Post: #1

http://nypost.com/2017/05/27/hamptons-ba...trap-them/

Quote:Hamptons Bacelors are Getting Vasectomies so Golddiggers Can't Trap Them

The latest Hamptons summer accessory? A vasectomy.

When Scott, a male model who says he’s in his 30s, kicks off the Hamptons high season this weekend at his Sag Harbor waterfront house, the unattached hunk won’t have any reservations about hooking up with women he hardly knows.

“I had a vasectomy a few months ago. Having a house in the Hamptons and being fairly well-off, I’ve encountered some problems — women try to get pregnant,” said Scott, a regular on the society scene who earns a cool half-million a year.

He recalled sex partners who have lied to him about being on birth control. “It’s a trick. [They say] ‘I love you, [we] don’t need a condom.’ ”

Scott — who describes himself as “Tarzan with light eyes” — typically beds up to 10 different women per summer and estimates that 20 percent of the single ladies he encounters are looking to trap a rich guy with a baby.
...

“They don’t want to be in the situation of being accused of fathering an unwanted baby,” said Dr. Joseph Alukal, a urologist at NYU. “That’s their fear — being told you’re paying for this kid until it’s [an adult].”

“This extortion happens all the time. Women come after them. [They get pregnant and] want a ransom payment,” said Shusterman. “Some guys do an analysis of the cost — for three days of discomfort [after a vasectomy], it’s worth millions of dollars to them.

“I never see a poor guy [asking] for a vasectomy,” he added. “Rich guys are a population that’s abused a lot.”

Just ask John, a 34-year-old bachelor who had the procedure this month. (He asked that his name be changed for professional reasons.)

The real-estate developer and Upper West Side resident — who said he can have a different sex partner in the Hamptons every weekend — doesn’t want a repeat of last summer, when a woman he met at a party tried to pull a fast one after sex.

She offered to dispose of the used condom, but when she was in the bathroom for a while, John got suspicious. He found the woman seated on the toilet and inserting his semen inside of her.

“She denied it, but she tried to get herself pregnant,” said John, who grabbed a towel and made her clean herself and then shower. “After that, I have to be a lot more careful.”

...

Child support is 17 percent of the father’s salary up to $400,000, after which the amount is at a judge’s discretion, according to Garr. For someone who makes $1 million a year, Garr estimates annual payments of $100,000 — a total of $2.1 million until the child turns 21. Meanwhile, a vasectomy is typically covered by insurance or costs $1,000 out of pocket.

Garr gave a thumbs-up to the bachelor snip: “It’s a foolproof way to fool around and not get in trouble.”

Post: #2

Very good moves by these guys.
I /salute them.
I wonder how many guys will laugh at them for doing this then get caught by a gold digger.

Post: #3

Let's just hope they can get it reversed if they want to have kids later.

I suppose as long as the ballsack barracks are still pumping out soldiers then IVF is always an option even if a reverse vasectomy fails.

Post: #4

When you have to make sure girls aren't stuffing your cum in their pussies in secret using any and all means, you know you have made it in this world.

Is there a more naked and primal evolutionary act you could witness than walking in on a girl fisting herself with a used condom full of a successful New Yorker's jizz? Nothing you could ever see in the boring Congo gorilla forest could compete with that kind of base natural act.

Post: #5

(05-29-2017 03:15 AM)GlobalMan Wrote:  When you have to make sure girls aren't stuffing your cum in their pussies in secret using any and all means, you know you have made it in this world.

Is there a more naked and primal evolutionary act you could witness than walking in on a girl fisting herself with a used condom full of a successful New Yorker's jizz? Nothing you could ever see in the boring Congo gorilla forest could compete with that kind of base natural act.

You would be surprised.
The threshold for sucess doesn't have to be high at all for women to do any and everything to father your child without your consent if they are determined

In the hood black women have been doing thot shit like this for years, even for relatively broke dudes. "Girrllll! He got guud hurr, I'm gonna have a baby girl by him. *proceeds to empty used condom in her nether region* or "he got light hazel or green eyes, our baby is gonna be so cute". If you are a lighter skinned black dude a lot of darker skinned ghetto black women want your sperm just to have cuter kids. Crazy but true. Let's not forget high school athletes that show strong potential, they fall victim to this often, even if they never go pro in the end.

Ghetto Latina women do the same thing and try to trap a 2nd dude with a relatively stable job as a car salesman or retail store manager after her first baby daddy got locked up.

