mostirreverent wrote:Big Ben wrote:Well, the two guys here both said they are at least decent looking, so it shouldn't be a factor. If one of them were hideously ugly and a virgin because of it, yes it is unfortunate that society would penalize them for it. But actually it is worse for women than men. Some pretty ugly, fat, balding men can still get great-looking babes, if they are rich enough to make up for their mediocre-to-bad looks. We see this rich man - beautiful woman combination all the time in society.
Is this any different from a hooker?
By the way, I’ve slept with “ugly” woman. All I need is a nice smile and their asking. And yes, I was sober.
Tough question and one that I have wrestled with. I'd say yes and no. There actually is a continuum: hooker, a money-for-looks couple where the two don't care about each other, a money-for-looks couple where the two do care about each other, and finally an "implied contract" marriage where the guy provides security and the woman provides sex. Where do you draw the line on what is socially "acceptable"
?
Society generally draws the line between the first and second of the above. I would probably draw the line either there or between the second and third case above. Distinctions can get blurred, however.
For example, I met a bloke who many years ago rescued and married a then-destitute woman from an Eastern European country. He showed me her picture and she was beautiful. They were married for many years, during which time she freely spent his money. Then she suddenly left him in the most cold fashion. She said that she didn't love him and not only that, but that she had never loved him
. She wasn't even grateful or appreciative of all that he had done for her 
.
That is why your question is difficult to answer
.
