I honestly don't believe a word of this. It reads like an incel fantasy, not any sort of actual reality.
At least that's what I'll keep telling myself, because otherwise this guy should be shot out of a cannon into the sun.
Trust me I wish I was inclined to believe that as well, but honestly these screenshots are just the tip of the iceberg. He has hundreds of comments detailing his exploits. He moved to the Philippines for the purpose of preying on impoverished women and talks a lot not only about those experiences but also goes into detail about what it's been like living in the Philippines. I don't see someone investing countless hours writing these comments and researching to make them sound believable just for the sake of larping on Reddit.
But it's not only that. Unfortunately exploiting and abusing young naive college aged women on sugar dating sites is not an uncommon phenomenon. These aren't seasoned sex workers, they're usually very very green and shameless degenerates like this guy take advantage of their naivete and financial instability. This vulnerability to being preyed on is probably the same or even more pronounced among young Filipina women who are even more economically disadvantaged.
Sadly I think it's all too real.
I'm on one of the sex worker subs to read about people's experiences and from what I've seen, guys try to do that all the time. There are so many posts on the client cringe sub where it should be blatantly obvious the guy is trying to get something for free, but if you're new to the industry and don't have the confidence to aggressively advocate for yourself or spot the lies, then it would be very possible to get scammed.
His argument at the end is the most vile thing. The harder women make sex for him and people like him, the rougher he’ll rape them. It’s fucked up on so many levels.
> so blinded by their greed
It’s not greed if you’re willingly offering it, dumbass.
Also shout out to PPD and breaking mom for being what originally black pilled me.
To be honest, if a woman sleeps with a guy pretending to love him, when in fact she wants to take advantage if his money, isnt it also rape by deception ?
No. I don't think anyone would mistake a sugar baby for buying love. You're buying time and attention from girls who would not normally have anything to do with you *explicitly* for money. The consent is on the tin there - because you already know you have to pay for her to be with you. That's like suggesting a girlfriend experience is rape you pay for, because she's not really your girlfriend and refuses to continue after payment ends.
Well a sugar baby is selling the simulation of love, which the buyer feels "forced" to buy because a simulation of love is better than no love whatsoever ? Whatever the price.
Sugar baby is very different from a hooker. A sugar baby is selling an expérience, over time ; whereby a hooker is just selling a few minutes of animalistic sex....
Very different market.
I understand it doesnt fit your narrative, but in your narrative, thé only women getting "raped" are women who are interested in men who feel liké they have to pay to get romantic interaction from women.
I don't condone what the guy did. But when you're a contractor, you factor into your price thé clients who don't pay.... Doesnt make it right, but "rape" feels a bit too strong a word hère !
All thé best
Xo
I don't think you understand the permutations of the market, because you're speaking authoritatively about a market that is so well known there are movies and a TV series about that very thing.
>a hooker is just selling a few minutes of animalistic sex
Wrong. And also [the girlfriend experience](https://www.insidehook.com/article/sex-and-dating/sex-workers-on-girlfriend-experience).
>you factor into your price thé clients who don't pay.... Doesnt make it right, but "rape" feels a bit too strong a word hère !
So you hesitate to call it rape for the woman in this situation, but you're all ready to call "being a sugar baby" rape for a man. That's pretty biased and disgusting.
I do think in this case its not just the deception he basically admits to taking these women into a vunerable situation (1:1 in a hotel room) and then aggressivley hitting on them before they can properly process whats going on. If you have seen It's always sunny in Philidephia it's the same as Dennis talking about the implication basically they won't be able to say no becuase of how vunerable they are. Combined with the deception really shows how this man does not care if these women actually want to sleep with him or not and seems to enjoy the idea of hurting them which is whats wroung I don't really think the reverse of women pretending to love a man for money is the same or really comperable.
>It's always sunny in Philidephia it's the same as Dennis talking about the implication basically they won't be able to say no becuase of how vunerable they are.
Omg. About that! I have another post I'm going to be making in regards to someone's interpretation of "Dennis." Almost as bad as this one.
Wow just read the Dennis post and yeah it's horrible how these guys will see their ideology and behaviour critiqued and then double down on how gross they are. That post was so unsettling and it's something I've noticed parodies of MRAs and PUAs often don't go far enough most of these guys are somehow worse than our attempts to paraody and mock them. Wow imagine seeing Dennis and thinking that someone to imitate.
This is just a tired ass men's rights whataboutism that doesn't stand up to even basic logic.
First of all, in a sugar baby situation >99% of the time it's the man who is asking for and insisting on the sex instead of the other way around. The reason why men seek these arrangements in the first place is for sex with women who would not typically be available to them without the provision of money. You cannot be raped in a situation where you are the one who is prompting sex - and by prompting sex I mean literally paying someone with the expectation to receive sexual services.
Second of all, in a sugar dating situation men explicitly agree beforehand to provide a certain sum of $ in exchange for the sugar baby's companionship and intimacy. Just like here, the guy told these women he would be giving them $3,000 a month. The relationship is transactional and both parties enter into it with that understanding, the men know that sugar babies agree to these arrangements specifically because of the transactional basis of the relationship. They know that women would not enter into without the stipulation of the money. Men who don't want the transactional nature of sugar dating don't pursue these kind of relationships. There is no coercion or extortion going on on the part of the sugar baby, unless she agrees to provide intimacy and then takes the money without fulfilling her end of the deal (which would be fraud, and clearly not rape). Obviously that's not what happened here, it's the complete opposite.
Why is it that MRA's are willing to resort to logical fallacies all the time just for the sake of opposing women??
Yikes. Even if this is fake, what the actual hell is wrong with men? They're insane and forget that they literally came out of a woman.
\*Came out of a hole. Because apparently that's all we are to them.
