Here's my question.
I've been thinking of seeing a provider and E-mailed her. In our discussions I found out we have meet. We were introduced to each other by a person that knows me. While I have no memory of the meeting ( I MUST have been really pre-occupied) I'm concerned that my seeing her might get back to the person I know (I have no idea who the friend is). I'm in a very public business and would not like for this to happen.
My question is....Am I worrying about nothing or should I find another provider to see? This was to be my first encounter with a provider.

1) If you've already contacted her, she must know for what reason. How do you plan to put that cat back in the bag?

2) She lacks discretion if she's revealing to you that she's already met you through a mutual acquaintance. She's either betraying you, or betraying him (probably both)

3) How does this acquaintance of yours know this girl? Most likely it’s a “business” relationship. Your acquaintance would probably pat you on the back.

My answer:
A: Yes, you should worry about this.
B: You’re already beyond the point of what you have to worry about, so go ahead and see her. (It will likely reduce the risk of getting back to your friend, if you develop your own business relationship with the girl, and let her know she shouldn’t pass on the fact – you don’t want her asking your associate what ever happened to you.)
C: It’s all a wash; even money – just live

Yeah but, you said it all in the first statement...

"She lacks discretion if she's revealing to you that she's already met you through a mutual acquaintance."

Until he does business with her, he has nothing to be "discreet" about. On the other hand, if he is here asking what should he do, he probably has something at risk besides just his buddy finding out (then again, maybe not).

Bottom line thou, there is nothing but potential trouble when dealing with people who are indiscreet when doing things that typically demand discretion. There are too many other sources of "business" to even bother….

Rike spelled it out aacurately except for the conclusion.  Even if she divulged to make you comfortable, it showed a lack of discretion and maturity.  Don't think seeing her would bind her to any stated or unstated confidentaility.  I agree with Lifeasme, cut your potential harm, especially with so many choices out there.

This happened to me.........well, a client called me and we started talking on the phone and hit it off great! In our conversation I found out what area of town he grew up in and what schools he had attended. Needless to say he had been in my brothers graduating high school class. This was weird and it made me very uneasy so we both decided not to meet at all it was mutual. We both agreed to keep it our little secret, for we both have a lot to loose.
Be safe,
Kisses & Licks.......
Mara

This situation reminds me of an earlier posting where a hobbyist discovered that a provider with whom he had scheduled a meeting was his neighbor. The general consensus seemed to be "protect the provider's anonymity."

So if I call a provider, and through the verification process or conversation she suddenly realizes, "Hey we met at the company Christmas party." And I say, "Really? I don't remember." And she says, "Yeah. John Doe introduced us." How is that being indiscreet? What SHOULD she have done? Not acknowledged it at all? Just cancelled the encounter for a bogus reason?

Granted, it's an awkward situation, but I don't see how she was indiscreet. Indiscreet would have been something like, "Oh, you work at ABC company? Do you know John Doe? I see him all the time." Something I can't envision ANY provider doing.

You answered the question for yourself.  If you had any recollection of your meeting, you could make an informed decision re whether or not to proceed.  But you have no idea who this third party is, or what relationship you have to him/her, or what relationship the provider has with him/her.  For all you know this third party may be your boss, or one of your clients.  Or she may be another provider who happens to do threesomes with this new provider.  

Without this critical information I can't recommend proceeding, so,  unless you live in some town where there is only one provider, find someone else and have fun instead of wondering about the potential repercussions of your visit.

You're saying it would've been better for her to be deceptive, and not admit to knowing this gent, as opposed to 'fessing up so that he can decide what he's comfortable with???

I must admit that I have not personally been in this situation, and I am not sure how I would handle it. But I do not think she was out of line for simply saying, "I think we have met before, do you remember _________."  As it turns out, he didn't remember her, but SHE didn't know that, and didn't know if he might freak out upon recognizing her during their appointment.  99% of the time, honesty is the best policy!

Hugs*
Nicole

She's being indiscreet because...

A) She's decided that her anominity was unimportant. That is VERY scary to me. I assume most providers want to keep their civilian and ASP lives seperate. If she doesn't, that's her call, but since I DO...I just as well not see someone who doesn't. They probably don;t have the same appreciation for boundaries and discretion that I do.

