Yes. That's why I don't like it.
Smoking any plant sucks. Pure chemicals are superior.

There is no mystery whatsoever as to what women are attracted too and why.
There is no need to guess or theorize about it.

@LordFall Dude i've done 2500 approaches and never got laid. I think an escort is the most effective route. Even though i don't know how it works. Do you recommend me mentioning this to my dad, as i would need him to help me find escorts and give me the money for it. 

Yeah, it was. Honestly, I can’t see myself having relationships outside of hooking up with Strippers and Escort Girls. That’s what really disappoints me! It’s a limiting belief, yes, but I don’t have my life put together very well, at the moment. I’m pretty young and I’m far from having a stable future. Work in progress! Also, as I mentioned above it’s much easier to pay for sex than to put myself out there and socialize. Putting myself in uncomfortable situations feels nearly impossible. I start to shake and my hands get sweaty. My heart starts to beat rapidly. I get racing thoughts and stutter as I talk. The thing I’ve learned about myself is that I won’t do something unless I know 100% that the outcome will be positive. Doing things like going to public places, night clubs or any type of social gathering seems a bit out of character for me. I’m very introverted and spend most if not all of my time at home. I was able to do hookups and go to the strip club cause I was working at the time and I knew it didn’t require much effort on my part to get laid through paying. I’m temporarily unemployed, right now. But I won’t lie. I am somewhat tempted to go back to sex workers cause it’s fun. Deep down I know it’s not what I want, really. 

I would have continued seeing escorts but the biggest letdown for me was the lack of connection that I was seeking. The interactions were mostly awkward, robotic and fake. Some advertised themselves as providing a "girlfriend experience" but this was far from being the case. Having said that, I do not dismiss the value that escorts provide. There were some moments that were fun and enjoyable. They fulfilled my sexual needs, at least temporarily. If you don't want a girlfriend then seeing escorts is not such a bad thing as some people portray it to be IMO. Do what you feel is best for you at a given moment while also considering the potential risks.

I've been an escort before, there's a lot you can learn from them if you find the right one. If you want sexual liberation, who do you think is going to know more, a random potential girlfriend or an escort? 

nothing wrong with this per-say. society has partially given sex work a bad name and labeled it as something desperate and lonely individuals partake in. I think it could be energetically draining and unfulfilling though. probably a better investment of your time would be looking for a self actualizing girl like you mentioned you want. if you have the opportunity to engage in ethical sex services it shouldn't get in the way if you do it occasionally and don't see it as shameful. 

I think we need to invent a new term to make better distinctions.

Recently, I've noticed that my imagination generate contest, meaning and satisfaction from "lust" waaaaay better than any porn could. It's hard to explain, but watching porn almost feels like something drains energy from me. It's a body awareness thing that comes with experience. 

HOWEVER,
If I use my imagination with women I know IRL, Or read a spicy story with a decent plot, Or just look at some pretty cosplay pictures my mind starts to plot stories. Tbh, the only porn that I have left are 2 movies (almost 2h long each) and a few amateur stars that I check maybe once a month. What is also funny, that my "favorite actress" spends like 2/3 of the video talking.

In short, imagination = great, traditional porn = meh, mental masturbation = good name for the term, but has bad conectaiton. Any ideas for an alternative 

That's right.
The women are usually more professional. They know why they are in this business (money) and why they aren't.
 It's the guys that often end up cracking in these scenarios and catching feelings.

Why would you choose "confidence, humor, Detached, adventurous, and good sex" above "social status, loyalty, good looks and finances", if the latter affects survival much more. Do the first 5 subconsciously signal the traits of survival even more? 

