Comments by Book Guy (page 8)

@goldeneagles9 "If she is fucking you then she is fucking someone else too... " Damn, I sense mind-numbingly arcane wisdom but I can't quite figure out whether I reject or accept it ...

1974. New Orleans. Decatur at Iberville. 1984. Amsterdam. Red light district. 1994. Richmond Hill near Toronto. Fantasia. 2004. Drew Park in Tampa. Lipstixx. 2014. Absolutely nowhere. 2024. Here I am.

Freedom of speech, a fundamental right, is constitutionally protected. Pornography has been, generally, held to fall under that protection so long as there are no good reasons to curtail it. I could see an extremist Evangelical move to curtail pornography despite its generally well-protected status, by creating test cases that make sure they are curtailing non-political speech for the compelling state interest of ... oh, I don't know what they'd make up, protecting the children, or preventing trafficking, or something. It's a long shot but I wouldn't put it past them. They have a deep need to shove their bullshit as deep into everyone else's asses as possible so that it can't be examined in the clear light of day.

Thrill of the chase. Yes that's the main thing for me, too. But, of a specific variety. I don't really want to do an ACTUAL "chase" after the girl, in which she is potentially difficult to catch, and resists. That's what real civilian dating is like -- she says "no" because she likes toying with the man, feeling her feminine power, and making him bend over backwards to prove his level of desire and worthiness. For mongering, I want my worthiness and desire to be ratified by means of something simpler, less cagey and manipulative and unreliable, than interpersonal skills and dating "game". So in mongering it's a "chase" but it's not a REAL chase. I love the thrill of the "fake chase" in strip clubs. I notice, as I look over my many past experiences in the monger-verse, that I really have valued being able to compare and to select in an off-the-cuff manner. You pick her WHEN you go with her. And you pick by comparison and, more important, by interaction. And you try her out before you finalize your pick. Other settings don't have all these advantages. I have mostly disliked internet escorts. Aside from many other concerns, such as price and reliability and id-verification and security, there's also delay. You have to pick the girl on Thursday in order to see her on Saturday. I have partly liked, partly disliked major brothels where there are a ton of girls in the same building. The FKK things in the suburbs and hinterlands of Germany, and the stairs-buildings in the German (and other European) city centers, similarly aren't very appealing to me. You have some degree of choice but you also are a captive market. You're in there (perhaps you've even paid an entry fee) on a limited time budget, so whoever is on-tap at the moment, is the girl you're stuck with. It doesn't feel enough like a chase, especially since the guy doesn't get the main advantage of a chase, that he can retract at any moment. It can be good, if the girls are stellar, but it lacks the strip-club advantage of having all the ancillaries and of giving the monger the chance really try out the merchandise first. The window girls and similar "tippel zone" locations, I've liked a good deal. I think I would also like the bar-fine girls in places like Pattaya, though I've never been there. In these locations, you can look, interact, and pick, or leave. These are near the top for selection situations, for me. I might prefer not to have to leave, I like it in the back room where it's done quickly, but I might also prefer to have a relaxed time and be leisurely about it. I might have to visit Pattaya some day. But the truly optimal, I think, is what you can do in a strip club. You look, interact, and you ACTUALLY CONTACT PHYSICALLY, and then pick or leave. So it's got all the advantages of Amsterdam's window girls but also an added bonus that you can touch and inspect before choosing to do the full dirty. For all the situations, it will of course entirely depend on the selection of providers present. If there's nobody attractive at the place when you're there, you're just not going to have enjoyment. But that's the case wherever -- in an FKK, or in the Bahnhofviertel, or the Amsterdam strolls, or a strip club, if you don't find a girl you like, there's nothing to be done. So any comparison of mongering settings requires that hot girls be present and available at the setting at the right time. Sadly, more and more this is simply not the case for strip clubs. I prefer the strip-club chase, yes. You can look and select and TRY OUT a bit, before sealing the deal. Nowhere else is this really the case. But the girls, over time, have become less desirable in North America's strip clubs. In 1995 the super-hotties were available and, in locations where the club could be a full-service setting, that was ideal for me. So if I find super-hotties in a strip club, then yes, that's ideal. I just despair of finding them reliably.

