I’m a bad girl, so I rank my papas.
1st: We don’t meet very often, but his allowance per meeting is high, so his total monthly allowance is also near the top.
2nd: A papa whose allowance per meeting is fairly high, but who I don’t meet often.
3rd: His allowance is on the low side, but we meet frequently, so his total monthly allowance is relatively high.
4th: His allowance is low, and we don’t meet often either.
Of course, compatibility is important, so there are papas who rank higher even though their allowance is low. But basically, I rank them along the lines above, and when a papa with better terms comes along, the rankings get reshuffled.
Looking at the answers from male respondents, I get the impression that there’s a tendency to value women who offer a low allowance but can meet frequently.
But wouldn’t that mean those women end up being ranked lower from the woman’s perspective?
Or do male members simply not care about how they’re ranked by the women they meet?
When a papa ranks low, my smile becomes more of a professional one. When he ranks high—and we’re compatible—I start to develop genuine feelings for him. Are male members okay with receiving a professional smile instead?
I’d also like to hear some candid opinions from female respondents.
I missed it because there were so many questions.
I mostly agree with that way of thinking, but how much I like the papa (male supporter) also has a major influence. In my case,
Marika
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Fuu, a column writer.
Bad Girl, you’re interesting. I figured there were priorities involved, but thank you for sharing the female perspective. It’s really helpful.
On the men’s side, I feel like we rank women more by how satisfied we are and how much we like them than by the amount of allowance. That’s how it is for me, anyway.
The woman I prioritize most does receive the highest allowance, but we also have the best chemistry when we’re together, and being intimate with her feels the best, so she naturally ranks highest.
For the others, the allowance is the same. As for satisfaction, they’re more or less equal. Their good and bad points vary, and it can depend on the day, too.
In any case, I’m grateful that they continue seeing me.
As for the number-one girl, this is just speculation, but I get the feeling she either has—or used to have—a generous (well-paying) monthly-support papa. She’s considerate, but she doesn’t come on too strong when it comes to intimacy, and yet she clearly has solid technique. She knows exactly what makes a man happy.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Osaka, a male member.
You say some pretty interesting things.
I’m guessing the reason you call yourself a “bad girl” is that you understand the psychology of many male members. But if someone is looking for something romantic, they don’t want to be number one—they want to be the only one, right? lol. I think that’s probably what makes it such a hassle.
Anyway, even if I made it onto the questioner’s personal ranking, the whole “I like you more because you smiled differently or more often” thing feels kind of iffy.
I might aim for fourth place and work on ranking higher with someone else’s list instead.
Some people don’t want to be the only one—or number one—either, you know? lol
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Aya, a female member.
It’s not exactly a ranking, but my priorities do end up being based on the allowance… Right now, I mainly have monthly arrangements, so I feel like I meet the papas who give me the most monthly allowance more often.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Dai, a male member.
I’m sure we’re ranked in some way.
Men rank women to some extent too, so it goes both ways.
I’m not particularly interested in being ranked number one.
I just want to enjoy dates and some intimate time, so I’d actually be troubled if she developed romantic feelings for me…
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Saito♪, a columnist.
I think you’re right. Men are ranked in much the same way as women.
> It seems like there’s a tendency to value women who meet frequently for a lower allowance, but wouldn’t that mean men rank them lower from the women’s perspective?
I’m not sure that happens very often, but if you think of the opposite—“a woman who’s available anytime and receives a higher allowance”—she might end up being treated as a backup for when someone cancels at the last minute. So it may happen after all.
I think it’s best to meet the people you actually want to meet. Some male members are especially eager to meet and therefore get taken advantage of, while some women naturally have higher going rates. The dynamics between two people can be full of mysteries.
If I had to say, I don’t think it’s a problem as long as they can easily coordinate their schedules.
After all, a dating club relationship is also about not interfering too deeply in each other’s lives.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Joe, a male member.
I think “ranking” is perfectly fine. In fact, it’s only natural. I don’t think she’s a bad girl at all.
That said, I didn’t really understand the whole “professional smile” thing. For one thing, Joe has absolutely no ability to tell whether a smile is a customer-service smile or not. And I don’t know what kind of smile would make me look like a “bighearted papa” in all the other senses of the word, either.
Besides, McDonald’s has “smiles are free.” Even Joe, who hasn’t set foot in a McDonald’s in nearly 30 years, knows that phrase—and it really shows how savvy McDonald’s is as a global company.
Incidentally, Joe has a long-standing connection with a professional (geisha). We’re close enough that there are years when we don’t see each other at all, but whenever we do meet, she always gives me a wholehearted smile. If Joe ever felt it was just a professional smile, things probably wouldn’t have lasted. After all, the cost of a single meeting back then probably exceeded the monthly allowance of the most generous papa.
Naturally, there are bound to be differences in various ways, but if you go around calling them “professional smiles,” you might end up being disliked by the most generous papa—the one who’s supposed to be giving you the biggest, most genuine smile of all. So do be careful!
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Date◎Yume, a male member.
I think that’s a good way to look at it. Men probably rank women in their own way as well, so relationships between people who are both seeing multiple partners will likely progress based on the point where their expectations and perspectives intersect.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I’m Kazu, a male member.
That’s your personal opinion—it doesn’t represent the views of all women.
I’m surprised by how self-centered that way of thinking is. A self-centered person is someone who assumes that everyone else thinks the same way they do.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