My point is not only the uber successful need to be cautious. I think the comment the doctor made about never seeing a relatively poor dude coming in for a vasectomy was inserted to downplay how common it is for women to trap guys with a baby.

Putting money aside, women that are "in love" with a dude that has moved on are also likely to attempt this cum-stealing strategy. The courts could give a fuck less what a woman did to get your sperm. Once she is pregnant you are on the hook for the next 18-21 years. This can be inconvenient and uncomfortable for a guy worth millions. But for an average joe it can literally be life ruining.

Post: #6

(05-29-2017 02:55 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Let's just hope they can get it reversed if they want to have kids later.

I suppose as long as the ballsack barracks are still pumping out soldiers then IVF is always an option even if a reverse vasectomy fails.

You realize you can just bank your sperm before you get it done. That is what I did. I only pay a couple hundred dollars a year in storage fees.

The peace of mind in knowing you don't have to worry about accidental pregnancies is truly a gift.

Post: #7

I ask very little of the members of this forum, but this is something I'd really appreciate.

You guys earning big money and shooting blanks? I'd really appreciate it if the next time you hooked up with some girl and got gold-digger vibes off of her you made a big deal about using a condom, then pretended you forgot to bring one and grudgingly accept to fuck raw on the premise that you're going to pull out at the last moment.

Then, make a big song and dance when you hit the end stretch and shoot deep in her cooch. Tell her you just couldn't help yourself, apologise, and tell her "I hope nothing, y'know, happens..."

After that you can watch her walk away like the cat that got the cream, completely unaware that she's got a load of sterile baby gravy slopping around in her snatch.

And don't forget to kiss and tell.

Post: #8

I think this is a rather unfortunate trend given the options available.

The principle concern here is the financial and legal threat these women pose. That threat can be neutralized by a man willing to expatriate - most nations do not have legal systems and family courts of anywhere near the capability and eagerness of those found in places like New York. This makes the threat of being compelled into giving massive portions of your wealth to the state for the purpose of child support relatively weak. Furthermore, even in places where one can be compelled to give some support, payments are often nowhere near as high as what can be found here, thus keeping the threat of massive transfers of wealth to these women relatively limited.

In short, these men who are concerned about the financial and legal threat that pregnancy imposes on them can go abroad and do as they please with as many women as they please without any need to neuter themselves. Even if a pregnancy resulted, it would not at all be damning.

If society has gotten to a point where the relationship between the sexes is so poisonous as to make procreation a deeply unappealing prospect, I think it is best for me to just rethink their place in that society and whether or not they need persist in it. It certainly does not seem right to me that men should allow themselves to be neutered by the dysfunction of this society and it's rather poisonous gender relations, when there exist societies with healthier gender relations where they can do as they please without fear of the same pitfalls.

If I were in the position of these men, I'd make my plans to simply get out of the matrix and plant myself in a place where the act of procreation doesn't amount to a metaphorical gun to my head. Expatriation is an easier prospect for these men as well given their wealth - they can live like kings in many parts of the developing world and have more quality women than they know what to do with. More importantly, they can be free to procreate the natural way absent the fear that doing so would ruin their lives and kill any financial freedom they once had.

Post: #9

(05-29-2017 04:21 AM)Excelsior Wrote:  I think this is a rather unfortunate trend given the options available.

The principle concern here is the financial and legal threat these women pose. That threat can be neutralized by a man willing to expatriate - most nations do not have legal systems and family courts of anywhere near the capability and eagerness of those found in places like New York. This makes the threat of being compelled into giving massive portions of your wealth to the state for the purpose of child support relatively weak. Furthermore, even in places where one can be compelled to give some support, payments are often nowhere near as high as what can be found here, thus keeping the threat of massive transfers of wealth to these women relatively limited.

In short, these men who are concerned about the financial and legal threat that pregnancy imposes on them can go abroad and do as they please with as many women as they please without any need to neuter themselves. Even if a pregnancy resulted, it would not at all be damning.

If society has gotten to a point where the relationship between the sexes is so poisonous as to make procreation a deeply unappealing prospect, I think it is best for me to just rethink their place in that society and whether or not they need persist in it. It certainly does not seem right to me that men should allow themselves to be neutered by the dysfunction of this society and it's rather poisonous gender relations, when there exist societies with healthier gender relations where they can do as they please without fear of the same pitfalls.

