Write Review
1,900,779 Total Reviews 2,962 New Reviews
7,636 Users Online

TER General Board

Short answer, NO. Long answer is more complicated ...
some-guy 6 Reviews 128 reads
posted

Do I agree that there SHOULD be a hall pass?

Yes, I do. I think it is in the best interest for a provider / civie relationship that they be in an open relationship of some form. Those are the only provider/civie relationships that I have personally seen and known to work out long-term. And even if it's not even fully open. Maybe just "ajar?" :-) ha ha

However, the fact that they never openly discussed it, I think clearly puts him in the wrong. So no, clearly there is no "automatic" hall pass. What I believe he is doing could qualify as cheating at worst. Or gaming the system by making assumptions at best.

But to be perfectly frank ... if a civie and provider engage in a relationship WITHOUT this topic ever coming up? That just speaks to an underlying lack of communication on both participants. And to me, that underlying lack of communication will eventually spell the downfall of their relationship. Much more so than whether one person or the other is violating any hall pass rules or not.


-- Modified on 3/13/2016 1:48:07 PM

Debra_Hollander1267 reads

Here's the situation that sparked my question: a longtime client and friend recently began dating a provider.  The interesting thing here is that he didn't actually meet her as a client; they simply happened to meet at a regular civvie social function.  
I don't know who asked who out... but on their first date she was very up-front and told him that she moonlights as a provider.  He assured her that he had no problem with that, had seen providers in the past, and didn't look down on her for it.  Great.  

He told me about her very shortly after they began dating, and as I see him about every 2 weeks, he was filling me in on their relationship fairly frequently.  After maybe 2-3 months, he said something that made me think this woman did not know he was still seeing providers.  So I just flat out asked him, and he replied that they'd never talked about it.  

This prompted me to ask, "Are you sure she's okay with it?"  

His response, "Well she's still doing this, so it's fair, right?"

He was genuinely shocked when I told him,  "NO, I do not think it's fair."  
In my opinion, the fact she is being honest with him, while he is keeping his activities secret,  is unfair right there.  

His defense: "But she's fooling around, so that means I get to do it too, doesn't it?!"
I asked him if he honestly thought she would see it that way, to which he admitted he was afraid to bring it up because she'd already shown signs of having a jealous nature. :smh:

 

After talking about this issue with several men, it seems the majority feel that if any man dating an active provider, then it would be "only fair" that the man get to have sex with other women.  Almost all of them said that, hypothetically, if they were in a relationship with a provider, then they would expect to have sex outside of that relationship.

If you're looking at it in a very general sense, then yes I do see the logic... a provider is having sex with other people, so her S.O. having sex with other people too would be equal.  But since her activities are P4P, I think there is more to the equation than that.  

My feeling is that this is NOT a fair trade-off because he would be getting to choose his partners; to pick the women with whom he wanted to have sex.  In general, providers really don't get that luxury.  Our clients choose US, not the other way around.  Yes, we can and do have fun during P4P dates.... but it is NOT the same to me. ;-)

What I'm saying is that I don't believe someone dating a provider is automatically entitled to have sex outside of their relationship.  Now, if they want to be swingers and she is going to be having her own civvie hookups too, then that's a different story.  

But this notion that just because she's a provider, he should be allowed additional playmates while she gets no other sex outside of her P4P and him?  No, I don't think that is "fair". :-)

 
These are my opinions; I am curious to hear YOURS.  

*****(EDIT)  This is my real question: If someone is dating a provider, is that person then entitled to have sex with other people?  

I'd genuinely like to know if the majority of men and women here share the mind-set of those I've already asked, that "It doesn't matter that it's P4P, If she's having sex with others, then he should get to do it too."  

Or if there are more here who see it closer to the way I view it.  ;-)

If my notions are just plain weird, well...... I'm used to that being the case. LOL.  :-)

xoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxooxxoxoxoxo

 

 

NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:13:19 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
FatVern243 reads

He doesn't need a "hall pass" from a woman.

ReplyQuoteReport
dakine18133 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
Afro-desiac269 reads

It's not fair because he's in a relationship with her and isn't being honest about what he's doing.  And the way he puts it makes it sound like he's trying to get back at her despite the fact he claims to be OK with what she does.

ReplyQuoteReport
Debra_Hollander211 reads

What I want to know is do you think that any person dating a provider is entitled to have sex with other people?