Toronto, I'm surprised to hear about. The Mississauga clubs were still excellent experiences, by my preferences, in 2017. The women were certainly hot by any standards. The reviews here at TUSCL seem to suggest the same. Have things changed? I had a quick trip in 2017 and a longer trip in 2013 and haven't noticed major sea-change in review descriptions since then. Could it be (not trolling here; genuinely asking) that, generally speaking, Toronto metro-area is bad for higher-end cleaned-up strip-club experiences but still reliable for full-service, albeit in main-floor settings? Maybe it's just that we're looking for different things. I'll admit freely, I was assuming (perhaps wrongly) that a "best" strip club experience would be one which guarantees relatively low-priced extras with relatively high-quality women. I still think Toronto provides that, though (again, I freely admit) I can't be specific about the other club amenities. Clarification?

For the few of you who are arguing with one another, I can't even figure out what you're arguing about, all of you have gone so far afield to insult one another (or a certain group of women, or the men who simp for those women) that you didn't even identify the thing you're angry about. Which one of you likes marriage and why do you think the other one doesn't? I can't even tell!

@rickdugan "Dem voters have always been understood to be weak self-absorbed ankle biters who just want others to take care of them. But even by these exceedingly low standards the sped at which they turned on their own was remarkable" Yes yes agreed. Pathetic.

