Read other letters about this article

• Saturday, December 6, 2008 10:48 AM

  @ curiousdwk

  What about the man?

  What about him? I see no particular reason to be concerned about either of them if the circumstances are as described. In the original article the man described himself as being dediciated to his work and uninterested in a more time-consuming relationship. Frankly, I think the whole article is a form of viral marketing, but if the situation is real and both parties are satisfied, then I think the whole thing has more to do with commerce than morality.

  Is it pathetic that the man has to spend literally thousands of dollars just for companionship for three months in the hopes that he might get some companionship and sex?

  The man doesn't have to hope. He paid for it. Is it pathetic that some people have yachts with gold plated bathroom fixtures? That some people wear Harry Winston jewels? That some people brag endlessly about their Ivy League degree acquired via legacy preference?

  You want us to feel sorry for this guy. Gawd! I am just sorry that poor mean old Leona Helmsley had such poor human relations that she had to leave part of her fortune to her dog.

  Is it pathetic that only rich men can make such a proffer?

  Do you favor destroying are entire capitalist system? Watch out! Some idiots will start calling you the liberal illuminati. Since the woman is selling a product for a price the market will bear and the man is buying a product for the price the market will bear, they are both good Americans.

  What do you want? The government should start some sort of sex welfare system in which it hires women to provide men with sex? This could be costly to the taxpayer. We don't yet have universal health care.

  I don't see that patheticness except that it is considered immoral (and I hope it's not illegal).

  Well, it probably is illegal, but she probably won't be arrested.

  What's the problem?

  I'm a feminist. I don't see a problem.

  I thought most women would go out with a guy that could show her a good time and lavish his attentions (and food and drink tabs) on her.

  Some women actually go out with a guy simply because they like him. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? I have never heard another woman say she was going out with a guy merely for food and drinks. Although, if the economy continues to tank, this could surely happen.

  Feminists might say they want to pay their way, but there is still the element of giving of one's time. We all are doint it, just at different levels.

  Doing what? Prostitution? I don't think so. I think if there is a vast difference in incomes the person who makes the most money should kindly pay most of the time -- whether that person is male or female. Otherwise, they should do inexpensive activities. Walks in the park cost nothing. Most museums have a cheap day. Should "feminists" pay their own way? If they can afford to. However, it is a general rule of manners that the one who does the asking does the paying.

  I realize this is changing, but Miss Manners abhors bring your own bottle parties. Housewarmings that are transparent bids for gifts. Wedding receptions where people are asked to pay for their own meals.

  —AKA Smith Read AKA Smith's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel