...SHARP!!

Don't be late again!

is closely related to this form of logic.  The key difference is that Multicollinearity is a statistical argument that is quantified (proved) by numerical data.  The problem with statistics is that you can "prove" damn near anything.  There are lies, damn lies and then statistics.

For example two events happen at the same time every day but are not related.  A person says there has to be some relation.  Statistics would (or could) prove with an observable set of numerical data (via regression analysis and other programs) that the rooster crow and sunset are not related.  How?  Don't know I have not run that analysis.  But here is how it would/could happen:

*  You need a large data set of 1,000,000 (or so) observations of sunrises (independently verified - i.e., 200k in Europe, 200k in North America, etc.)

*  The same for observations of rooster crows (independently verified, etc.).  Independent observations not connected to the sunset.  In other words, the person observing the sunset cannot be the person observing the rooster crow.

*  Using a statistical program you conduct a correlation analysis between the two data sets.

My initial hypothesis is that there would be a small percentage of observations where the rooster does not crow when the sun rises.  Why?  The rooster could have died, eaten by a fox, maybe some roosters don't crow south of the equator, maybe the rooster is a hobbyist and was on a date, etc.

Given a large enough body of observations damn near anything can be proven (or not).  This is why some shady car insurance companies try to charge more in premiums for people with bad credit.  They ran a large enough analysis and "proved" that people with low credit scores filed more claims.  Trust me it's BS.  But again given enough data points you can prove almost anything.

Damn, you got me started.  And today was my day off from work.  Damn you to hell!!!  This is what happens when you get a nerd like me started.

Off to watch the Big Bang Theory.

In a different context than what you’ve brought up....possibly.

But. In a professional environment, if you are ignoring the smart woman in the room---the one who has the expertise, and useful information you need---just because you find her less physically attractive than the hot girl sitting next to her; who has nothing useful to say, and has nothing useful to contribute, *just because* you think she’s hot?

Yes. That is wildly unfair. And pretty dumb, frankly (assuming you really are looking for useful information, and not *just* great tits...whatever...). Although, sadly, not at all uncommon.

Take that dynamic out of a professional environment  and what you get is...well....what all of us do, to one degree or another. No big news that physically attractive people draw more attention.

The fact that you happen to pay sex workers is not the driving factor here.

Stephen Hawking  

You simply weren't qualified.

Sorry...better luck next time!

Your manly good looks OR

Your not qualified to do the job?

-- Modified on 1/11/2013 7:30:53 PM

Why would we pay for something we can get for free?  Of course we are gonna pay for things we cannot otherwise get for little or no cost.  Duh.

YOU might think the Plain Jane woman isn't worth your time, but that's because you are thinking about sex.  When I talk with female business colleagues, I'm not thinking about fucking them.  I'm thinking about how the fuck I can do business with them to make money off them.

If you are just now coming to the conclusion that more attractive people get more perks in life, you really are reinforcing the notion that Wall Street guys are overpaid morons.

Your argument about scarcity is somewhat correct, but it's only the supply side of economics.  You forgot about the demand side.  Just because something is scarce doesn't mean it is desirable.  You what else is scarce?  Women with an arm sticking out of their forehead.  That doesn't mean there is demand for it.

I think that men who change how the interact with women, for the worse, are professional hobbyists and just generally unpleasant men.

That you enjoy a connection in addition to sex is not an anomaly. It is on a fk board, but when you get into a certain demographic, if you don't have brains and beauty (and are at least in college or have a degree), you're not really in demand.

"My intention will be to not hobby if and/or when I do start dating"
Sound like my favorite clients. (or the one's in open relationships).

I think your hobbying doesn't affect how you interact with women in general, because you're just a normal dude that enjoys having a paid lover. No biggie.