@Xonas Pitfall I think you're making this way too complicated. First off, the idea that attraction has changed throughout history is nonsense. It's not even reasonable to compare how mating worked 100 years ago with how it works now.
Now is actually the best time to analyze female psychology and how women select mates, simply because this is the first time ever in human history where dating is a market, where men and women are basically shopping around. The qualities and traits that women find attractive are the same, regardless of culture or the time we're living in.
We've kind of moved from socialism to capitalism in dating. In the 1950s, it was much more regulated, with stronger social norms and family involvement limiting people's choices. Today, dating is far more open and market-driven. In many ways, the 1950s were more comparable to how dating works in countries like India or Pakistan today.
It's only been in the last 40 years or so that men have started to discover what truly attracts women.
Postmodernist and pluralistic views aren't going to work when it comes to mating, simply because it's so essential to our survival. I'm not saying there's no value in those perspectives, but if we want to solve the current dating challenges we men are facing, pragmatism is absolutely necessary.
 

In the context of this thread, men are the providers, which is why women are judged on their beauty and not on their ability to provide.
No man rejects a woman because she can't provide materially.
Women are not called to be "providers", men are. If a man fails to do it, "something is wrong with him". If a woman fails to do it, nothing is wrong with her.
Let's not act like this standard doesn't exist.
This explains why women date up. It screens out those who can't provide. It is easier to provide when one is near the social top. That's why women are attracted to men near the top.

Men can also be attractive on their own merits.
But, since women need men for survival, they want a man who is better at survival, and survival for humans usually involves higher social standing.
Men don't depend on women for survival aa much (excluding reproduction).
So yeah, it is asymmetrical.

LOL.
It DOES if you have a pussy. 
A pussy cannot afford to not care about social standards. Social standards are life and death, not a silly game.

And men get horny for a vacuum cleaner. So what?
All else being equal woman will choose the high status guy if she can get him. Women LOVE to chase guys with status.

We are never talking about ALL women in such discussions. We are talking about a bell curve. We seek to understand the curve.

Any hot girl gets lots of male attention unless she lives in a basement.
Pure physical appearance.

What?
Of course it is genuine.
I have gotten girlfriends from my fame alone. In fact, those girlfriends are better than random club girls.
When you have fame, not only do you get more sex, you attract higher quality girls who really appreciate you because they understand your full value.
Nothing is as effective at getting girls than fame. I barely have fame and it still works. Not that I use it much.
When you have fame, girls will just throw themselves at you. Girls will bend over backwards to be with you.

If a girl is hot to me, she is hot to basically everyone.
That's called having good taste.
Being hot is not as subjective as people want to believe. Everyone sees the hottest girl in the room. Don't kid yourself.

Does not matter. They are all hot.
I don't know. I have not been with many hot girls. And some I ruined by lack of experience and skill.
No.
You guys are being too nuanced for your own good, which ends in misleading false equivalencies.
We all understand who the model in the room is. Don't act naive. Hot people are objectively good-looking. That's what models and actors are.
I can walk into any room and point out to you the objectively hottest 5 people in that room. And those people themselves will know it because they know how much attention they get for doing zero.
You can objectively measure this just by counting how many unsolicited sexual offers they get.
A hot girl is getting swarmed with dicks.
I've had a hot girl complain to me about how spammed she gets by guys at the club. It is exhausting. She is rejecting 30 guys a night.

The "art" that Hollywood makes these days is so poor that I get more enjoyment from watching criticism of it than I do from watching the art.
We have entered full late-stage capitalist post-modernity, where the reviews are more interesting than the art

There is too much Hollywood trash these days not to consider reviews.
I am not saying I know it is bad. I am saying the evidence points to it being not so good.

Nosejob is only worth it if you have an especially big or problematic nose. Not a regular nose.
Girls don't care about this as much as fools like Clav think.
You will get way more results from learning game than looksmaxxing. Pickup is way healtheir than looksmaxxing. Even caring about your looks is already terrible inner game.

I don't doubt he believes his own BS.
That's hard to quantify. I don't have a number for you.
Depends on the costs.
Minor stuff is worth it like hair transplant.

That's easy to answer:
Telling people they are too ugly to get laid is very hurtful and depressing.
No one wants to hear that they won't get laid because they are too ugly.
So this topic cannot be talked about seriously in public. Similar to God.