Lots of excellent replies here. Nearly every one of you has a different point of view on the subject(s) discussed. One of the nicest things about reading all the replies is to hear from a bunch of you, that you are constantly thinking about how good or bad off your PARTNER would be for any of a number of choices. Leaving her, or not leaving her, or staying with her even though her looks decline, etc., it's always about, would I be ruining or improving ANOTHER person's life, not just my own? There's a lot of good comments from several of you that go in that direction. One of the many things I managed to leave out of my first post here, while discussing the times when I was dating women I wasn't fully sexually attracted to at the outset, was the same awareness on my own part. It was a nasty thing for me to do TO THE GIRL. It wasn't just that I was cutting myself short; it was also, that I was cutter HER options short, by preventing her from having a partner who really valued her. (Somehow I missed making this statement in my first post.) Lots of you are thinking of the other person in that manner, with whatever reasonable conclusions. Like, maybe I personally shouldn't be married at all, because it wouldn't be good FOR HER, because I'm so looks-centric (though, I'd say I'm not, but my first post does sound that way, it's just not representative of all my concerns). Or, in any of a number of other ways, you mongers are surprising me by having the wife's or girlfriend's position foremost in your minds. I guess I assumed the worst, that mongering men (we are all at TUSCL, after all) would be all Club-Hombre about it, the woman's well-being be damned; but you aren't, so, my fault, for having wrong assumptions. Good on y'all! Another generalization is that people are recognizing, over and over, the weaknesses of the current STYLE of marriage that we have going. Mostly North American, mostly Western, mostly college-educated, mostly post-Industrial. Some with happier interactions make it happen with non-Western women, for example. Others of you have managed to stand outside of typical "adjusted" (using the term pejoratively, to mean, "you adjust your desires to instead play culturally approved roles") North American materialist marriage. Either you dislike that kind of marriage and therefore don't enter into it; or, you manage to make your marriage operate in a non-"adjusted" manner as best you can despite cultural expectations otherwise, or you figure out some other solution. Several of you agree that materialism or consumerism is a major culprit of damage to partnerships. One inquiry was about my use of the term "woke relationships." Yeah, that's poor wording. I just was trying to reference the idea of trying to date people whom the politically-correct establishment of liberal feminists would insist were the "right" choices, rather than going for women I was attracted to. I meant, that in college and grad school I made the mistake of trying to have relationships with partners that supposedly would have been good for me on paper but whom I didn't have a spark for. And the reason that the spark was lacking, was, that even in my late 20s, I just didn't want to have sex with these women because (so I thought at the time) they weren't sexy enough. That might have been simply my instincts telling me something -- maybe they WERE sexy women, in the eyes of other men, but I was sensing some other signals that suggested they shouldn't be partners for ME -- or, probably just as likely, that was me trying to "force" a relationship to happen. She was available, interested, but unappealing. I was "supposed" to be a good honest boring submissive feminist man and not judge her by her looks. That's all I meant by the terminology "woke relationships," that I was acquiescing to the politically-correct demands of my peer group at the time, by eschewing more "natural" instincts to instead try to have relationships that would have been "approved" by the professors of Women's Studies. So to speak. Another point I could make about that. At the time, when I was mistakenly engaging in these dead-end options, I probably was doing so out of desperation. Those were the best partners I could get! (In fact, if you can find ancient posts of mine here or elsewhere on the mongering internet, you'll see me saying that the reason I go to strip clubs, is that this is the only means of access to attractive women that I have. Lacking hot civilian partners, I felt "forced" to get access to hotness through paying for it. And wow did I resent that fact. I felt utterly controlled and abused by the hot, attractive women I knew in civilian life. They were lording it over me, denying me access to pussy, and that HURT BAD.) At the time, I could NOT figure out why women were rejecting me a lot. I reasoned that I was a good catch, I read "The selfish gene" and understood evolutionary psychology (so I wrongly thought), I had high markers for a variety of desired traits (fitness, visual appeal, reliable stable male friends, good family relationships, high potential income, high intelligence signaling, "local fame" and leadership positions) but I was just not getting even to first base. With anyone that I as attracted to. Hence, dating the women I was NOT attracted to. Only many years later did I realize that there were probably two very obvious, very simple, solutions to the problem. One was, that I should have STOPPED being so damn nice to them. At the time, my poor logic told me (wrongly) that because they were rejecting me, it must have been because I was not nice enough. I reasoned that I wasn't being enough of a milquetoast, so I needed to be even MORE pathetic and "nice." If only Jordan Peterson and the internet had existed at the time, I probably would have figured it out pretty quickly and played a rather more aggressive, less mewling and soft-sided role, and probably would have gotten benefit from that change. It was the 80s and 90s, there was no internet. I got nicer and nicer and nicer, to a fault. The other problem was, probably, that I wasn't being rejected at all. When the women said, "no," they meant, "please chase after me, I enjoy the manipulative gamesmanship and want you to prove your interest." I had no idea that such a thing existed! (Again, no internet.) In the face of the feminist mantra "what part of NO don't you understand?", chanted all over campus, I (probably sensibly, but, again, wrongly) understood that when she said "no" she meant "no forever, now go away or I'll call the police." She didn't. She meant "yes probably, if you play your cards right, but I have to say 'no' to keep up appearances and make you chase me." I had NO FRICKIN' IDEA!! Yeesh rather slow of me hunh? Those two new awarenesses -- summarized by the concept, "please, MAN UP and stop deliberately being more and more of a weakling!" -- were actually not difficult for me to implement at all, once I conceived of them. But I didn't know those concepts in the least, until I was about 50 years old, at which point I randomly hit the man-o-verse (mentioned by others in this thread) on the internet. I think it was fast-seduction-dot-com that got me first thinking about it. The most sad thing isn't that I went about it all wrong, though that is a bit sad; the most sad thing is, that the masculinity was quite natural for me, and it wouldn't have been much of a difficult sell, if only I had implemented it much sooner in my life. I'm left to wonder, where the hell were the masculine males in my life who could have aided me a bit when I was a fledgling trying to figure out these signals? I recall whining about it to parents and cousins but all I ever heard back from them was, "stop complaining, we're sick of hearing about it," and I didn't know any better way to ask for help. So I didn't end up getting any help. Where would help have come from? Most people, so the myth goes, will have cagey ol' Uncle Mort who tells the teenage boys a few stories and the boys therefore clue in and turn into men who aren't utterly misunderstanding the whole premise of the game. Mort says, "no no, don't be AROUND her all the time. Arrive, make her laugh, and DISAPPEAR." Mort (or is it Saul? Harry?) says, "no no, you are being nice. She SAYS she wants nice, but really she wants a BAD BOY." Mort says, "no no, whatever you do, don't let her think she can answer 'no'. Don't say, 'would you like ...". Say, 'how are we going to continue this?' There isn't a chance for her to say no." Mort isn't necessarily a master at seduction, he's just an advocate for masculinity. If your dad is an office worker, Mort is a manual tradesman. If the person who raises you is a school teacher, Mort is a dropout earning a fortune working on oil rigs. I really resent the absence of an Uncle Mort from my life. I am vaguely sympathetic, but sometimes also chagrined, at the fact that the women so grossly misled me, but that's the game, they didn't make it up, they just play it. But the fact that I wasn't clued in to the game, until well after I was no longer of the right age to play it? That really miffs me. I feel somewhat cheated. So this thread really marks a type of change in my perceptions. I thought for a long time that it wasn't fair that I had been left out of dating people that could eventually potentially grow into longer-term commitments. And I wanted that committed relationship, maybe just because I thought I was "supposed" to have it. Now, I'm changing my mind, finally, and realizing that what I missed, has just as many disadvantages as it might have advantages. Perhaps because I'm so clueless about relationships, I don't really belong in one. I couldn't figure out for myself, until literally thirty years later than many people come to it, that Uncle Mort might have something intelligent to say. I wallowed in over-nice milquetoast, never reading from even the most salacious hinting, that the girls might indeed be interested. I have no "sniffer" for that sort of thing. So, although I did once resent the fact of being left out of the game, I'm slowly realizing, maybe I also dodged a bullet by not letting that game entrap me into something I wouldn't have wanted. Well, TLDR ...