That was my question. :-)  (And I have now edited my post in an attempt to make that clearer lol)

xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxooxoxxoxoxoxo

 

 
NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:04:56 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
Afro-desiac216 reads

It depends on what's acceptable to both parties.  There is no "right answer" beyond that.

ReplyQuoteReport
GGxo177 reads

What's "your" answer to her question. There is no right or wrong.

ReplyQuoteReport
Afro-desiac161 reads

You said, "There is no right or wrong."
That is called a distinction without a difference.
As for your "What's 'your' answer to her question," I already gave it in both my responses above.  Looks like your reading comprehension is wanting.
But I'm glad "everyone knows already."
So relieved.

ReplyQuoteReport
CharlesV133 reads

Too many replies, to read them all. Hence to make it short: Debbie Nooner, you are right.

ReplyQuoteReport
micktoz112 reads

Entitled? There is no such thing in any relationship. It is something to be discussed and agreed upon or not agreed.
There are no blanket answers to this question

ReplyQuoteReport
NumNumMan179 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
Debra_Hollander196 reads

The provider is only having sex with other people because they pay her to do so.

HE is paying to have sex with other women because he WANTS to have sex with them.  

How are those two things NOT different?

 
xoxoxoxoxoxooxoxoxxoxoxoxoxoxoxo

 

 
NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:05:45 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
BigPeterJohnson168 reads

nobody's holding a gun to her head saying "have sex for money or i shoot."

she chooses this life style, so on a large scale, she is choosing to have sex with other ppl.  maybe her specific choices about who and when are more dictated by by $$ than his playtime, but she is seeing other men.

having said that, i disagree with the guy not being upfront with his girl about it.  he should be open and discuss it with her.  if it bothers her then he should either stop or stop seeing her.

also imo if he's seeing civvies and having relationships (even if shallow one night relationships) without p4p that's a whore of a different color.

ReplyQuoteReport
GaGambler183 reads

No two relationships are the same.

A couple of things that seem to have gone unmentioned here are, "Just how serious a relationship are they in?" IOW do they see each other every day, once a week, a couple of times a week? That alone makes all the difference in the world.

One of my first (modern era) hooker GF worked at an AMP, she worked very long hours and except for her "vacations" we only saw each other once a week. Saturday nights she would get off a bit early and didn't have to be back to work until 10 AM Sunday morning, so we spent every Sat night together. I am sorry (no I am not) but getting laid only once a week is just not an option for me, so yes you're damn right I saw other women.

Now if they are seeing each other every day, and she is taking care of his "needs" then I suppose I would have to agree with you. The last semi serious relationship I had with a hooker, we saw each other almost every day, at least 6 nights a week I stayed with her and NO, I didn't see other women, it wasn't a rule, I simply had no desire to "cheat" on her and her work was simply that "work" not cheating. In a case like this, you have a very valid point.

I suppose my real point is there is no cut and fast rules where it comes to "cheating" when dating a hooker. IMO, it's cheating when either of the parties involved think it's cheating.

ReplyQuoteReport
Senator.Blutarsky169 reads

It really depends on the two individuals... There is no one size fits all IMHO... I think the key is open communication... If I was too date someone from this world, I would be clear upfront what the ground rules were. I would have no problem with her continuing to work if she so desired. As for whether I continued to play, that would depend on her views. If she would be okay with it or not. Then I would have to decide if I could live within those boundaries. But I would make sure that it was discussed upfront and not assume.  

Solo mis dos centavos.

ReplyQuoteReport
Hieronymus148 reads

You know what they say "what's good for the goose is good for the gander".  

My only issue would be that he should "man up" and disclose that he is seeing providers. She was honest with him and disclosed that she provided. The fact that she sees anyone that books her and he gets to choose doesn't make a difference to me. Should he step his criteria down in a attempt to match her clients? I don't think so. He is entitled to book any lady he desires. Just needs to disclose his continuing activities to his lady.

ReplyQuoteReport
JackDunphy202 reads

Speaking for myself, I couldn't stay faithful to a provider GF so that is just one of many reasons I wouldn't date one. The other biggee is that I can't have my woman fucking other men.

But let's all be honest here. This is very, very complicated for most. Sex fucks with many peeps emotions and clouds our judgement, on both sides. When one is out doing it with others multiple times per week while the other is being monogomous, I think you are just begging for a potentially disastrous ending.

