What makes a PL?

I don't think you can identify a PL by how someone acts, it's more about what's going on inside his head. I see two types of PL's - guys who are so naive that they believe everything a dancer tells them and guys who are so distrustful that they can't allow themselves to have any fun in a club. The non-PLs are the guys who understand how SCs work, who recognize the BS as just part of the game, and who can enjoy themselves in clubs without taking it too seriously.

Your RL slip is showing.

Why is it that everything we write on this board is assumed to be a lie or rationalization, yet we are supposed to treat you with absolute credulity?

What about regulars who are so beaten down that they just accept that they are going to have pay strippers for something which is only part of what they want? How about those who just accept that they will only meet one stripper every decade or so who actually likes them enough to spend time with them for FREE and are spending tons of money and energy to get to this ONE?

These customers are in DEEP DENIAL, and will sometimes post on internet message boards, trying to DECEIVE others regarding their true desires. The evidence however comes from their contradictory and/or especially revealing posts; destroying whatever brave face they from time to time try to put on.

In some sense the PL is worse than the RIL? Hopefully the RIL gets over it the first time he gets burned, whereas the PL may be in for long term non-fulfillment.

RIL is a subset of PL the way I understand the usage here and in the TUSCL glossary. PLs think it's love between them and any number of dancers; RIL's focus their delusion on just one dancer. Of course, in my definition, and the usage that prevailed on ASSC back in the day, all customers are PLs.

I agree as long as you're using RIL to stand for "regular in lust." If you're in love with the girl or think you are, then you're a PL.

And I think FONDL and I agree with you. If you are spending the bucks chasing the big payoff that'll never come you are a PL. If it's on one regular girl, you're a RIL.

As the author of the RIL definition in the glossary, I stand by my statement.

I am weak, I admit it, I am going to reply to DavidS.

"a) You're a PL if you pay women for affection, love, friendship, sex, intimacy, etc. These ought to be gotten for free."

Yes they should, but not in a strip club. In addition, we may not all agree with you. Some men might like to pay for sex because it is quick and simple. Your contention that we should all go to strip clubs looking to spend little or no money and be rewarded with free dates and sex, while an admirable goal, misses one point. There is still work involved. As your method has been outlined (numerous times), I think its fair to say that it would take a few visits to get to the dating part, let alone the sex. If in this time you aren't getting dances, or at least not getting dances from the girls you would like to, it kind of defeats the purpose of going to a strip club as far as I'm concerned. If I want to go through the whole courtship ritual I can go to a bar. The fun of clubs is that they're a shortcut. I get to see the girl I like naked without even dinner and a movie, and I can probably get to second base the same night for less than the cost of the movie. To me, that saves a lot of time and effort. Let's then assume I want sex. I could hit the singles scene, or whatever, find a reasonably attractive girl, go on some dates, and if things work out, maybe score within a month. There is an alternative. I pick up the phone book, look under "Escorts" and for about $300 I can have a girl delivered to my door within hours. Now if you are the kind of guy who can meet a girl and have her in bed within a few hours, my hat is off to you. Some guys may want things you don't or may work on a different timescale. I'm not going to call them PL's for taking the shortcut. They're PL's if, as FONDL said, they keep chasing the payoff that'll never come. As for the sports metaphor, if you can get free tickets, great, you probably know someone. Most people need to pay for their seats since I don't know any sports franchise that hands out free tickets to fans unless they are doing it for marketing or buisness purposes. Perhaps strippers fall all over each other in the stampede to sleep with you or dance for you for free (I somehow doubt it), but most likely you'll need a bit of time and effort to work your magic. If I start working now to cultivate the right relationships, just maybe I can score free playoff tickets this fall, or I could just order them and pay for them.

FONDL: how about a guy who pays $100 to see the sporting event live when he could pay $0 to see it live in equal quality or maybe even better seat?

CG: A very interesting post. First of all, I would limit what you spend while dating: make it a nominal amount such that she couldn't possibly be dating you for what you are spending on her (other guys would spend more).

Ok, but your central thesis seems to be that, for women, dating is a gambit to get free stuff once you marry them. There is alot of sense to this argument. I would point out, however, that in lots of marriage women are contributing more than enough for their "upkeep". Is that the only time you should get married? I think it would be best, but there could definitely be exceptions. I think if somehow you both knew you loved each other aside from the money it would be ok to spend money then. The problem would be how to know.

To me the real PLs are the guys who spend $100 plus to go see a professional sports event that they could watch for free on TV. But they obviously enjoy doing it and feel that they're getting their money's worth. So that's my definition - if you enjoy what you're doing and feel that you're getting your money's worth, you're not a PL. But if you're betting on the come (no pun intended) that's never going to happen, then you're a PL.