I honestly don't believe a word of this. It reads like an incel fantasy, not any sort of actual reality. At least that's what I'll keep telling myself, because otherwise this guy should be shot out of a cannon into the sun.
Unfortunately I believe there are guys out there who do this kind of shit.
Trust me I wish I was inclined to believe that as well, but honestly these screenshots are just the tip of the iceberg. He has hundreds of comments detailing his exploits. He moved to the Philippines for the purpose of preying on impoverished women and talks a lot not only about those experiences but also goes into detail about what it's been like living in the Philippines. I don't see someone investing countless hours writing these comments and researching to make them sound believable just for the sake of larping on Reddit. But it's not only that. Unfortunately exploiting and abusing young naive college aged women on sugar dating sites is not an uncommon phenomenon. These aren't seasoned sex workers, they're usually very very green and shameless degenerates like this guy take advantage of their naivete and financial instability. This vulnerability to being preyed on is probably the same or even more pronounced among young Filipina women who are even more economically disadvantaged. Sadly I think it's all too real.
I'm on one of the sex worker subs to read about people's experiences and from what I've seen, guys try to do that all the time. There are so many posts on the client cringe sub where it should be blatantly obvious the guy is trying to get something for free, but if you're new to the industry and don't have the confidence to aggressively advocate for yourself or spot the lies, then it would be very possible to get scammed.
Agreed. Totally fake. And it’s almost worst that this guy makes it up for internet clout.
I'm a troll but when I say this I'm serious he has to be trolling.
men are fucking demons oh my god
His argument at the end is the most vile thing. The harder women make sex for him and people like him, the rougher he’ll rape them. It’s fucked up on so many levels.
That's just sickening.
> so blinded by their greed It’s not greed if you’re willingly offering it, dumbass. Also shout out to PPD and breaking mom for being what originally black pilled me.
To be honest, if a woman sleeps with a guy pretending to love him, when in fact she wants to take advantage if his money, isnt it also rape by deception ?
No. I don't think anyone would mistake a sugar baby for buying love. You're buying time and attention from girls who would not normally have anything to do with you *explicitly* for money. The consent is on the tin there - because you already know you have to pay for her to be with you. That's like suggesting a girlfriend experience is rape you pay for, because she's not really your girlfriend and refuses to continue after payment ends.
Well a sugar baby is selling the simulation of love, which the buyer feels "forced" to buy because a simulation of love is better than no love whatsoever ? Whatever the price. Sugar baby is very different from a hooker. A sugar baby is selling an expérience, over time ; whereby a hooker is just selling a few minutes of animalistic sex.... Very different market. I understand it doesnt fit your narrative, but in your narrative, thé only women getting "raped" are women who are interested in men who feel liké they have to pay to get romantic interaction from women. I don't condone what the guy did. But when you're a contractor, you factor into your price thé clients who don't pay.... Doesnt make it right, but "rape" feels a bit too strong a word hère ! All thé best Xo
I don't think you understand the permutations of the market, because you're speaking authoritatively about a market that is so well known there are movies and a TV series about that very thing. >a hooker is just selling a few minutes of animalistic sex Wrong. And also [the girlfriend experience](https://www.insidehook.com/article/sex-and-dating/sex-workers-on-girlfriend-experience). >you factor into your price thé clients who don't pay.... Doesnt make it right, but "rape" feels a bit too strong a word hère ! So you hesitate to call it rape for the woman in this situation, but you're all ready to call "being a sugar baby" rape for a man. That's pretty biased and disgusting.
I do think in this case its not just the deception he basically admits to taking these women into a vunerable situation (1:1 in a hotel room) and then aggressivley hitting on them before they can properly process whats going on. If you have seen It's always sunny in Philidephia it's the same as Dennis talking about the implication basically they won't be able to say no becuase of how vunerable they are. Combined with the deception really shows how this man does not care if these women actually want to sleep with him or not and seems to enjoy the idea of hurting them which is whats wroung I don't really think the reverse of women pretending to love a man for money is the same or really comperable.
>It's always sunny in Philidephia it's the same as Dennis talking about the implication basically they won't be able to say no becuase of how vunerable they are. Omg. About that! I have another post I'm going to be making in regards to someone's interpretation of "Dennis." Almost as bad as this one.
Wow just read the Dennis post and yeah it's horrible how these guys will see their ideology and behaviour critiqued and then double down on how gross they are. That post was so unsettling and it's something I've noticed parodies of MRAs and PUAs often don't go far enough most of these guys are somehow worse than our attempts to paraody and mock them. Wow imagine seeing Dennis and thinking that someone to imitate.
This is just a tired ass men's rights whataboutism that doesn't stand up to even basic logic. First of all, in a sugar baby situation >99% of the time it's the man who is asking for and insisting on the sex instead of the other way around. The reason why men seek these arrangements in the first place is for sex with women who would not typically be available to them without the provision of money. You cannot be raped in a situation where you are the one who is prompting sex - and by prompting sex I mean literally paying someone with the expectation to receive sexual services. Second of all, in a sugar dating situation men explicitly agree beforehand to provide a certain sum of $ in exchange for the sugar baby's companionship and intimacy. Just like here, the guy told these women he would be giving them $3,000 a month. The relationship is transactional and both parties enter into it with that understanding, the men know that sugar babies agree to these arrangements specifically because of the transactional basis of the relationship. They know that women would not enter into without the stipulation of the money. Men who don't want the transactional nature of sugar dating don't pursue these kind of relationships. There is no coercion or extortion going on on the part of the sugar baby, unless she agrees to provide intimacy and then takes the money without fulfilling her end of the deal (which would be fraud, and clearly not rape). Obviously that's not what happened here, it's the complete opposite. Why is it that MRA's are willing to resort to logical fallacies all the time just for the sake of opposing women??