Lex Luthor wrote:
She should also want to spend time with me just because I'm me. Not because I'm paying her also. In such a scenario, she isn't sacrificing her time because she actually wants to be with me.
Spend time with you doing what? Sitting around staring at each other? You're the one making the approach to her; why should she also want to spend time with you just because you're you? The burden's on you champ, since you're the one going around making a nuisance of yourself. She's giving you a chance to see if she wants to spend time with you; you're the one who already wants to spend time with her.
When girls start coming up to you and asking you out, then you can expect them to spend the money (I fully expect a story where this happens to mysteriously occur in the near future too, now that I mentioned this.)
Quote:
Paying for her demonstrates that I value her time more than mine.
You should. You're the one that initiated this.
Quote:
If you don't pay money, they are obviously not prostitutes. If you do pay money (as you suggest), then they are definitely more like prostitutes. So you have it all backwards.
No, because if you're paying money to take her on a date, sex will eventually develop as part of the relationship - not prostitution. So no, I don't have it backwards because you're superimposing your overemphasis on sex for your own gratification on the situation.
If, on the other hand, you're insisting she sleep with you for you to spend money on her you're either just paying her after the fact with entertainment, which is just prostitution with a convoluted buisness arrangement, because you only cared about getting laid. If you never spend any money on her after sleeping with her at all, you're just a cheapass douchebag who seduces chicks because he can't keep his fly zipped; essentially no different than hiring a prostitute and not paying her.