If I were in the position of these men, I'd make my plans to simply get out of the matrix and plant myself in a place where the act of procreation doesn't amount to a metaphorical gun to my head. Expatriation is an easier prospect for these men as well given their wealth - they can live like kings in many parts of the developing world and have more quality women than they know what to do with. More importantly, they can be free to procreate the natural way absent the fear that doing so would ruin their lives and kill any financial freedom they once had.

I feel you.

It's a tough choice either way though. Semi-forced sterilization or forced extpatriation.

Some peoples circumstances don't allow them to just pick up and leave on a whim. Even if they have the cash to do so. Saying goodbye to family and friends and the only life you've ever known isn't easy. In the case for the guys in the article they are in their prime earning years, they may be rich to us but in their circle they aren't rich enough. They probably have a great niche carved out for themselves in New York and are probably unmotivated to start from scratch abroad somewhere they have no links.

I understand your point about third world countries having less vigorous child support mechanisms. But the fact of the matter is...laws change. If he retains his U.S. citizenship and resides abroad he will eventually have to renew a U.S. passport.

Do you think these girls overseas won't realize Chad Blueblood is a U.S. citizen? If the chick gets greedy she can always take her case to the U.S. embassy in her country, her child is a U.S. citizen remember? Back child support IS real and was recently added as a primary reason to revoke or deny a U.S. citizen's passport. So even running off to the third world doesn't eliminate your exposure to the degree a vasectomy does. Of course its a very personal decision and I agree its madness that North American society has severly limited men's legal options to these.

Post: #10

Child support laws in America are a absolute shit show. It is perhaps the most blatant example of the way the government intervenes to transfer wealth from men to women. Many rich guys who find themselves paying thousands of dollars a month are in effect just financing the woman's lifestyle, with zero accountability of the money going to directly to the children. Unfortunately, the public and lawmakers seem just fine with the current status quo of screwing men in child support.

While guys can go through the difficult process of expatriating to greener pastures, the option of banking your sperm and getting a cheap and safe 20 minute surgery is a an easier solution for most men. Rich men in particular like to have options and control over their life and for them a vasectomy provides that against powerful and predatory child support laws.

Post: #11

(05-29-2017 04:05 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I ask very little of the members of this forum, but this is something I'd really appreciate.

You guys earning big money and shooting blanks? I'd really appreciate it if the next time you hooked up with some girl and got gold-digger vibes off of her you made a big deal about using a condom, then pretended you forgot to bring one and grudgingly accept to fuck raw on the premise that you're going to pull out at the last moment.

Then, make a big song and dance when you hit the end stretch and shoot deep in her cooch. Tell her you just couldn't help yourself, apologise, and tell her "I hope nothing, y'know, happens..."

After that you can watch her walk away like the cat that got the cream, completely unaware that she's got a load of sterile baby gravy slopping around in her snatch.

And don't forget to kiss and tell.

Or you can just plonk it in her shitter.

Post: #12

(05-29-2017 07:30 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Or you can just plonk it in her shitter.

How can you be sure that she hasn't anticipated this move and place some sort of container deep inside her asshole to catch the cum?

Post: #13

(05-29-2017 04:05 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I ask very little of the members of this forum, but this is something I'd really appreciate.

You guys earning big money and shooting blanks? I'd really appreciate it if the next time you hooked up with some girl and got gold-digger vibes off of her you made a big deal about using a condom, then pretended you forgot to bring one and grudgingly accept to fuck raw on the premise that you're going to pull out at the last moment.

Then, make a big song and dance when you hit the end stretch and shoot deep in her cooch. Tell her you just couldn't help yourself, apologise, and tell her "I hope nothing, y'know, happens..."

After that you can watch her walk away like the cat that got the cream, completely unaware that she's got a load of sterile baby gravy slopping around in her snatch.

And don't forget to kiss and tell.

Dude, that was like THE first priority after this:

/thread-31369.html

Post: #14

(05-29-2017 04:21 AM)Excelsior Wrote:  I think this is a rather unfortunate trend given the options available.

The principle concern here is the financial and legal threat these women pose. That threat can be neutralized by a man willing to expatriate - most nations do not have legal systems and family courts of anywhere near the capability and eagerness of those found in places like New York. This makes the threat of being compelled into giving massive portions of your wealth to the state for the purpose of child support relatively weak. Furthermore, even in places where one can be compelled to give some support, payments are often nowhere near as high as what can be found here, thus keeping the threat of massive transfers of wealth to these women relatively limited.

