I am a relatively Newbie to TER, and like all good Newbies should be, I have been reading everything I can on every board. For the life of me I cant find the same post again or remember how far back it went, maybe January 2009. The original posting was from a newbie hobbiest, seeking a "reality check" before taking his "viginal plunge" into the depths of the hobby.
The responses that followed were informative as well as insightful, even though they were intended for an audience of a hobbiest and not that of a provider. But there was one particular response from a "Texcat" and others that followed, that caught my attention in particular, and the one that I seek clarification on.
He mentioned specially seeking out providers that were NOT his type to go and see. Did I read that right? The gist behind this was, specifically to be immune to falling in love. Which he mentioned in his very next sentence, that "the plan" would backfire as well.
First of all, I am shocked at the statistic that was quoted of 50% of hobbiest can, and do, or will, possibly fall in love with a provider.
My real question is, do hobbiest, other than
admittedly "Texcat" really seek out providers that are NOT your type to see? And how satisifying is the experience, if the person you see is NOT your type?
And specifically to "Texcat". If your plan of seeking out providers that you have nothing in common with carries the same inherent risks as seeing a provider that IS your type, why go the other route to start with in the first place? I mean, if the very thing you are trying to avoid is inherently plausible with someone that is your type, why go the other way? Just curious.
Sincerely,
Jaycee
-- Modified on 5/24/2009 9:18:13 PM
i sought and still seek out providers that inspire lust and possible friendship but not love.
i think it useful to consider "type" separately with regard to physical attraction, commonality of interests, and the deep, deep caring for the other's well being that is love.
once you grasp the possibility of refining notions of type in this way it is possible to avoid pitfalls, but no system is perfect. surprise is always possible.
at this stage in my life i want compensated FWB so i look for people who excite my lust and who i can regard as friends or friendly companions that i could take out to dinner. i love those long dinner dates.
i have a long sexual history of attractions to many different looking ladies. so the physical description of a lust inspiring "type" has too many qualifications to be meaningfully and briefly discussed.
as far as a "friend" who would be a good companion for compensated FWB i like intelligent women who have an interest in fine dining and wine and the arts: music, literature and visual. my tastes are eclectic and i am open to new input so this is somewhat easy to deal with too. i have limited interest in sports: i'm not likely to compensate a provider to play tennis or racketball! LOL! though i did have plans for a long vacation.... maybe then.
where i need to be careful is when i think that i might possible be able to form an equal partnership with a woman that would enable us both to get from where we are to someplace better both as individuals and as a team. when i get a sense that this is the case i completely lose my head and fall. these LTRs are not possessive (unless it is at _her_ insistence). they generally end amicably once _her_ goals have been reached. i usually wind up having to help her realize that she really is finished with me but there are exceptions to that also.
admittedly i am a bit complicated. pardon the long detailed response and the rudeness of a self follow up. this latest attempt to explain myself will probably backfire as badly as the previous ones, LOL!
if there is a point that requires clarification feel free to PM me.
No apologies needed whatsoever. Admittedly, we are all complicated, and a detailed response was probably indicated given the premise behind the question.
I too followed up my response, sensing a need to clarify where I was coming from with my question. I am still moderated, whatever that means, but it equals out to being my responses take a lot longer to post than yours.
when i _decide_ how complicated i need to be.
there is extra overhead involved to be sure....
Please allow me to clarify my question and where it was coming from. Though I am indeed surprised that a hobbiest would seek out a provider for the specific reason you mentioned, I am completely dumbfounded by the revelation that a hobbiest would seek out a provider they werent interested in, regardless of their reason, period.
The thought had simply never occured to me, that the gentleman knocking on my door, had picked me, yeah, out of all the others, because I WASNT his "type".
For a girl whose only experience has been under an agency, I have always had to put all my faith and hope in the gentleman knocking on the door. He is the only one that has a say in the matter. You are crossing your fingers and hoping that he has a good sense of "you".
I have always be an inquisitive person by nature, and have usually inquired to the gentleman that saw me, why it is that they chose me. Their answers have ALWAYS surprised me. Perhaps it is the "newbie" still in me, even though I have a "few" under my belt.
But if anyone had ever told me, they had chosen me specifically because I was not their type, well that would have just taken the cake.
P.S. If any hobbiest does ever happen to chose me, specifically because I am not your "type", could you kindly hold that information back until after the session. Thanks!
i mentioned three different _kinds_ of _types_.
let's recategorize them as:
1) physical (lust)
2) emotional/intellectual (friend/companion)
3) interdependent (love)
i look for those who are my type in the first two senses and try to avoid those who may be my type in the 3rd sense. this last is difficult without a face to face encounter.
being a gentleman i would never say i picked a lady because she was TOTALLY not my type. if i ask for a date you can be sure you are my type in the first two senses. i am not looking for someone to fall in love with.
some ladies have more informative websites than others and i am pretty sure that there is safety from "falling in love" when i make the call. that doesn't mean that i call up people that i think are unattractive and that i won't enjoy their company. does this help? or should i just give up?
but thanks for re-inerating it again
You were choosen for a reason and it always relates to sexual attraction.
"Love" has a number of facets, many of which are triggered by pheromonal pathways, as well as the "chemical cocktail" that a guy (and girl) can get dosed with during a sexual experience.
Generally, a guy can make it through just the biochemical part of it okay. (though not always.) The trouble comes when the psychological part comes into play. At a psychological level, "love" can be a response to values. That is, a response to a woman possessing attributes that are preferred. Those attributes can be as profound as a keen intellect, or as simple as blond hair.
If the chemical cocktail and the psychological part come together; a guy can indeed enter that phase of "love" known as infatuation. The likelihood of this varies between different men on a normal curve due to differences in both genetics and environment. Some men, you can expose them to practically anything and they'll never become infatuated with you. Others, just kiss them and they are yours. Most (thankfully) fall in between these two extremes.
As for me, I have tried it both ways. I've specifically chosen women with whom I know I have very little in common in order to avoid attachment; and specifically chosen women I know I have a lot in common with because the greater intensity of the emotional side of the experience.
Because I'm not widely experienced (i.e. 5 providers in 4 years) I can't give a lot of stats; but I can say that I chose the most recent provider on the basis that the emotional connection would be scant if at all. For the next provider, I'm looking for someone with whom I'll have a bit more in common.
I WILL say that if I ever met a provider who was "my dream girl," (highly unlikely, but possible) I would leave the fee on the counter (to compensate for the time spent preparing for my arrival) and run like the wind. No way would I risk the chemical cocktail under those circumstances.
I certainly do not seek what I have at home.
I do tend to seek the same body type that I am attracted to. My woman I choose as a provider is like Quade in Total Recall when he travels to Venusville to see his lusted after provider. It is the fulfillment of the fantasy. Johngaltnh said it well how powerful the chemical cocktail can be. Especially when the physical attributes are preferred.
You made the point that I was completely lost on when I posted my original question. I thought that gentlemen where seeking out their "fulfillment of the fantasy". Thats why I couldnt fathom the idea that someone would seek out someone that specifically WASNT their type.
Especially is the "type" that you are trying to avoid has characteristics of the "love type".
How does one going about advertising that? And further more, how does one decipher that in an advertisement so that it can be avoided?
looking for cues that are "against type" in the sense of love is tricky. some providers compartmentalize with a performance persona (reflected on the website) that is different from their character. only the performance persona is likely (hopefully) represented on the website.
i find it best to look for resonances between the ads/reviews and those past experiences that were great NSA fun with no conceivable long term partnership prospects. there is no way that an ad can do this reliably that would work for everyone. it is simply too individual.
so simply present yourself as you wish to market yourslef. including that you are discreet and professional can't hurt. be really clear in communicating, perhaps even crisply so. that will minimize the possibility of drama.
Personally, I am in for girlfriend experience. It is for my love to the ladies -- I pay to testify it. I only want to see the providers I like.
You have denied seeing some hobbyists? Then you do the same too.
Business is only a superficial cause; human affection is the real underlying reason.
I do not make distinctions with human affections. I respect the ladies in the business too.
I have only worked under an agency, and therefore had no say in the matter.
-- Modified on 5/24/2009 9:12:28 PM
Once you go indy, think twice about turning someone down. I am also a newbie even though I pass out a ton of "know it all" advice in here. Still, I do know what it is like on this side of things. ALWAYS turn down if you ever feel a hint of it not being safe, you safety comes first. But remember, while some in this are just looking to get laid, others just want to feel desired for a time. You should feel desired everytime you are asked to be booked. It's OK if you ask them why they selected you, but desire for you is always one of the reasons. Some really never get that in real life despite a lot of love, friendships, etc. So always feel good about yourself in that regard.