Everyone here can get on their high horse and tell us all they would NEVER cheat on their hooker GF. Well, ok, but saying you will be loyal and actually being loyal are two vastly different things.

Just seems to me that human beings were never meant to be with one person and that is an antiquated notion. Show me a guy who has been with the same gal for 30-40 years and I will show you a man that is in a sexless relationship or a man that cheats. Is that an ironclad rule? No, but I think it is the overwhelming likely outcome.

So, to your point, I can't say who is, and who is not "entitled" to have sex with others but it is my experience that it is a road to ruin for almost all at some point if only one is being the text book defintion of "faithful."

ReplyQuoteReport
MatureGFE115 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
AngelinaDDD202 reads

I dated a guy, a few years back, who felt it ok to fuck anything that walked.  When he got caught, he used this argument to justify it.  He knew from day 1, what I did for a living.  I, on the other hand, never knew of his escapades, until I caught him red handed.

Had I known, maybe I could have handled it, but I was never given that choice. I was met with dishonesty and anger, when confronted.  Lesson learned.  I will NEVER date while I am still escorting.

I may be a hoe, I am no liar:-)  Enough said.

ReplyQuoteReport
BigPeterJohnson106 reads

Posted By: AngelinaDDD
I dated a guy, a few years back, who felt it ok to fuck anything that walked.  When he got caught, he used this argument to justify it.  He knew from day 1, what I did for a living.  I, on the other hand, never knew of his escapades, until I caught him red handed.  
   
 Had I known, maybe I could have handled it, but I was never given that choice. I was met with dishonesty and anger, when confronted.  Lesson learned.  I will NEVER date while I am still escorting.  
   
 I may be a hoe, I am no liar:-)  Enough said.

ReplyQuoteReport
smallsteps132 reads

does something, that justifies you to do the same.   Being "fair" has nothing to do with it; being honest and non-judgemental is most important here.  Then, if both agree, all should be good.  

We almost never truly know another person's situation completely, but feeling entitled to anything is never a good quality in someone--especially having sex with others shortly after starting a relationship.

ReplyQuoteReport
2648667120 reads

So, she told him at the very beginning what she does. That was honest and probably a little nerve wracking. Seems like he's decided that since she is a P4P provider, it's only "fair" that he be allowed to continue as a P4P client. That's his perspective and he's not allowing her to offer hers because he's afraid of what it may be. The "it's only fair" argument only holds water if she's the one he's having the debate with. In other words--if she knows about it.

I dunno about the getting to choose your partner thing, but one thing that definitely seems unfair here is the one-directional flow of information.

Rule of thumb: if you're doing something and you have an instinct to hide it from her/him, it's probably cheating.

ReplyQuoteReport
DT_lover144 reads

I married my wife because she gave great blow jobs.  When she stopped giving blow jobs, I started seeing providers.  The wife has figured out that I do.  I told her I would stop going out if she would take care of me at home, which is true.  10+ years of hobbying and no BJ's at home in sight

ReplyQuoteReport
some-guy129 reads

Do I agree that there SHOULD be a hall pass?

Yes, I do. I think it is in the best interest for a provider / civie relationship that they be in an open relationship of some form. Those are the only provider/civie relationships that I have personally seen and known to work out long-term. And even if it's not even fully open. Maybe just "ajar?" :-) ha ha

However, the fact that they never openly discussed it, I think clearly puts him in the wrong. So no, clearly there is no "automatic" hall pass. What I believe he is doing could qualify as cheating at worst. Or gaming the system by making assumptions at best.

But to be perfectly frank ... if a civie and provider engage in a relationship WITHOUT this topic ever coming up? That just speaks to an underlying lack of communication on both participants. And to me, that underlying lack of communication will eventually spell the downfall of their relationship. Much more so than whether one person or the other is violating any hall pass rules or not.


-- Modified on 3/13/2016 1:48:07 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
mrfisher164 reads

This is not a symmetrical situation, and the honesty that all are calling for is required.

But I have to also observe that he did tell her he was a hobbyist, and for her, of all people, not to assume that he is continuing in that path, is telling me she is not being honest with herself.

If she couldn't handle dating a hobbyist, she should not have started down that road.

A discussion for another time is whether all women and men should respect the sexual needs and desires of their mates.

That's where this thread eventually leads

ReplyQuoteReport
AngelinaDDD166 reads

you need to know what they are and then be given the respect to make the choice.  I was never given that.