In short, these men who are concerned about the financial and legal threat that pregnancy imposes on them can go abroad and do as they please with as many women as they please without any need to neuter themselves. Even if a pregnancy resulted, it would not at all be damning.

If society has gotten to a point where the relationship between the sexes is so poisonous as to make procreation a deeply unappealing prospect, I think it is best for me to just rethink their place in that society and whether or not they need persist in it. It certainly does not seem right to me that men should allow themselves to be neutered by the dysfunction of this society and it's rather poisonous gender relations, when there exist societies with healthier gender relations where they can do as they please without fear of the same pitfalls.

If I were in the position of these men, I'd make my plans to simply get out of the matrix and plant myself in a place where the act of procreation doesn't amount to a metaphorical gun to my head. Expatriation is an easier prospect for these men as well given their wealth - they can live like kings in many parts of the developing world and have more quality women than they know what to do with. More importantly, they can be free to procreate the natural way absent the fear that doing so would ruin their lives and kill any financial freedom they once had.

I think for a certain level of dude in a certain income bracket being "a mobile expact" isn't doable. In the article one guy was a RE Developer, he has to remain local to oversee his deals and projects and places like the Hamptons taps him into investors and purchasers of his property. None of these guys are Richard Branson with private islands and the ability to literally fly around the world when they want. These guys are all wealthy but none were described to be truly elite in money (more than $2.5 million per year).

Plus they get a hometown advantage. They are the apex of their social and wealth scene for NYC. If these dudes all fleet to Ukraine or the Phippeanes and had to then mingle with the 'top crust' elite there it wouldn't be the same. First, which they would like have a barrier to entry as he dudes there maybe would not be so open to let them into the club there. Also being that wealthy over in those parts would bean a life of high level security and guards while in America he can still walk to the store to buy milk in Manhattan with no worries. The lifestyle tradeoffs aren't all that great. The biggest advantages of going abroad for those rich men is taxes. America offers them the best. No other country is better to be wealthy than America.

Off note....

One interesting thing I noticed about the article, which is basically a condensed summary of game if you think about it. The one thing was how the male model even with his money and status is still pulling a healthy game average of 2.5 girls per month. We would all assume he is drowning in pussy but this guy still bats average like the rest. Now mind you his selection will be better and maybe he needs less work to bed broads but he is still stepping up the the plate and getting contact with the same averages of most seasoned men.

In my experience during my "hot streaks" of hitting the pavement hard with game, my best month was I think 7 or 8 girls. To get to the number though was hell as I literally was out almost every night in bars, doing dates in between, blowing money, getting little sleep, and overall not really getting anything aside from nuts busted.

A number of 2.5 per month would keep me happy and healthy and would still provide enough time to balance important things like work, hustles, and hobbies. My point is I just wonder if there truly is a magic number for the return on new pussy before you start to degress with things.

Post: #15

Great Article.

Why would they need to go overseas, they are getting nice dirty skanks at home. In a place like NYC, you can find almost any kind of girl to your liking.

Maybe it is a cultural thing, I would never go under the knife for this sort of procedure.

Post: #16

(05-29-2017 09:38 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(05-29-2017 04:21 AM)Excelsior Wrote:  I think this is a rather unfortunate trend given the options available.

The principle concern here is the financial and legal threat these women pose. That threat can be neutralized by a man willing to expatriate - most nations do not have legal systems and family courts of anywhere near the capability and eagerness of those found in places like New York. This makes the threat of being compelled into giving massive portions of your wealth to the state for the purpose of child support relatively weak. Furthermore, even in places where one can be compelled to give some support, payments are often nowhere near as high as what can be found here, thus keeping the threat of massive transfers of wealth to these women relatively limited.

In short, these men who are concerned about the financial and legal threat that pregnancy imposes on them can go abroad and do as they please with as many women as they please without any need to neuter themselves. Even if a pregnancy resulted, it would not at all be damning.

If society has gotten to a point where the relationship between the sexes is so poisonous as to make procreation a deeply unappealing prospect, I think it is best for me to just rethink their place in that society and whether or not they need persist in it. It certainly does not seem right to me that men should allow themselves to be neutered by the dysfunction of this society and it's rather poisonous gender relations, when there exist societies with healthier gender relations where they can do as they please without fear of the same pitfalls.

