There is absolutely nothing contradictory about my statements. I said,
The inclusion of those two highlighted words suggests that I, personally, am not able to engage in sexual activity without having to pay for it, which separates me those who do pay for sex but are able to engage in non-paid sexual activity.
I also stated:
You claim that this reinforces your point. It does not.
That is a fallacious construction of my statement. What the fuck kind of retard logic are you using? I did not suggest that all men who pay for sex are otherwise unable to engage in non-paid sexual activity. As a corollary, I did not suggest that paying for sex is, in and of itself, a sufficient reason to believe that someone is unable to engage in non-paid sexual activity. Ergo, no contradiction.
I simply stated that if I, personally, were not able to pay for sex, then I, personally, would not be able to engage in sexual activity at all.
Do you need me to draw you a venn diagram?