ReplyQuoteReport
2648667126 reads

Posted By: mrfisher
This is not a symmetrical situation, and the honesty that all are calling for is required.  
   
 But I have to also observe that he did tell her he was a hobbyist, and for her, of all people, not to assume that he is continuing in that path, is telling me she is not being honest with herself.  
     
 
I think this is very true and insightful. It's very possible that if he does talk to her about it, she'll say she doesn't gaf. However, I still believe, and I suspect you do too, he needs to have that conversation.

The fact she hasn't brought it up probably means she either doesn't gaf or is in fact in denial about it as you indicated.  He still needs to talk to her. He knows he needs to talk to her. He doesn't want to talk to her because he doesn't want to fuck up this situation where he's getting his cake and eating it too. I can't say I blame him. Much as I think he should talk to her, I can't say I wouldn't do the same thing, were I good looking enough to date a provider. Still, my never been there opinion is he should level with her. Not necessarily that he's all wrong and she's all right; Just that they both need to show respect and honesty.

Maybe she is lying to herself, but she's apparently been, at least in this regard, honest with him. Whether they're casual or serious, if they're in a relationship, I don't think a real man takes advantage of that. If either of them ever takes a mind this could be a serious ltr, with this beginning it's most likely destined for disaster.

The ramblin gamblin man from Georgia said one of the most true and profound things here, it's cheating when either of the parties involved thinks it's cheating.

I'm not outright disagreeing with the good for the goose is good for the gander folks. I'm saying that's an easy answer and one that works for some people/couples and not for others, with great variation based on the circumstances. In any case, the entire concept is totally irrelevant when the gander is the only one who knows what the hell is going on.

Easier to get forgiveness than permission, there's a lot of truth in that. It sometimes leads to catastrophic bearing failure though.

ReplyQuoteReport
PenleyDuke185 reads

He can see "strange"  once a week for all I gaf.  

Posted By: DebbieNoonerGirl
Here's the situation that sparked my question: a longtime client and friend recently began dating a provider.  The interesting thing here is that he didn't actually meet her as a client; they simply happened to meet at a regular civvie social function.    
 I don't know who asked who out... but on their first date she was very up-front and told him that she moonlights as a provider.  He assured her that he had no problem with that, had seen providers in the past, and didn't look down on her for it.  Great.  
   
 He told me about her very shortly after they began dating, and as I see him about every 2 weeks, he was filling me in on their relationship fairly frequently.  After maybe 2-3 months, he said something that made me think this woman did not know he was still seeing providers.  So I just flat out asked him, and he replied that they'd never talked about it.    
   
 This prompted me to ask, "Are you sure she's okay with it?"    
   
 His response, "Well she's still doing this, so it's fair, right?"  
   
 He was genuinely shocked when I told him,  "NO, I do not think it's fair."  
 In my opinion, the fact she is being honest with him, while he is keeping his activities secret,  is unfair right there.    
   
 His defense: "But she's fooling around, so that means I get to do it too, doesn't it?!"  
 I asked him if he honestly thought she would see it that way, to which he admitted he was afraid to bring it up because she'd already shown signs of having a jealous nature. :smh:  
   
   
   
 After talking about this issue with several men, it seems the majority feel that if any man dating an active provider, then it would be "only fair" that the man get to have sex with other women.  Almost all of them said that, hypothetically, if they were in a relationship with a provider, then they would expect to have sex outside of that relationship.  
   
 If you're looking at it in a very general sense, then yes I do see the logic... a provider is having sex with other people, so her S.O. having sex with other people too would be equal.  But since her activities are P4P, I think there is more to the equation than that.  
   
 My feeling is that this is NOT a fair trade-off because he would be getting to choose his partners; to pick the women with whom he wanted to have sex.  In general, providers really don't get that luxury.  Our clients choose US, not the other way around.  Yes, we can and do have fun during P4P dates.... but it is NOT the same to me. ;-)  
   
 What I'm saying is that I don't believe someone dating a provider is automatically entitled to have sex outside of their relationship.  Now, if they want to be swingers and she is going to be having her own civvie hookups too, then that's a different story.  
   
 But this notion that just because she's a provider, he should be allowed additional playmates while she gets no other sex outside of her P4P and him?  No, I don't think that is "fair". :-)  
   
   
 These are my opinions; I am curious to hear YOURS.  
   
 *****(EDIT)  This is my real question: If someone is dating a provider, is that person then entitled to have sex with other people?  
   