Main points are: 1. talking with a ghetto-plus-southern accent to be funny, 2. saying you should tip waitresses but not dancers because one type of work is not the other type of work 3. not giving up money too much 4. being obscene for effect I'm not on Instagram but I can see the video just fine with my laptop.

after reading some of the discussion, rofl @ "seniority" concept :)

1. Toronto. Greatly under-rated mongering destination. The full-service options are under-reported at TUSCL as Canada allows much wider latitude, generally speaking, though of course YMMV and jurisdictions change. 2. Houston. Strip club culture is strong there. It's the only place I've done a trip for mongering-only and do not regret it, though that was no more recent than about 2007 IIRC. 3. Pompano Beach. Three full-service clubs that are legends at TUSCL. I plan a trip soon enough. 4. Detroit. Two or three full-service clubs that are also highly regarded at TUSCL. I plan another sooner enougher. For all, first read TUSCL reviews to confirm. YMMV.

Jeezus H Christ the Saints cheerleaders look like Mack Trucks ... https://www.instagram.com/SaintsKrewe/

Dunno, never been in it. Since you seem so familiar with this kind of self-sabotage, why don't you tell us what it feels like to simp for teenagers in their underwear instead of growing some balls? Oh BTW, pics and vids or it didn't happen.

"Why are you so sad / angry / bored / anything-else disapprovable?" "Oh so you don't like it when people are nice to you?" "Well what did you come here for if you aren't going to get dances?" "You really need to party more. You aren't whooping it up enough." "This isn't a funeral it's supposed to be FUN!" Don't correct me. I'm not having fun BECAUSE you are all up in my face. Get out of it so I can start having fun again.

Unpopular opinion. Unionization of strippers? It's a bad thing for mongers, I think. In the most cynical sort of way, or (if you want to put a different slant on it) considering enlightened self interest, customers in the vice trade(s) probably prefer non-unionized workers. We all benefit from girls being desperate, and always looking over their shoulders, always aware they can't really rely on having a good productive day without having to out-hustle one another. Girls working together is girls charging more but doing less, whether it's a pair of girls on the floor fleecing individual suckers, or an entire club's worth of girls unionizing. That's my prediction.

Aw Puddy-Tat you brought up how many extras? I gotta say I'm in the high-hundreds, maybe 200 different women have been some level of service providers to me over the years. Seldom were they at strip clubs, though some of them were. Like in the range of 15% of my extras experiences were strip-club extras experiences.

Bizarre, that your Instagram account got blacklisted or de-authorized or whatever you call it. I'm just going to call it de-authorized, I know that's the wrong term but you know what I mean. Anyway. So, personally, I haven't encountered this. I have an Instagram account that I use for my "normal" or "civilian" life (a.k.a. no strip-club or monger activity), with which I follow a lot of visual artists that I like. I have made literally zero posts of my own on it. Furthermore, I have deliberately gone into the Instagram settings and disconnected my Facebook/Meta membership from that Instagram account so, even though I do have a Facebook membership related to the same email address, nevertheless the Facebook and Instagram never connect to one another. And yet I've never had any sort of de-authorization like you had. I relate all this just to suggest, that one reason the de-authorization may have happened to you, is that you have monger-style activity on it. You're following scantily clad chicas who may have triggered other Instagram algorithm concerns. So, the watercolorists and figure-drawing experts who post hand-drawn graphite works that depict someone's kneecap whom I follow, all are on a lower security level for Instagram's de-authorize-o-bot, than your chicas. Just a guess, suggestion. Maybe? Maybe not?