Chandler, OK, I think I see the larger view of your point. I was taking it more literally as in every time you go into the club it is a potential PL experience, which I agree may be true. I just put the line between a good time and a PL experience at a point where you are no longer the one deciding how much money to spend.

The way I see davids interpretation of PL, many married guys are pathetic losers when I hear stories about them buying things for their wives to get the kind of sex they want. I suppose taking a girl out to eat, paying for the meal etc. makes you a pathetic loser by this definition as well if you thought you wouldn't get any affection if you didn't pay for the meal and told the girl she had to pay her own way. I suppose some people still haven't figured out that women use their power over sex to get material things whether they are married or not. I suppose you might get lucky and find a horny girl but she will probably want something out of you sooner or later. Apparently some guys believe in sugar coating the reality of life that people use what they can to get what they want. In this case I believe most women use sex to get what they want. It may not be immediate and may require a commitment first but there is still a price to pay. Many divorced men might agree with me I believe. Getting things for free is only some guys interpretation in my opinion the same as I could claim that I get free lap dances because I am paying a special two for one price and the second dance is always free. I suppose if the wife is the breadwinner and the husband is lounging around getting sex for free that is more of an aberration than what is normal. Just because a guy gets things for free while dating doesn't mean that will continue either. That may be one of the freebies that guys get to try before they buy and start paying in a commitment. I just see guys ultimately end up paying one way or another to get and keep a girl they want. Therefore I disagree with davids interpretation of PL as anyone who pays for affection etc.

So davids if a person pays for lapdances because he gets sexual gratification from it does that make him a PL? He doesn't ask the strippers for dates or actually thinks that the strippers or his "Real" friends.

AN, I'm afraid we're locked in on quite different meanings for PL. Yours is more literal, mine is more existential, akin to Christians saying, "We are all sinners." My definition, however, would make for a pretty dull thread. So I'll gladly go along with yours for now. I might even offer up a tale or two, although I never wasted a lot of money in pursuit of affection. Time and worry, yes. Money I've always blown on purely physical thrills.

Ok, I'll be the one to take a vey hard line here:

a) You're a PL if you pay women for affection, love, friendship, sex, intimacy, etc. These ought to be gotten for free.

There may be some exceptions to this: For example if you are in a serious relationship and paying strippers for some fun that your partner approves of then you are ok.

Now, I've never been sure how strippers have been able to hijack the term "PL" so that it only applies to customers. IMO, just as many strippers are "pathetic losers" as their customers: they are way below where they ought to be in life with respect to their own ideals; they are not doing suffecient work on self improvement to get out of it; and they are in their poor situation mainly due to themselves and their attitudes as opposed to bad luck.

I think I understand, your point is that strippers see anyone coming in the door as a potential PL (or potential ATM) and will do their best to separate them from their money. I also understand the irony, and the point that the strippers are right under the right circumstances. Correct me if I'm wrong. I just find that, after a few PL experiences, I am not likely to cross that line and become one anymore. The PL line in my experience is from that creeping thought in your mind where the trip to the ATM seems like a good idea, 'cause she really seems to dig you, and you're sure the next dance will be even hotter, maybe a nice big tip will help with that, and maybe she'll meet you OTC... The point where you avoid crossing the line and becoming a PL to me is when you finish your drink and walk past the ATM and out the door.

AN, I think you're taking it a little too personally. PL is a slur that customers have turned around and adopted with a good dose of irony. But it also helps to keep it in mind anytime you're feeling vain or afraid you might embarass yourself.

Chandler, I'm gonna have to disagree. I think the PL line is crossed when you think you are special to the dancers and can somehow date or befriend them by throwing more and more money at them, so we agree there. I just don't see how walking through the door makes you a PL. I also don't think being a PL is a permanent condition. My guess, and my reason for this thread, is that most of us have some PL experience in our past where we got drunk, overspent, thought the stripper was special, etc. Almost all of us get over that and learn to enjoy responsibly, like drinking.

The Glossary has it wrong. A PL is any strip club customer. Period. It doesn't matter how many lessons you've learned, how well you get along with the girls. Anybody who walks in the door without realizing that, thinking he is special, somehow different from all the other fools, is just a more severe form of PL.

One more point, now that the financial pain is only a memory I look at that trip in a much different light. It was an awsome intro to the club world, both in terms of the upside and the downside.

AN, I think most of us long-termers have learned quite a bit over the years. I know I'm much more careful about spending money than I used to be. I'm also a lot slower to believe things a girl tells me. I'm also more immune to their charms. I think all of these things take some time to develop. Like any other hobby, you learn as you go. I only remember one episode that was somethat painful, emotionally not financially, and that was a long time ago at a time that I was especially vulnerable. I now realize that it was a very good learning experience, and it also led to meeting my ATF, so it had several benefits.