 I'd genuinely like to know if the majority of men and women here share the mind-set of those I've already asked, that "It doesn't matter that it's P4P, If she's having sex with others, then he should get to do it too."    
   
 Or if there are more here who see it closer to the way I view it.  ;-)  
   
 If my notions are just plain weird, well...... I'm used to that being the case. LOL.  :-)  
   
 xoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxooxxoxoxoxo  
   
   
   
   
   
 NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.  

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:13:19 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
bocabuster127 reads

Unless or until he's willing to supplement the income she's making as a provider he's in a deal breaker
Besides, personally, I don't believe in cheating. Never have
When I'm dating anyone, especially after we are intimate, I don't see anyone else for sex
There's a few reasons but no sense getting into it here
For this guy, he knows it's not right, otherwise he'd be upfront with her
He's never going to be monogamous.

ReplyQuoteReport
GaGambler219 reads

You mention you asked several guys about their opinions about this and then stated that the majority think they would continue to see hookers "IF" they were dating a hooker and I can see how the "average" guy might feel that way.

My question is, "How many of these guys answering in the hypothetical have actually ever dated an active provider?"  

I think if you asked only guys with any experience with the subject, you might get a whole different set of answers. It's a very rare guy who can date an active provider in the first place, I don't think the average guy has a clue what he would do if he were dating a provider.

ReplyQuoteReport
Debra_Hollander141 reads

You know, I honestly didn't think of that.  But I should have. :-)

I asked 6 men; half are/were hobbyists and half are not..... at least, as far as I know. LOL.   ;-)

2 of the 3 hobbyists have not dated providers; both said they would absolutely expect to get to keep seeing other women.  The third has casually dated providers in the past and is in a LTR with one now.  He does think it's "fair" for him to get to see other women, but it isn't a deal-breaker for him.  I should note that his current GF is not only cool with him seeing other providers, she encourages him to do so.  ;-)

Of the 3 non-hobbyists I asked, again, only one of them had dated an active provider.  

It was a non-hobbyist who had NOT dated a provider who was the only guy I asked who said that her providing activities were NOT the same as him playing around would be; not an equal or fair comparison.  
But he didn't think he could date one, either.  

 
This little exercise was enlightening for me, as I was sure I knew what some of these guys' answers would be and I was dead wrong.  :-P

xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxooxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxo

 

 
NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit

ReplyQuoteReport
nothrofboston101 reads

I know what I'd like for lunch tomorrow. Around Nooner. Take out or eat in (eat out is a possibility too ...)  

Interesting question tho. I occasionally wonder if I could. There's definitely only a few women I would entertain the idea with and that's based 100% on her personality, sense of humor, wit, intelkigence. That is, if I really get to know hers.

I don't think I'd fuck other women in spite and I definitely wouldn't sneak around behind her back. But it's not impossible to see me fucking someone with her approval. Has anyone mentioned MFF?

Given: she's smoking hottt and loves fucking me.

ReplyQuoteReport
Greenbacks2100 reads

If I was dating her she would fulfill all me needs. If she is not doing that, I need to move on. Than the relationship is not helping either one of us.

ReplyQuoteReport
jelloman42129 reads

Factor one is honesty in a relationship...in this scenario the provider is open about her activities while the client is not...regardless of anything els this is already an unhealthy relationship based on his dishonesty and infidelity...

Factor two is how he considers her career...if you can seperate P4P sex from relationship sex then there should be no issue...one must consider her job as no different from any other career choice...if he considers P4P sex on the same level as relationship sex then he is unprepared for the basic nature of the relationship...

Under no circumstances is "entitled" to sex with other women...the only way he should have even considered it would be with her openly expressed permission...

Edit: sorry GaG, I meant to post this directly off of Debbie's OP...wasn't meant to respond directly to you...

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 7:20:47 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
GGxo173 reads

its not a "hall pass" for him. He's already getting a pass if he's not paying. Absolutely positively END of discussion.  

Posted By: DebbieNoonerGirl
Here's the situation that sparked my question: a longtime client and friend recently began dating a provider.  The interesting thing here is that he didn't actually meet her as a client; they simply happened to meet at a regular civvie social function.    
 I don't know who asked who out... but on their first date she was very up-front and told him that she moonlights as a provider.  He assured her that he had no problem with that, had seen providers in the past, and didn't look down on her for it.  Great.  
   
