March 24, 2013

Dinner whores.

"The woman detailed how she would meet her 'victims' on the dating site OKCupid and through Craigslist, and would go out for dinner three times a week with different men, allowing them to foot the bill every time."

This isn't worth doing, of course, but it's not what the woman was doing. She was also writing and promoting her career as a writer.

36 comments:

Shouting Thomas said...

And producing this drivel is better than getting married, staying home and having babies!

campy said...

It's better that this particular woman produces drivel instead of babies.

ricpic said...

Was she at least the next course after dessert? In other words was she a respectable whore, or just a straight out thief?

Mitchell the Bat said...

Skimming that execrable little article at the link I'm reminded of an old New Yorker cartoon by Gahan Wilson.

A writer is trying to think up headlines for a tabloid newspaper.

It isn't easy to carve up a man with a butter knife, and it takes time.

Gahan Wilson batted about .225 when it came to humor but he had an interesting visual style when he thought it worth the effort.

edutcher said...

Forget where I saw this first, but the guys got off lucky.

One of those poor schmucks could have ended up married to her.

tim maguire said...

At least she was willing to use the right term. I've had a few conversations of greater or lesser pleasantness in this subject. Women who expect men to pay are whores, men who expect to pay are treating women like whores.

Back in my dating days, when the check came, I was ready to pay to avoid any discomfort for us both, but if she didn't at least reach for her purse, that was a big red flag.

Sam L. said...

That's an ugly picture of her.

My fave Gahan Wilson cartoon was a boy standing by his bicycle next to a gate (big old house up on the hill) with a sign: "Creel Institute. Trespassers will be experimented upon."

sinz52 said...

The bursting of the "dot.com" bubble was killing a lot of early online computer dating services.

The female CEO of one of those online computer dating services came up with a way to raise extra cash: She started to run online contests, where the winning prize was a date with her.

http://web.archive.org/web/20001017215318/http://socialnet.com/

campy said...

The second prize was two dates with her.

madAsHell said...

Color me....not surprised.

America's Politico said...

How is this different than what we see on HowAboutWe or Zoosk sites?

Nomennovum said...

Color me 100% unsurprised. It's the stupid women -- or the ugly ones -- that give it away for free. If you can avoid getting married, you too can get it for free, though. There are more stupid ones than ever. You just need to know where to find them and how to get one to give it up.

Chip S. said...

'Looking back, I truly didn't see the harm in my actions,' Pierre concluded. 'I met a wide variety of men and honed my acting and interviewing skills while chowing down on some awesome steak dinners.'

The morality of the redistributive state on full display,

YoungHegelian said...

When she came clean to her friends about her money-saving scheme, the women in her circle praised her...

I'd love to see a Venn diagram of the "women in her circle" with the group of NYC women who "wonder where all the good men have gone".

Nomennovum said...

'Looking back, I truly didn't see the harm in my actions,' Pierre concluded. 'I met a wide variety of men and honed my acting and interviewing skills while chowing down on some awesome steak dinners.'

The morality of the redistributive state on full display,
-- Chip S

The morality of female solipsism of full display, more like. Or stated differently, female rationalization of her amoral solipsistic behavior. That women use sex* to get what they want should surprise precisely no one. It has always been thus.

No judgments though! She can't help the hand dear Darwin dealt her.

________
*Please, guys, let's ignore the fact that she didn't have sex with the poor unsuspecting schlubs -- or at leaset that's what she says.

Chip S. said...

That women use sex* to get what they want should surprise precisely no one. It has always been thus.

That's a straightforward exchange. What this woman added was to get something for nothing, and to justify it on grounds that assign no value at all to what the man pays.

That last part is precisely the rationale used today for setting the top income-tax rate at its revenue-maximizing level.

William said...

If I went out with a random selection of sixty women, I'm pretty sure I would take a fancy to at least one of them. Maybe this woman isn't telling the whole truth. Would her crime be greater or less if she banged a few of her dates?

Dust Bunny Queen said...

'Looking back, I truly didn't see the harm in my actions,' Pierre concluded.

Really? She sees nothing morally wrong or corrupt in her actions? No thought about the men that she was jerking around for her own selfish purposes? No empathy for them as thinking feeling people? Not even one bit of remorse or embarassment? None?

Just think how loud she would squeal if the men had treated her in a similar callous fashion. How her friends would be 'outraged'.

Die bitch.

YoungHegelian said...

@DBQ,

No thought about the men that she was jerking around for her own selfish purposes? No empathy for them as thinking feeling people?

People often think that the most common way sociopaths hurt & use other people is through violence. Not true at all. Sociopaths just do what needs to be done to get their way, which most of the time falls way short of violence.

Look at the sentence you just posted. Doesn't this woman just fit the description of a sociopath to a T?

SGT Ted said...

Wow a sociopath with a pack of friends that are sociopaths too, as far as men are concerned.

Woman is the nigger of the world. -John Lennon

Single Men are the niggers of American Women. -SGT Ted

Nomennovum said...

Look at the sentence you just posted. Doesn't this woman just fit the description of a sociopath to a T?

