i always found this to be a dumb argument. of course car accidents kill more than plane crashes, there's like a million times more people driving around in cars than there are people flying around in planes at any given point in time.
It's a
very sound argument. It's not a matter of how many individual trips are taken by car compared to trips taken by airplane. Per passenger mile, flying is far safer than driving. From
this article:
Over the last 10 years, passenger vehicle death rate per 100,000,000 passenger miles was over 9 times higher than for buses, 17 times higher than for passenger trains, and 1,606 times higher than for scheduled airlines.
Emphasis mine. You're
sixteen hundred times more likely to be killed traveling by car than traveling by airplane. That's a massive difference that's impossible to handwave away. There's a reason psychologists include safety statistics like these among the techniques they use to help treat people with a fear of flying. It's effective.
having a fear of flying is something i can understand. i don't share it, but i see where it comes from - once you're in the air, your fate is completely out of your hands. there is absolutely nothing you can do to influence it. very different to a car where you are in the drivers seat yourself (literally and figuratively) and can do whatever you think is best at any point in time. you're in a state of being in control, whereas as a passenger on a plane you're in a state of absolute powerlessness.
Sure, that's somewhat understandable. But if you're a passenger in a car, your fate is equally out of your hands. And even when driving, you're not nearly as "in charge" of your fate as you might think.
You might be a safe, competent and skilled driver with fast reflexes and lots of experience to help you avoid accidents, but none of that is going to help you if, say, an asshole driving an 18-wheeler runs a red light and t-bones you on your way through an intersection.
Remember that people also use reasoning like this to justify not wearing helmets when riding motorcycles or not wearing seatbelts when driving (or riding in) a passenger vehicle. "I'm a good driver, I'm in control of my vehicle, and I can get out of anything that arises, so I don't need these safety devices." They still die all the same when someone else's driving sucks.
ETA:
He just has to stand near the end of the bar doing jumping jacks and squats or whatever while the hookers just have to stand there in a line and watch until he decides to choose one. Because that's literally their job.
You have to wonder what they thought when suddenly in comes this deformed greasy midget in a suit that looks like it's been crumpled in a ball in a dumpster for a month and starts doing what looks like an epileptic seizure.
I genuinely feel bad for prostitutes that work in brothels that make them do the whole "lineup" thing. I know that (at least on paper) they're allowed to refuse to service someone, but of course they're also aware that if they keep doing that, they won't make as much money or might even get the boot. So imagine having to stand in a lineup with other attractive girls (who are simultaneously your friends/coworkers and your competition) and get thoroughly eyeballed by all the random men who come in for "service." Imagine that sense of dread when you size him up, find him unpleasant, and then realize he's been looking at you more than any of the other girls.
It's got to be a hundred times worse when it's someone genuinely nasty like Russ, with a physical deformity that makes him look angry and unpleasant but also that greasy hair and dirty suit that demonstrates his lousy hygiene. You just know every girl in the lineup is thinking "oh god please don't pick me."
He refuses to learn that hookers don't need to be impressed or wooed. It would shatter his fantasy that he's the only the nice guy and the hooker was just waiting for him to rescue them.
He's got the strangest ideas about how prostitution works and what its benefits and drawbacks are. Like you said, the whole point of it is that you're paying to get laid without having to bother impressing or wooing the provider, and for an added bonus you don't have to worry about whether she's attracted to you. You show up, you pay the fee, you get your nut, and then you leave and go on with your life. She doesn't expect you to help clean up, stay the night (that costs extra) or cook her breakfast, and she won't call you the next day to ask how you're feeling about last night and whether you want to go out again.
Like Chef once said, "you're not just paying her for sex; you're paying her to leave afterward." (RIP Isaac Hayes) It's a great arrangement if you just want to get laid. It's a lousy one if you're hoping to find a girlfriend. It's "no strings attached" sex, and she doesn't want your strings.
And I still don't get why he wants to date a hooker in the first place. That's a woman who is literally
guaranteed to not be faithful or monogamous. He's super-possessive even with women who don't even like him. I can't imagine if he somehow
did successfully woo a hooker and she decided to date him that he would tolerate her having sex with other men. He knows how much he pays them for each visit, and he knows they (usually) get lots of customers, so he should be able to figure out he can't possibly replace that income for her to feel comfortable giving it up to be with him exclusively.
I imagine butternut has pre-recorded fantasies about cutting up and leaving an entire bar in a fit of spastic giggles like he's Ron Fucking White or something. Like nah...
"I had the right to remain silent, but I did not have the ability." Russ would do well to heed Mr. White's many wise words.