 He told me about her very shortly after they began dating, and as I see him about every 2 weeks, he was filling me in on their relationship fairly frequently.  After maybe 2-3 months, he said something that made me think this woman did not know he was still seeing providers.  So I just flat out asked him, and he replied that they'd never talked about it.    
   
 This prompted me to ask, "Are you sure she's okay with it?"    
   
 His response, "Well she's still doing this, so it's fair, right?"  
   
 He was genuinely shocked when I told him,  "NO, I do not think it's fair."  
 In my opinion, the fact she is being honest with him, while he is keeping his activities secret,  is unfair right there.    
   
 His defense: "But she's fooling around, so that means I get to do it too, doesn't it?!"  
 I asked him if he honestly thought she would see it that way, to which he admitted he was afraid to bring it up because she'd already shown signs of having a jealous nature. :smh:  
   
   
   
 After talking about this issue with several men, it seems the majority feel that if any man dating an active provider, then it would be "only fair" that the man get to have sex with other women.  Almost all of them said that, hypothetically, if they were in a relationship with a provider, then they would expect to have sex outside of that relationship.  
   
 If you're looking at it in a very general sense, then yes I do see the logic... a provider is having sex with other people, so her S.O. having sex with other people too would be equal.  But since her activities are P4P, I think there is more to the equation than that.  
   
 My feeling is that this is NOT a fair trade-off because he would be getting to choose his partners; to pick the women with whom he wanted to have sex.  In general, providers really don't get that luxury.  Our clients choose US, not the other way around.  Yes, we can and do have fun during P4P dates.... but it is NOT the same to me. ;-)  
   
 What I'm saying is that I don't believe someone dating a provider is automatically entitled to have sex outside of their relationship.  Now, if they want to be swingers and she is going to be having her own civvie hookups too, then that's a different story.  
   
 But this notion that just because she's a provider, he should be allowed additional playmates while she gets no other sex outside of her P4P and him?  No, I don't think that is "fair". :-)  
   
   
 These are my opinions; I am curious to hear YOURS.  
   
 *****(EDIT)  This is my real question: If someone is dating a provider, is that person then entitled to have sex with other people?  
   
 I'd genuinely like to know if the majority of men and women here share the mind-set of those I've already asked, that "It doesn't matter that it's P4P, If she's having sex with others, then he should get to do it too."    
   
 Or if there are more here who see it closer to the way I view it.  ;-)  
   
 If my notions are just plain weird, well...... I'm used to that being the case. LOL.  :-)  
   
 xoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxooxxoxoxoxo  
   
   
   
   
   
 NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.  

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:13:19 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
GaGambler144 reads

tell us how you really feel. lol

ReplyQuoteReport
GGxo132 reads

Posted By: GaGambler
tell us how you really feel. lol

ReplyQuoteReport
some-guy143 reads

You're saying he's getting some sort of bonus by not having to PAY his GIRLFRIEND to fuck him????!!!!

WOW.

Just ...  WOW.

ReplyQuoteReport
GGxo110 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
Zak0326137 reads

I know two providers one met her husband in this world the other like Debbie was met outside of this world. Both of them have the strongest relationship of most of my friends.

Couple 1 She brought him into this world to show him what it was about. He was allowed to hobby till the day she was ready to give it up. They both quit the same day. Been married eight years with two kids. They swing together now and they will be married another 30+ years,  

Couple 2 He booked her. She thought he was alright nothing special he booked a second time he made her laugh and that was the start. He told her after the fifth date that he would never book her again told her straight out how he felt she wasn't ready but he proved to her he was serious. They hooked up six months later and they haven't left each others side.  

If they work together anything is possible.  

Every relationship is different. My thoughts are if she is still providing she is having sex with other people which is fine but I should also be allowed to have sex with other people. If you want to make it I can't pay for it that's fine I will pull a girl out of a club not as much fun and not as easy as a sure thing but I can see that mind set also.

Those are my thoughts.
I hope it works out for them.
 

Posted By: DebbieNoonerGirl
Here's the situation that sparked my question: a longtime client and friend recently began dating a provider.  The interesting thing here is that he didn't actually meet her as a client; they simply happened to meet at a regular civvie social function.    
 I don't know who asked who out... but on their first date she was very up-front and told him that she moonlights as a provider.  He assured her that he had no problem with that, had seen providers in the past, and didn't look down on her for it.  Great.  
   