My best relationship was a BBW, she was loyal, giving and good to my kid, someone who I perhaps should have married. However, I was not attracted to her physically and I cheated throughout the relationship.
My point is that I dated her because I was in a let me date someone not my type phase. In sum, it did not work
Now if you can really believe in interest of someone who advertising on a website ( No offense ladies but I embellish my Resume too)
Since my purpose in this hobby is NSA, I tend not to be interested her interest because I simply can afford it. LOL
I am not sure about 50%, and I am not sure how intense the love may be. Like Texcat, I am a more complicated hobbyist than most. I seek more than just basic sex from this hobby and do not wish to ever be the type that is emotionally detached. I "fell in like" with my first and to various levels like all of those that I have been with. I have never not cared about a woman I have been with in my entire life and do not want that to change, it is too intimate an activity to me.
So sometimes I will try to "push the envelope" to make it the best partnering possible because I ultimately seek passion from what I call a primary provider. And passion takes more than lust, it also takes something else between the two such as a deep like or love. Something other than the envelope that makes both sides want to be with each other. So far I have not fallen in love, although I have had a mission failure at the like a lot level.
But regarding the "not my type" selections I understand the concept. I of course always go for women I find attractive, but I have also learned that my personal level connections almost always are with older providers. I frankly never intended to ever book someone under 30, but gave it a try and it worked out great. I like her but that's it, no real worry about anything else or it getting too complex. I now have 2 what I call Booty Calls, younger ladies that I like but it remains more simple, keeps this all balanced for me. One is to me totally beautiful so I can not say not my type, but I have no worries about me emotionally with her other than I like her and care about how things go for her. I often wonder if this is a major reason a lot of guys like the younger ladies.
I can't speek for Texcat as to if this parallels what he meant, but some of us just don't leave our emotions at the door, so sometimes it is nice to book someone with which you can just have fun. That said, I am also enjoying navigating a course with the older providers who understand where I am coming from as well.
Hope this helped.
i get too abstract, nuanced, and complicated sometimes to be clear. i feel that you have expressed what i meant more clearly than i did.
the ability to care but without desiring possession (by or of another) is essential to keeping balance in this life. but since i have never desired possession with LTR SOs that doesn't say a lot. it may seem paradoxical that the danger for me in "falling in love" (a warm and passionate term) lies in seeing equal partnership, mutual and collective benefit (a cool and considered term).
i'm not going to resolve that paradox, it is too personal. suffice it to say that that kind of partnership involves a level that is deep in the guts and not writable on a scorecard or balance sheet. i'll let it go at that.
If I have an appt request from someone who sees almost all 18-22yr olds or is really into roll playing or something that makes me wonder if he knows I am not 22 and don't role-play or whatever. I raise the question to him, "I just read your reviews and it seems your a big fan of role playing and wanted to make sure you realize that's something I don't do." I would hate to waste someone's time and resources knowing how precious they both are. Sometimes a gent will respond, "thank you, i realize you don't but I would like to see and think we would have a great time." Others say thank you for being so honest and that they will go elsewhere. Variety is the key to the hobby and a lot of fun!
That makes for the best experience.
as my name implies i wanna fall in love! break my heart please! and i have fallen in love with providers, never proposed ,stalked or even lost the boundries of the hobby but please break my heart!!!!
i'm happy with just having my heart _melted_.
does it come naturally or do you take daily shots of testosterone and serotonin supplements? 
just kidding of course.
it is not the stereotypical approach to the world of compensated dating just as mine is not. but then as responsible individuals willing to take some risks we find our own sweet way....
A cheater faithful. It would never work on either side
"Provider" not my type is an oxymoron, a null class. And I fall in love with all of them, at least while I am with them.
Seeing providers has really helped me discover what actually turns me on physically. There are lots of women that I find jaw-droppingly beautiful, but in bed, no fireworks.
I've never had any problem with getting obsessed with a provider, or feeling I was in love. The confines of a session don't really provide for that sort of connection, IMO.