If I were in the position of these men, I'd make my plans to simply get out of the matrix and plant myself in a place where the act of procreation doesn't amount to a metaphorical gun to my head. Expatriation is an easier prospect for these men as well given their wealth - they can live like kings in many parts of the developing world and have more quality women than they know what to do with. More importantly, they can be free to procreate the natural way absent the fear that doing so would ruin their lives and kill any financial freedom they once had.

I think for a certain level of dude in a certain income bracket being "a mobile expact" isn't doable.

I dont buy that either. If you make that kind of money and enjoy your work and life, and live a nice lifestyle in a fun city, moving to a third world shithole away from your work, friends, family, etc, just to bang women, is not in the cards for any of these guys. Not everyone lives a miserable cubicle existence in the US. Especially if you enjoy your life, and everything that comes with it, why would you give that up just for pussy? Talk about pussy power. Who's the beta now? Not everyone wants to become an internet marketer, on a beach with a laptop.

Also, totally disagree that you can just pop around the world planting your seed in every willing non-American starfish desperately waiting for her Rambo goo. First off its incredible dumb, to assume that non-Americans are stupid, and wouldn't be able to figure out how to call a lawyer, or pursue you for money after you plant a baby in them. What Excelsior, these people are so dumb that they, or their governments, couldn't not figure out how to get child support from you?

To me this kind of logic, on both points, either stems from a total lack of life experience in either matter, or is just flagrantly thrown out there to negatively influence young skulls full of mush, to go out and commit idiotic, avoidable mistakes.

Post: #17

If I was wealthy and single, this would be first on the list of things to do.

Sometimes I read about wealthy celebs and their alimony and child support payments and the whole idea of it makes me happy to be middle class and not deal with that bullshit

Post: #18

(05-29-2017 04:53 AM)azulsombra Wrote:  I feel you.

It's a tough choice either way though. Semi-forced sterilization or forced extpatriation.

Some peoples circumstances don't allow them to just pick up and leave on a whim. Even if they have the cash to do so. Saying goodbye to family and friends and the only life you've ever known isn't easy. In the case for the guys in the article they are in their prime earning years, they may be rich to us but in their circle they aren't rich enough. They probably have a great niche carved out for themselves in New York and are probably unmotivated to start from scratch abroad somewhere they have no links.

I understand your point about third world countries having less vigorous child support mechanisms. But the fact of the matter is...laws change. If he retains his U.S. citizenship and resides abroad he will eventually have to renew a U.S. passport.

Do you think these girls overseas won't realize Chad Blueblood is a U.S. citizen? If the chick gets greedy she can always take her case to the U.S. embassy in her country, her child is a U.S. citizen remember? Back child support IS real and was recently added as a primary reason to revoke or deny a U.S. citizen's passport. So even running off to the third world doesn't eliminate your exposure to the degree a vasectomy does. Of course its a very personal decision and I agree its madness that North American society has severly limited men's legal options to these.

I understand the point about expatriation not being for everyone. Some just aren't of the mindset necessary to permanently (or even semi-permanently) leave the states behind.

As for the bit about his citizenship and girls realizing it, that's part of my point. The risk is limited by a couple of things:

1. The challenge of enforcement. Outside of a handful of foreign reciprocating countries, the mechanisms for compelling support are not great. The resource issue enhances this problem: as omniscient as the US Government may seem, the fact is that they do not have endless resources to throw at legions of men abroad who may be fathering children. They also have no incentive - the main reason the US Government is so vigorous about support orders in the USA is the interest of supporting a US resident and keeping that domestic resident off the Government support rolls as best they can. If said child is not a domestic resident, then they are not the USA's problem - they are the foreign government's problem, and the USA isn't going to do much unless there is a reciprocating agreement in place. They've got enough to deal with at home to avoid going out of their way to track every American abroad and try to compel support for children who don't even reside in the USA. Absent a reciprocating agreement, it is simply extraordinarily difficult to compel any kind of order for support.

Because of this resource issue, the USA has to rely heavily on foreign governments to compel support even when there is a reciprocating agreement in place. If the nation is a wealthy country with a reciprocating agreement like Australia or Canada then yes, you have a problem.
If the country is a Jamaica or Belize with a limited government and no reciprocating agreement, the odds of getting enforcement are infinitesimal (and the sheer lack of resources/competence in those governments would make realistic unlikely even if there were an agreement). It's just not a realistic threat.