Yeah @rickdugan you're targeting the same ideas I was getting at, not much disagreement here. Recently saw a map that categorized the countries of the world on the "friendly for business" scale. I don't know how they did their metrics, things colored light blue to dark blue, you know the kind of map. USA figured very poor, very unfriendly. Many African nations were also unfriendly, probably for other reasons. Most friendly were the Scandinavian and Nordic countries, IIRC Netherlands Germany Denmark at the top of the list. Also Ireland. I was surprised. I had assumed that regulation would be generally considered unfriendly for business, but perhaps good for the environment or good for the customer or good for the employee, etc.. So I had assumed that more developed countries, where there are generally more environmental and pro-employee regulations, less unfettered free market, would be less friendly. But that didn't turn out to be the case. Netherlands and Denmark are somehow able to have rather robust regimes that protect the environment, and offer a lot of mandated employee benefits like days off and no work beyond maximum hours and high minimum wages and no hire-and-fire at will situations, and yet those countries ended up as very friendly to business. Whereas the USA, which significantly lacks most of those pro-employee regulations and protections, nevertheless is still a difficult place for a business to succeed. I'm thinking the problem is, NOT that there's TOO MUCH regulation, but that there's THE WRONG KIND of regulation, implemented and policed poorly, in a manner that simply clogs up the works. Let's hope the change with overturning Chevron might move in the right direction for the USA. I don't know much about what it would take for a nation to be "friendly for business" but I was dismayed to see that the positive examples EXIST but that we aren't FOLLOWING them. According to that map, we're in the camp with (f.e.) Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia. Those are place where you can't get educated workers, the rival company shoots your managers, you have to bribe the local officials, and your profits might get eaten up by sheikh or emir showing up after you've done all the work. That's a problem. I presume our business-unfriendly-ness is due to other factors but we'd really ought to work on being more friendly.

Garlic breath.

BRICS was news to me, couldn't even get Google to define it for me without a little finagling. FYI: Brazil Russia India China South Africa (plus Iran Egypt Ethiopia UAE but their currencies aren't likely to be valuable for backing). I had set myself a deadline of 4th of July to rearrange some of my investments, now the local part fireworks went off this evening and I just looked at the damn calendar and realized I've missed it.

@nicespice I pretty much have the same impressions, that (1) fewer strippers, over all, are taking crazy-ass drugs and (2) skinny is not "in" any more. Your impressions from stripperweb agree. I recall a thread or even article type posting I read once, maybe stripperweb or another resource, about how to make money as a dancer. In there an experienced dancer basically equated the wanna-dance game with body fat. The skinnier the girl, the more a guy gets a dance from her; all competition on the main floor was simply a body-fat comparison competition. I think I read that article in about 2010 or earlier. Just by the fact that it could be so blatantly announced, back then -- whether or not it was totally true, it certainly was a central concern. I'm really disappointed in the unappealingly fat women. I'm OK with women who are zaftig or otherwise attractively large. I'm definitely not OK with unhealthy or over-fed women. I don't know how to define the difference. I know it when I see it. I will never get a dance from any girl who weighs more than average, for the typical college girl of the 1980s. I don't necessarily prefer freakishly thin, the waif-look turns me off, it doesn't look feminine. But I can't find what I consider "normal-stripper" any more. Examples from porn. Janice Griffiths, a bit too skinny but fabulous anyway. Leah Gotti in her prime, perfect. Emily Grey, oddly skinny in all the wrong places. Alexis Texas, a bloated disgusting freak of nature. IMO, of course.

I believe this question is about pants, not money. If your slacks have button-able pockets you are ahead of the game. First, the big bills. I have a rather tight money-clip (IIRC I got it at Walmart in the 90s) that operates solely on the paper-clip principle, no moving parts, it is functionally simply a flat bent arc of metal. Into it goes the $20s, however many I am carrying, up to $500 depending on the night and the destination. This wad goes into my rear pocket buttoned. Also two, maybe three condoms. Then, the small bills. All my ones go into any of a number of other money-clips that I own. Presently I am enamored of a magnetic one, which is a pair of softer leather pads that attract to one another joined by a leather hinge. This will hold about 20 x $1s bills before they start to slip. This goes in the front shirt pocket. Then, the wallet. I am a small-wallet aficionado. On any given day, my thin wallet has a government ID and a credit card and not much else, so I don't really have to reduce it for strip club purposes. Left rear pocket buttoned. Doesn't ever come out once I'm on the strip club floor. The big question is, do you carry a phone with you? I like having my phone, I can act distracted by it if there are girls I'm avoiding, and its Shazam function will help count dances song by song. My phone is too large for a pants pocket, so I am torn, phone yes? phone no? the jury is still out.

5 decades 9 US States, 1 Cd Province, 4 European countries (IIRC?) How many of you can truthfully claim you have bargained a girl down from 40 Dutch florin?

@nicespice did you also search on cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, methamphetamine, MDMA? Wonder if that's how they're losing weight? Or maybe they just don't post about it.

Oh forgot, ditto on the treasury-direct, it's the best-kept secret in American investing right now, can't figure out why they don't push it harder. All of us here at TUSCL are internet savvy, all you have to do is sign up and then start buying stuff.