A papa who changes the amount depending on whether protection is used or not sees women as objects, right?

Originally, papa-katsu (compensated dating in Japan) is about paying for sex, so I don’t think it’s all that different. The woman’s side sees her papa (a male supporter) as money, right? She wouldn’t have sex with him without payment. Personally, I wouldn’t call him a “thing.” He’s still a person—someone who makes me feel really good.

> Paps who change the amount depending on whether it’s without a condom or with one see women as objects, don’t they? I don’t think that’s necessarily true. If that were the case, then when a woman says she wants an allowance for having sex, it would mean she sees herself as an object. But that’s not actually the case. So even if the amount changes depending on whether it’s without a condom or with one, that doesn’t necessarily mean he sees women as objects. To begin with, there are a lot of women on these apps who are almost like semi-professionals. When they tell men things like, “This much without a condom if he finishes inside,” “This much if he finishes outside,” or “This much with a condom,” men who have encountered that before may come to think it’s normal and say the same things to other women. So I think it originally comes from the women’s side. Though if you trace it back further, it’s also possible that male workers in the adult-entertainment industry taught women to think that way, so ultimately it may have originated with men… > I’m scared they might have an STI. I think it’s fine to be cautious around anyone who brings up having sex without a condom. And I believe men think the same way.

By that logic, wouldn’t charging different amounts for an adult relationship (intimate) versus no adult relationship be the same thing?

Thanks as always for all your hard work. When you’re being hung up— Some people find value in things like that, while others don’t. Everyone wants different things and has their own way of thinking. Even when the chemistry is good, some people place more importance on the experience itself, while others focus more on how they feel or reach climax. It varies depending on the person. There are still experiences that feel like a first in life, or like something that only happens once in a lifetime. As long as we’re alive, there’s always more to enjoy. There are women from the club I have great chemistry with, but simply getting along well or having fun isn’t enough to keep things going for that long. Unless both people feel something truly special—like the kind of dynamic or mutual desire that only lovers can share—I think meeting dozens or even hundreds of times is difficult for both sides. When you think about it that way, whether it’s without protection or with a condom seems like such a trivial, uninteresting detail.

Statements like “...right?” aren’t really questions, but I felt like answering this time. You should be grateful（笑） I don’t think it’s related. People who view women as objects probably do so simply because they’re women, or because they’re someone they pay. Whether or not they wear a condom, or whether the allowance changes because of it, is such a narrow condition that it probably won’t affect whether they see someone as an object. A woman I recently made an offer to told me—without me even asking—that she’d be okay with no condom if I increased the allowance. She seemed to be sleeping with a lot of people without condoms, so I decided not to take things any further.