2. The cost. Even if many of these places could compel support, it would be along the guidelines of those nations, not a state like NY. We're talking about payments starting at $50-100K over 20 years, not $2 Million. The lower cost of living in many parts of the world makes child support far less daunting for any foreigner with a high income - it takes FAR less money to provide a healthy amount of support for a child abroad. We're talking a few hundred a month here ($250 is a decent monthly income for many across the world - you can double that).
If you're willing to bare that kind of expense (and doing so would go a long way toward convincing her and, failing that, her government that you have met your responsibilities), the already infinitesimal odds of compelled support in absence of a reciprocal agreement go down even further.

To keep it simple, I think two mistakes are often made in these discussions by western men.

A. They overestimate the omniscience of their governments.
B. They overestimate the capability and the willingness of the foreign actors to act in the way they have become accustomed to their own government's behaving with regard to this topic.

The realities are not as dire as you might think.

Post: #19

(05-29-2017 09:59 AM)Vaun Wrote:  I dont buy that either. If you make that kind of money and enjoy your work and life, and live a nice lifestyle in a fun city, moving to a third world shithole away from your work, friends, family, etc, just to bang women, is not in the cards for any of these guys. Not everyone lives a miserable cubicle existence in the US.

That's true, if you love your life in the states as much as I've seen some do and really don't consider children essential and/or a priority, then perhaps the tradeoff is different. I can acknowledge that.

For men who feel differently, however, I would like to let them know that there's an alternative to semi-forced sterilization that still allows them to have much of what they want.

Quote:Especially if you enjoy your life, and everything that comes with it, why would you give that up just for pussy? Talk about pussy power. Who's the beta now?

First, the move isn't only for pussy. There are plenty of benefits to expatriation beyond sex, benefits I'm sure you can easily discover with a passing glance at the travel forum and/or a quick look around the expat-oriented parts of the internet.

Second, we're talking about men who are pushing themselves into semi-forced sterilization because of pussy. These guys have neutered themselves just to ensure continued safe sexual access to women who are so difficult, manipulative, and dangerous that it is viewed by many to be too risky to enjoy normal sex with them absent the snip. These women, with all of their poor intangibles, have gotten a good number of high quality men to sterilize themselves (and, in doing so, put their future odds of fatherhood at risk - vasectomies are not always reversible and there's no guarantee that nothing goes wrong with your banked sperm if you're planning on storing it for over a decade or more) specifically for the purpose of being able to continue to casually fuck them.

Is that not a sign "pussy power" as well?

Quote:Not everyone wants to become an internet marketer, on a beach with a laptop.

Let's not pretend that internet marketing is the only business opportunity available to expatriates.

Quote:Also, totally disagree that you can just pop around the world planting your seed in every willing non-American starfish desperately waiting for her Rambo goo.

First off its incredible dumb, to assume that non-Americans are stupid, and wouldn't be able to figure out how to call a lawyer, or pursue you for money after you plant a baby in them. What Excelsior, these people are so dumb that they, or their governments, couldn't not figure out how to get child support from you?

No, they are not dumb. That was not my assumption. See my response to azulsombra above for a more detailed explanation as to why I feel the risk is infinitesimal. There are legal, economic, cultural, societal, and governmental factors guiding my conclusion.

Quote:To me this kind of logic, on both points, either stems from a total lack of life experience in either matter, or is just flagrantly thrown out there to negatively influence young skulls full of mush, to go out and commit idiotic, avoidable mistakes.

You're wrong on both counts.

Furthermore, I see nothing wrong with presenting said young minds with a viable alternative that doesn't involve sterilizing themselves. If they decide that expatriation is not right for them then so be it, but they should be able to make a fully informed decision.

Post: #20

(05-29-2017 09:38 AM)kosko Wrote:  I think for a certain level of dude in a certain income bracket being "a mobile expact" isn't doable. In the article one guy was a RE Developer, he has to remain local to oversee his deals and projects and places like the Hamptons taps him into investors and purchasers of his property. None of these guys are Richard Branson with private islands and the ability to literally fly around the world when they want. These guys are all wealthy but none were described to be truly elite in money (more than $2.5 million per year).

For some, it is indeed the case that movement is more challenging. The RE Developer could probably expatriate, but only after substantial efforts were taken to either wind down or mobilize his business and/or establish some business abroad. Those may not be viable options for him.
For many others in his position, however, there is viability. You do not need to be Richard Branson to expatriate and live very well.

Quote:Plus they get a hometown advantage. They are the apex of their social and wealth scene for NYC. If these dudes all fleet to Ukraine or the Phippeanes and had to then mingle with the 'top crust' elite there it wouldn't be the same. First, which they would like have a barrier to entry as he dudes there maybe would not be so open to let them into the club there.

