I am always in search of sexual exploits. But bear in mind that the term "exploits" is not equivalent to "exploitation".

Black Africans were exploited as slaves in the Americas. Children are exploited when they are forced to work in sweatshops. Women who are forced into prostitution are exploited.

I pursue sexual exploits but I have no part in the sexual exploitation of women. The girls and women with whom I have sexual relationships (my exploits) engage in sexual relationships with me on their own free will, often without the knowledge of their fathers, mothers, older brothers, even husbands. Actually, it usually is implied that fathers, mothers, older brothers, and, of course, husbands would oppose what I and their daughter, sister, or wife, are doing together.

The motive of the woman or girl with whom I engage in sexual acts may not always be sexual lust alone, but a mixture of sexual lust and an act of protest against her elders, or may include commercial considerations (as I can afford to be generous). But the relationship definitely is based on free will on the part of the girl or woman, which is why, from my perspective, it is an exploit (yes, I score points). However, the relationship is not based on exploitation in a sensible interpretation of the term.

We want to be careful not to overstretch the meaning of words because this would lead to a dogmatic, scholastic dead end. Not every interaction between a rich man and a poor girl, or a socially powerful person and a largely powerless one, is exploitive per se, even though the interaction is not between equals.

I am better than many other men. I pursue my exploits, which are not based on exploitation. I don't interact with exploited women. I don't need to. There are more than enough who are available on their own free will.