 He told me about her very shortly after they began dating, and as I see him about every 2 weeks, he was filling me in on their relationship fairly frequently.  After maybe 2-3 months, he said something that made me think this woman did not know he was still seeing providers.  So I just flat out asked him, and he replied that they'd never talked about it.    
   
 This prompted me to ask, "Are you sure she's okay with it?"    
   
 His response, "Well she's still doing this, so it's fair, right?"  
   
 He was genuinely shocked when I told him,  "NO, I do not think it's fair."  
 In my opinion, the fact she is being honest with him, while he is keeping his activities secret,  is unfair right there.    
   
 His defense: "But she's fooling around, so that means I get to do it too, doesn't it?!"  
 I asked him if he honestly thought she would see it that way, to which he admitted he was afraid to bring it up because she'd already shown signs of having a jealous nature. :smh:  
   
   
   
 After talking about this issue with several men, it seems the majority feel that if any man dating an active provider, then it would be "only fair" that the man get to have sex with other women.  Almost all of them said that, hypothetically, if they were in a relationship with a provider, then they would expect to have sex outside of that relationship.  
   
 If you're looking at it in a very general sense, then yes I do see the logic... a provider is having sex with other people, so her S.O. having sex with other people too would be equal.  But since her activities are P4P, I think there is more to the equation than that.  
   
 My feeling is that this is NOT a fair trade-off because he would be getting to choose his partners; to pick the women with whom he wanted to have sex.  In general, providers really don't get that luxury.  Our clients choose US, not the other way around.  Yes, we can and do have fun during P4P dates.... but it is NOT the same to me. ;-)  
   
 What I'm saying is that I don't believe someone dating a provider is automatically entitled to have sex outside of their relationship.  Now, if they want to be swingers and she is going to be having her own civvie hookups too, then that's a different story.  
   
 But this notion that just because she's a provider, he should be allowed additional playmates while she gets no other sex outside of her P4P and him?  No, I don't think that is "fair". :-)  
   
   
 These are my opinions; I am curious to hear YOURS.  
   
 *****(EDIT)  This is my real question: If someone is dating a provider, is that person then entitled to have sex with other people?  
   
 I'd genuinely like to know if the majority of men and women here share the mind-set of those I've already asked, that "It doesn't matter that it's P4P, If she's having sex with others, then he should get to do it too."    
   
 Or if there are more here who see it closer to the way I view it.  ;-)  
   
 If my notions are just plain weird, well...... I'm used to that being the case. LOL.  :-)  
   
 xoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxooxxoxoxoxo  
   
   
   
   
   
 NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.  

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:13:19 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
Jensen36363123 reads

I think that should be understood and not assumed.  So he should be open about it and let the girl make a choice if it's okay with her or not.

I also agree with your point about P4P being a bit different from the provider and the hobbyist because one is income related, a job and not often just a choice of partner for the provider as you've pointed out. However, I'm not sure how far that goes and it seems to be a legitimate position that if she's not stopped her moonlighting activities then she probably should be a bit tolerant about his activities as well. Again, the key here is both being on the same page about what the current status is.

ReplyQuoteReport
incallman2124 reads

She was up front and honest with him before they began their relationship. He entered into the relationship knowing that was how she earns her living. For him to keep seeing providers without her knowing is not only unfair, it is the same as cheating ... dishonest.

ReplyQuoteReport
ROGM138 reads

No guy gets a Hall Pass for dating a Lady. Civvie or Provider. All us guys pay for Sex in one form or another.  

As for dating a provider I'm kind of in this situation. I'm seeing a provider on a steady basis. I help her outside of our playtime. We have OTC time together. So I know I'm not getting freebies with her. And that's fine with me. Dating a civvie or a provider a guy is going to pay for the sex either way. There's no Hall Pass in both cases. Should the guy be honest? Tough question to answer. She's providing for the money. He's playing around because it's fun. If he told her about seeing other providers my guess is that she would be offended. Would my provider be offended if she knew I was seeing other providers? Most likely.  She's under the impression that she's the only girl I'm seeing.

ReplyQuoteReport
rogue112 reads

He is not being honest with her about his seeing ladies so its wrong.
  Once the two of them discuss and layout ground rules then live by he rules set forth.