That's true, they would be giving up a good social position in arguably the greatest city in the world. That's tough to do. It would be a relatively easy call for me to make (I wouldn't get a vasectomy save under pain of death), but not all men are me. The social isolation might not be worth it.

As for entrance into social scenes abroad, I think you'd be surprised at how well a dedicated foreigner with the cash necessary to buy access into top scenes and decent networking skills can integrate into top tier social circles elsewhere. This will, of course, vary by nation - some elite circles abroad are indeed about as impenetrable as you describe here, but others have a lot more room.

The question isn't really about the ability to have a social circle abroad - as noted above, you can do quite well abroad in this regard. The real question is giving up the one you have in NYC, an exalted social status in arguably the greatest city on Earth. That, I will concede, is a challenging proposition.

Quote:Also being that wealthy over in those parts would bean a life of high level security and guards while in America he can still walk to the store to buy milk in Manhattan with no worries. The lifestyle tradeoffs aren't all that great.

That depends on where you are. San Salvador, Fortaleza, Savador de Bahia, and Johannesburg are one side of the coing. On the other side, however, it's not that incredibly difficult to live a safe existence in Ljubljana, Warsaw, Belgrade, Makati, Bangkok, or Zagreb. This is doubly true if you do happen to have resources and can locate yourself properly.

Quote:The biggest advantages of going abroad for those rich men is taxes. America offers them the best. No other country is better to be wealthy than America.

That's debatable. The US does very well in this regard, yes, but some third world elites are effectively God in their locales and have more clout than any similarly wealthy American could hope to wield locally. There are tradeoffs, but they go both ways often enough to make the topic debatable.

Quote:One interesting thing I noticed about the article, which is basically a condensed summary of game if you think about it. The one thing was how the male model even with his money and status is still pulling a healthy game average of 2.5 girls per month. We would all assume he is drowning in pussy but this guy still bats average like the rest. Now mind you his selection will be better and maybe he needs less work to bed broads but he is still stepping up the the plate and getting contact with the same averages of most seasoned men.

In my experience during my "hot streaks" of hitting the pavement hard with game, my best month was I think 7 or 8 girls. To get to the number though was hell as I literally was out almost every night in bars, doing dates in between, blowing money, getting little sleep, and overall not really getting anything aside from nuts busted.

A number of 2.5 per month would keep me happy and healthy and would still provide enough time to balance important things like work, hustles, and hobbies. My point is I just wonder if there truly is a magic number for the return on new pussy before you start to degress with things.

It just varies for different guys as to whether or not quantity beats quality.

If that guy is averaging 2 girls a month and they are all of very high quality, that might be enough for him. Even 1 girl a month or just a few girls a year might do if they are of sufficient quality. He might be content to keep a smaller number of higher quality girls around for shorter term relationships that a larger number of women who would not be as attractive, especially when securing that larger number of women requires the kind of herculean effort it tends to require (little sleep, out every night, blowing tons of money and sinking tons of time, etc). Many guys aren't willing to invest that effort, and others couldn't even if they wanted to because of how demanding their professional lives are. Still others just don't value the numbers for the sake of numbers, and feel more content with lower numbers and higher quality. It's up to the guy.

Post: #21

(05-29-2017 01:22 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  Second, we're talking about men who are pushing themselves into semi-forced sterilization because of pussy. These guys have neutered themselves just to ensure continued safe sexual access to women who are so difficult, manipulative, and dangerous that it is viewed by many to be too risky to enjoy normal sex with them absent the snip. These women, with all of their poor intangibles, have gotten a good number of high quality men to sterilize themselves (and, in doing so, put their future odds of fatherhood at risk - vasectomies are not always reversible and there's no guarantee that nothing goes wrong with your banked sperm if you're planning on storing it for over a decade or more) specifically for the purpose of being able to continue to casually fuck them.

Is that not a sign "pussy power" as well?

I see your points as idealistic, but not practical in today's world. Lets factor in younger men who have already had children, men who enjoy their lives in the west, and men who aren't attracted to the women in these other countries. I would venture to guess its the majority of men who go the vasectomy route. Are we giving away our power, if we take away our sperm? No, I think the opposite is true. And reversals are very common these days.