When she revealed that they had met before (rather than leting HIM bring that fact up, even if she was aware of it), she essentially said "I know who you are OUTSIDE of the hobby", which very easily (as our poster is concerned about) becomes "I may or may not keep these two lives of yours seperate and discrete". I know she didn't say she WOULD do anything improper, but if she were, she sure as hell wouldn't announce it, now would she? She should have known better to ever combine a clients civilain and hobby life without his explict permission first....even a POTENTIAL client.

B) When she further explained HOW she knew our poster, bringing the identity of a third party into it, she showed no discretion for that person either. No, she didn't say that she knew him (the 3rd guy) as a client. But, here we are, speculating if this is the case, now aren't we? Our orginal poster certainly is. Thus, no matter HOW she knows the third guy, she has got him involved without his consent or knowledge into a civilian / hobby cross over as well.

The bottom line is that when we do this "thing we do" we assume (at least most of us) that the two lives will NEVER cross. Discreet ladies know this....professional ladies anticipate circumstances just like these and practice the art of the "poker face"...she could meet you any place, while you are standing right next to your wife, and pull it off. That "other person", the one with the sexy name who provides companionship for a fee, is just that...another person. "Barbie" might know that you like to have your prostate tickled during BBBJ, but "Barbara" has never met you. And...converserly, while "Barbara" might have had the pleasure of an introduction sometime in the past, "Barbie" has yet to make your acquintance...or so it should be.

IMHO...

-- Modified on 9/18/2002 11:49:10 AM

Yes dear, but....I am not sure if it matters that she remembers him, if he doesn't remember her. I understand what YOU are saying, and it is a bit sticky. But I still like my analysis above...that "Barbie" and "Barbara" are not the same person, and having met one is not that same as having met both.

I'm thinking that their are hobbyist in the this world who ANYBODY would recognize. Discretion is still assumed, right? I mean, assuming standard screening, the clients "real name" will soon be shared knowledge. That isn't it the issue. The issue is, "we" just aren't supposed to talk about, or even acknowledge, that our "hobbys" and our civilian life ever overlap.

I am presuming she doesn't "know" this guy any better than she would have after he showed her his license. So, what is to be gained by providing details about their mutual aquintances, etc.?

Honesty *IS* the best policy, but telling everything you know isn't always the best thing to do.

It's reminding him about WHO introduced them that I think is out of line.

I agree that Legman should find another provider just to avoid any potential problems.  I am not sure how indiscreet the provider really was.  She did not tell Legman the name of the person who introduced them.  It probably would have been better if she had just told him that they had met at such and such a party and not even said that they had been introduced. However we all are sometimes guilty of hoof in mouth disease.  It seems a little bit of a jump to automatically assume that the person that introduced them knows the provider professionally.  At many parties you have Jim introducing Bob and Sue to each other and Jim barely knows either of them.

I assume she must have told Legman the person's name. How else would he know that the person does actually know him? Maybe I read into it, but that is how I took it. The jump to the assumption that the person has a professional relationship, or is aware of the girls vocation is precisely the problem. It’s a short leap, and a natural one to make. Either way, whether they do or they don’t, it’s a problem if the company mixes.

What makes you jump to the assumption that the introduction took place at a party?

Surprised, and a bit knocked off kilter by having an acquaintance contact her for an appointment... and probably was trying to jog his memory. I do not think she intended any harm by it.

You guys are always so ready to believe the worst. I kind of understand why, after some of what I've seen, but the fact is that not all of us are like that dumb tramp who tried to blackmail Bob Beckel.  

And she didn't KNOW that he didn't remember her... so I think on her part she was trying to be as honest as possible. Did she go post on the boards about it? Did she name him and their mutual acquaintance? Did she blab to their mutual friend?  THAT would be indiscreet, IMO.

Yanno we are not perfect... this would be a sticky situation for any of us to bump into, and to my mind, she handled it the best way she knew how.

Hugs*
Nicole

What makes you jump to that assumption.  If fact he indicates that he does not know who the person is that introduced him to her.  "While I have no memory of the meeting(I Must have been really pre-occupied)I'm concerned that my seeing her might get back to the person I know(I have no idea who the friend is)." The phrase "(I have no idea who the friend is)" indicates to me that he still does not know who introduced him to this lady.  If that is the case then she never did give him a name.

Yes you are right I made an unwarranted assumption about a party.  You apparently just did not read the post very well.

-- Modified on 9/20/2002 12:29:47 AM