ReplyQuoteReport
davincib1118 reads

Glancing over some of the provider's comments. Not know ing the ends ands outs of the situation, but here's 2 cents.  First, her honestly with him on the first night should be applauded, in return yes the right thing for him to do is disclose his hobbying habits to her. On the other hand, I don't see how a provider could feel like or demand that their man should not continue seeing other ladies.  

One argument was the provider saying that she was doing it for "work" ooh ok, the light bulb just went on, I get it, totally fine with that as a suitable excuse (Not).  It takes a certain mindset to moonlight as a provider, so I'm not knocking that, I respect the business. But you have to be able to check yourself back into reality if you choose to provide and at the same time be in a relationship outside of providing.  

Just because it is a job does not justify the fact that a man will feel like you are giving away his punany, so why shouldn't he be able to see other women.  He may know that you provide, but I am sure he's not being told play by play whats happening for every client etc.  

Or just go by the old saying, "whats good for the goose is good for the gander."

ReplyQuoteReport
escalade1964115 reads

Is it serious? Are they dating (CIVIE) others??

When, I got serious with a civie, I quit the hobby.

Personally, I could never have a (Civie) relationship knowing she was or is providing

ReplyQuoteReport
MasterZen161 reads

sex is merely the source of the deception. An omission in this case is a deception, a lie.

You have to have trust for a relationship. Deception is a breach of trust and a betrayal.

That is my answer.

My opinion is the two need to have a full discussion of sex and boundaries. Honestly, I don't think there are entitlements about sex on either side, whether provider (the "But I do it for money" or "But I don't get to pick the guys") or client ("But you get to have sex with others"). Both are whining, bullshit arguments as alternatives exist for both.  

Anyway, no two people I know have the same marriage or relationship rules as another couple, so neither do I expect that any pair of provider/client couples would have the same relationship rules.  

Let them work out what works for them.  

I just have a feeling that starting with deception won't help any couple make it

ReplyQuoteReport
PenleyDuke153 reads

I'm not really writing a book about queefing.

ReplyQuoteReport
MasterZen125 reads

but anything meaningful about queefing would have to be a musical piece. A chamber piece for wind ensemble, I think.

ReplyQuoteReport
jelloman42138 reads

I was SO looking forward to the audio version...

ReplyQuoteReport
PenleyDuke104 reads

I am still  searching for the perfect  hookah ensemble and video gent who can hold the camera steady without laughing 😊

ReplyQuoteReport
bbfs4ever140 reads

Prostitutes aren't interested in monogamy, let alone from some john.

And since the john is out paying for prostitutes, he certainly isn't interested in monogamy.

So what's the point on either side?  They're both seasoned liars.  And will continue to do so.

ReplyQuoteReport
Larissa_Sweets148 reads

If he agreed to this lifestyle, he agreed to it. To want to change his mind now is a form of resentment. My fiancé found out that I was doing this and his reaction wasn't "all well, I'll do it too" it's devastating for a real man to know that his woman is having sex with strange man for money......no reasonable person is going to say "No problem" unless they don't care. And as far as sex, No you accepted I did this that means you won't do the same. I don't know, i find these stories of people like this so weird.

ReplyQuoteReport
MatureGFE148 reads

It's how she pays her bills, her "job". This is a perfect example of how ladies in the biz are still not taken seriously when embarking on a personal relationship with a guy who knows all about P4P.

Steph

ReplyQuoteReport
nothrofboston121 reads

I agree with Steph's and Rox's position, as well as understand those who say they wouldn't be happy with their SO fucking guys p4p.  

As for others, while I might not agree, I'm not one to judge. Doesn't mean I like it or endorse it. That's between two adults just like p4p.

ReplyQuoteReport
GoldieKnox104 reads

Related Link: http://goldieknox.com

ReplyQuoteReport
ComradeM119 reads

It's something that should be talked about if they've decided to be 'exclusive'.  Her job would be excluded from the monogamous aspect of the relationship.  Then if she's OK with him doing outside P4P, understanding the nature of it as only a provider would, then they would hash that out.  

If she'd rather him quit his P4P while they are exclusive, then that's something he'd have to agree to and follow.

Now, if they haven't yet talked about being exclusive, then he shouldn't feel guilty about his P4P activity.  I would feel more guilty doing P4P behind a non-provider's back, simply because they aren't in the industry and understand the risks and safety.

ReplyQuoteReport
vantheman66695 reads

In polyamory, there is no need for "hall passes" and all that crap.  Only honesty.

ReplyQuoteReport
Post Reply Back To Forum
Register Now!