Post: #22

This is just another story glorifying neutering oneself in the name of population control. It is in the same category of becoming a trannie when you are 10, going gay, women working through their fertility then trying to have a baby in their 40s. Vasectomies are not always reversible; articles like this are attempting to brainwash the most successful men of our society into shutting down their own fertility (and thus immortality) in the name of personal convenience and sexual gratification. It's a trap.

Post: #23

Frankly, most guys don't have any idea how much better they can have it on 1/5th or 1/10th their current incomes in cheaper countries. I'm sure 99% of guys making 500k in a major North American city have no idea how wild of time they could have on 100k in many other countries.

Post: #24

(05-29-2017 01:32 PM)Vaun Wrote:  

(05-29-2017 01:22 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  Second, we're talking about men who are pushing themselves into semi-forced sterilization because of pussy. These guys have neutered themselves just to ensure continued safe sexual access to women who are so difficult, manipulative, and dangerous that it is viewed by many to be too risky to enjoy normal sex with them absent the snip. These women, with all of their poor intangibles, have gotten a good number of high quality men to sterilize themselves (and, in doing so, put their future odds of fatherhood at risk - vasectomies are not always reversible and there's no guarantee that nothing goes wrong with your banked sperm if you're planning on storing it for over a decade or more) specifically for the purpose of being able to continue to casually fuck them.

Is that not a sign "pussy power" as well?

I see your points as idealistic, but not practical in today's world.

My points are not idealistic. They are completely practical in today's world. They may not be a good fit for every single guy, but they have been and can be a great fit for many guys who have certain priorities. It is completely inaccurate to claim that my views have no place in today's world and are mere artifacts of idealism.

Quote:Lets factor in younger men who have already had children, men who enjoy their lives in the west, and men who aren't attracted to the women in these other countries.

As I have already acknowledged, some men may, for various personal reasons, consider expatriation an invalid option.

However, many men do not have children (or have them but would like more at some point), and are capable of enjoying their lives outside the west as much or more than they do within it.

Further, the number of men who are exclusively attracted to women in western nations (that is to say, they simultaneously maintain no attraction to women anywhere in Latin America, Asia, Eastern/Central Europe, the Caribbean, or Africa) is not high. The rest of the world is a pretty big place - odds are pretty good that you can find a spot that works for you.

Quote:I would venture to guess its the majority of men who go the vasectomy route.

I would strongly question that. Aside from the mitigating factors listed above, there's also the sheer cultural aversion to the idea of neutering oneself (especially when done in the service of western women) that many men maintain. Factor all of that in and there's no assurance at all that the snip wins the majority vote.

Quote:Are we giving away our power, if we take away our sperm? No, I think the opposite is true.

You're quite literally allowing western women to dictate your means of procreation and take away a fundamental human capacity (rendering you unable to create life absent artificial assistance). You're allowing them to change you in a pretty major way simply for the sake of continued sexual access to them, even though they are unkind to you and have, in your mind, few redeeming qualities.

In short, low-quality women are dictating your sterilization.

That sounds like an imbalance of power to me.

Quote:And reversals are very common these days.

Not telling the whole story here: http://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-rep...ovasostomy

Quote:Vasectomy reversal is usually an outpatient procedure (without an overnight stay in the hospital). Spinal or general anesthesia is commonly used to ensure that you stay completely still during the surgery.

The chances of vasectomy reversal success depend on how much time has passed between the vasectomy and the reversal. Over time, additional blockages can form, and some men develop antibodies to their own sperm.

Chances of a successful vasectomy reversal decline over time. Reversals are more successful during the first 10 years after vasectomy.

In general, vasectomy reversal:

-Leads to overall pregnancy rates of greater than 50%.
-Has the greatest chance of success within 3 years of the vasectomy.
-Leads to pregnancy only about 30% of the time if the reversal is done 10 years after vasectomy.

Vasectomy reversal is far from risk-free. When you get a vasectomy, you are taking a substantial risk that you may never be able to conceive naturally again. The odds are greater than even that you will if the vasectomy reversal is done quickly (within 3 years), but they that risk is still very high. This is something men (especially younger men) need to know before they go under the knife.

Post: #25

This just shows in what an unnatural, degenerate, decaying, unsustainable and broken down system Western man live in.

Think about it, based on the current legal rules and regulations an environment is created where the clearly most successful, the most attractive, the best looking and most intelligent, in short, the fittest men are relentlessly incentivized to procreate as little as possible, to the point of sterilizing themselves just to be on the safe side.

Truly perverse.