Of course it does, but when doesn't it? Isn't that current thinking, that men are asshole losers for actually expecting something sexual to develop from their dating a woman, even though they are expected to pay for dinner, movies, etc.? Or has the female imperative evolved to such as extent that no man should ever have an expectation of sex?

I've heard women laughing at work about dating guys they think are losers, just to get a free meal or something else of value from him. It's pretty common. This "reporter" is not unique. As the video Ann posted yesterday noted: Sperm are cheap, eggs expensive. So, girls, get a meal and a good laugh. It's always possible you might find someone worthy of the vag, along the way.

SGT Ted said...

We used to call those women "cock teases". We should bring that term back.

Nomennovum said...

Single Men are the niggers of American Women. - SGT Ted

And women are niggards.

Ann Althouse said...

Having to sit through being pleasant with someone, listening to their conversation as if you cared and holding up your end, is just not worth the value of a restaurant meal.

Sure, if you were starving, but we're talking about going out somewhere nice, which costs you some money to dress for and travel to. Whatever that amount is would be enough to buy food that would keep you from starving.

The woman must put a low value on her time and get some kind of thrill out of tricking men. To me, it feels like hostility to herself and to others.

If I were a dinner whore, I'd want to be paid for my time. The food alone is not enough. And I'd bill my time at $500 an hour.

YoungHegelian said...

@Nomennovum,

Of course it does, but when doesn't it?

I might agree with you more, if, of the few comments over at The Mail, there were some supportive comments from women. Nor are there any here, not that I'd expect any from the resident distaff side of this forum.

I've seen fora where the harpies come out in force (e.g. when a woman physically assaults her significant other, there's always the "the SOB deserved that & more" chorus). But, to exploit this many basically decent men, over such a long period of time, and -- for what, to get a meal? -- just seems over the top even by the protocols of the most recent edition of the How to be a Shrewish Bitch manual.

YoungHegelian said...

And before any of the rest of you assholes says it, let me say it:

That's funny! She didn't look Shrewish!

McTriumph said...

Dinner whores sound very similar to cocktail whores, concert whores, vacation whores and break up after Christmas and Valentines day whores.

fivewheels said...

"Having to sit through being pleasant with someone ... is just not worth the value of a restaurant meal."

Depends how selective she had to be or not be with the dates. If you go to a nice place, you could bleed the mark for, what, $50-$100 worth of value? Couple of cocktails, order the filet? That's not nothing in my world. And you discount the chance that maybe the guy is worth talking to on the merits. It might be a delightfully interesting and pleasant person you're cynically fucking over. Win-win!

campy said...

It might be a delightfully interesting and pleasant person you're cynically fucking over.

Oh come on, it's a male we're fucking over. The chances of that are infinitesimal.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Having to sit through being pleasant with someone, listening to their conversation as if you cared and holding up your end, is just not worth the value of a restaurant meal.

I thought that the purpose of dating was to meet new people, have conversation (which is a back and forth activity), get to know something about that person, share something about yourself and hopefully find out if you may have the beginnings of "like" and enjoyment in each other's company. You might decide that it is worth another date to explore the potential. It is Not to rip off the other person or manipulate them so that YOU can have a good meal or good time at their expense knowing all the time you plan to dump the poor schlub who might actually like you.

Does every date work out? Hell no. Not every one is a gem or a winner. Often you do find yourself in a boring or uncomfortable situation. You realize that this is not going to go anywhere. As a civilized person, you do continue to hold up your end of the conversation and gently but nicely let the other person down without making them feel like rejected garbage. Maybe, sometimes, it is YOU (generic you not anyone in particular) that will be the one boring the pants off of the prospective date. Wouldn't you want to have the same kind and considerate treatment?

AND....split the cost of the date, or at least offer to do so.

Yes...sociopath is the description of these women. I'm sure there is a male version of the same.

Steven said...

Yes...sociopath is the description of these women. I'm sure there is a male version of the same.

The Pick-Up Artist. With the difference that a bragging PUA would be viciously attacked by the same women who supported the dinner whore.

fivewheels said...

I'm not comfortable with the sociopath label, partly because quasi-medicalizing the condition lets them off the hook, and it implies that this kind of selfishness is not common. But it really is.

I think some people here are extra appalled because they are from a generation where women were not growing up feeling this entitled. I hear 1970s feminists used to fight for the check to prove a point. That's hard to imagine now.

fivewheels said...

One difference there, Steven, is that there's actually less deception in the PUA method. One of the first, most crucial rules is to immediately signal to the woman that you don't want to make friends, that your interest is sexual.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

"And I'd bill my time at $500 an hour."

You really flatter yourself.

Blair said...

I'm not sure why people are criticising this woman. The men were stupid enough to buy her dinner after all.

I never used to buy a woman dinner on the first date - I'd ask them out for drinks or coffee first. If they were good company, they got dinner next time. If a man does buy a woman dinner without having met her properly, it's the equivalent of a woman "putting out" too easily: You enjoy the experience, but you have no respect for them in the end.

Jeff said...

Having to sit through being pleasant with someone, listening to their conversation as if you cared and holding up your end, is just not worth the value of a restaurant meal.

I just love the way you take it for granted that you're the one making the enormous sacrifice here. Of course no random man could possibly be as interesting as you are.