something_else

Oh give over. You were super judgemental towards OP right out the door. Trying to take the high road now is so disingenuous.

Yea because it benefits you not to. Like I said, you want to have your cake and eat it too.

This is all totally fine. Like, completely fine. You're allowed to feel this way. But if you're going to believe stuff like this then you can't get angry at a guy saying he wants a woman to cook and clean for him.

I was paraphrasing to an extent but you made your position of "It's OK for a woman to expect the man to pay the bills but it's not OK for a man to expect his wife to cook and clean" pretty clear in the following quotes: And why not when she's married? Because that's the man's job? lol

A man also needs to be able to trust his partner. The things you're attributing to gender here aren't really gendered. They're just the cornerstones of a healthy relationship. Having hefty 'expectations' of your partner is a bad thing for both men or women. Nobody likes it. Expectation is a problem because it implies that your partner doesn't deserve any gratitude for what you expect of them. "You are expected to do the dishes" means I'm not grateful that you're doing it but I will be angry with you if you don't. "You are expected to pay the bills" Means I don't expect any thanks, it's expected of you, and I'll leave you if you don't pay them all. Both of these are unhealthy and demonstrate the problem with expectation. It's a form of entitlement. It's better to think about it in terms of fairness, and to be sure to express gratitude for whatever responsibilities your partner picks up e.g. "If I pay all of the bills, I'd be really grateful if you could do a bit more of the housework so I can focus completely on work." "If I pay half the bills, we could split the housework evenly to keep it fair"

I understand and agree with this. Most healthy relationships don't put heavy expectations on either member to pay all of the bills or do all of the house work. You figure out a fair distribution of bills and housework that works for you. It's just @Princess Arabia's framing that annoyed me, where in one breath she says that "expecting a woman to do chores is despicable" while in the next saying "expecting a man to pay for everything is totally fine". It's a very hard stance to justify. Yea of course. And on the flipside a woman should be able to earn money and pay for stuff herself too.

So what you're saying is that you.... cook and clean. Yet you are offended when OP said he wants a woman who will cook and clean? But at the same time you also think it's OK to expect a man to pay for everything? I'm sorry, but your opinions on this are kind of messy and contradictory.

This is absolutely having your cake and eating it. You're saying you want the gender roles that benefit you to stick around but you want to get rid of the ones that don't. Like I said, you're either OK with both of the following statements: a woman can say she wants a man to pay for everything; a man can say he wants a woman who will cook and clean Or you're OK with neither. You can't say that one is acceptable while the other isn't. To be clear I'm pretty much on the side of 'neither is OK' in the above comparison. I don't want a housemaid, but I also don't want a dependant living with me who isn't pulling their weight financially. For me, chores and bills should be split equally in most circumstances. But I can see how a setup where the man pays for everything and the women does chores can work for some people. What I think is very selfish is this middle ground you're trying to argue for whereby the man pays for everything and you just get to sit on your ass and enjoy it without doing any kind of work. And your reasoning of "well bills aren't optional but chores are" is quite a lousy argument. Chores aren't really optional either unless you want to starve to death in a filthy house.

The amount of money involved ($1.3) is what’s surprising and what gives this credibility for a lot of people instead of just thinking the guy is nuts. But there are no shortage of crazy people with lots of money.

In general I agree with a lot of what you wrote here but this made me laugh. How can you say that it's acceptable for you to expect a man to pay all of the bills but you get annoyed when a guy said he wants a woman who will cook and clean? You can't have your cake and eat it. Either both of these are OK or neither are OK.

I think most men would take the deal of getting hit on by 90% people they weren't attracted to if they also got hit on by 10% that they were. Even the times I've been complimented by girls who I wasn't particularly attracted to, it still made me feel very good.

Your argument here seems to be that "if men were women then men would feel the same way about sex as women do" which is a tautology. But I do think I get what you're trying to say. I just think "if men could experience massive sexual objectification they would hate it" is not a good way to phrase the argument because what you really want is for men to experience what it's like to exist as a woman and then experience sexual objectification from within that frame of mind. Most men would be pretty happy about this, lol. We are fairly hard-wired to enjoy as much sex as we can get regardless of circumstance. There just isn't any amount of sexual objectification that's going to start to bother us. It only starts to become a negative when you throw in all of the other baggage that women have to deal with regarding sex and like I said, at that point you're basically saying "if you were a women you'd feel the same way about sex as women do"

I'm not singling them out, or placing higher expectations upon them. I'm just pointing out how exploitation can occur in this particular case because that's what this thread is about. All of those examples of people being crooked deserve criticism as well.

The line is very blurry. I imagine it's very tempting to sacrifice more and more of your ethics to make money as an OF girl. Most, from what I understand, are trying to find whale clients who they make the majority of their money from. By whale clients I mean guys who pay lots of money for specific things. I'm sure some of those guys know what they're doing and are fine with it, but I have serious suspicions that in many cases they are being led along in some way. Whether this is OK or not is really hard to judge. Like I said, the line is blurry. It just seems like it would be hard to stick to an ethical code as a girl on OF when there's so much money to be made by dropping your ethical standards.

I think a lot of men would enjoy this, not hate it. But we are safe to enjoy it because we don't have to fear for our safety when random women show interest. My issue with OF is more to do with the scam side of it. Like where you have an organisation running an OF account for a girl with managers that will message men pretending to be the women to try and lead them on and extract more money from them. If you're just an independent OF creator then that's your hustle and you do you. I'll never pay for it but you're not really harming anyone. It's when it gets to the point that you're misleading, lying or manipulating beyond a certain line that I think it becomes a problem. Kind of equivalent to a man lying about his profession, income, or coming up with random lies to get a woman to sleep with him.