Would it make any difference if you knew a provider you wanted to see had an SO?  What if you came to know that a provider you've seen several times has an SO?  Assuming all your appointments had been good, would it have any influence on your decision to see her again?

The ROCK,lol...he's a puttycat actor compared to__________

I hope she's not doing what I think she's doing


BADABING!

The only difference it has ever made for me is if the provider is "saving it" for her SO during the session. I have met several gals who won't reach orgasm or engage in certain activities which they only do with their SO. While it is certainly their right to proceed in conducting business in this manner, once I discover that I generally will not repeat business with them. I prefer the company of a provider who is comfortable just letting it all hang out as the mood may hit us.

-- Modified on 4/3/2004 9:48:11 PM

Yeah, it would make a difference to me. It would shatter the illusion for me.

Most CLIENTS have SO's, so what difference does it make if the provider has one as well????

-- Modified on 4/4/2004 4:20:27 PM

It would be sad to think that providers would have to feel that they have to hide the fact that they have an SO.

No.  I already know she's seeing other clients.  Of course, there's a difference between other clients and her SO, but I have always figured that the ladies I see probably have clients they like better.  If I really like her company/sessions, I'm just glad to be one of the people she chooses to spend time with.

I have been seeing the same provider for 3 years and has the SO,but always gives 110% whether a concert, dinner, or private
time and always works around my schedule

It does not matter to me.  I have seen providers who were single, married, and divorced.  Since I am not looking for a long-term relationship, the only reason to ask whether she has an SO is whether our encounters were safe for me and for her.

Electroguy

It only bothers me a little bit if he's in the other room watching TV, as happened once. Never saw her again - not because of that, but because DATY necessitated a layer of Saran wrap!

I have seen a few that I know are married. It doesn't affect my decision.

I would rather not know.

Don't you think that most providers have an SO?
Why would this be of a concern to you?
Providers don't like giving out much personal info for safety reasons.

That is probably true, but I don't have an SO, so it matters to me.

I want to f*ck her and not her SO.

I have somewhat the same view as db125 on this issue. I am single and currently do not have an SO. I have become somewhat jaded with respect to the whole civilian dating scene. I think the fact that I am single and not currently involved with someone means that I don't have to deal with the perception of a double standard, or an actual double standard that someone who is married might have to confront if he were to suggest that he would have a problem seeing a provider who has an SO.

Personally I would not be in the hobby if I were married or had an SO. That is my own personal viewpoint for my own reasons. I am not passing judgement on those who participate in the hobby who happen to be married or have an SO. I realize I may be in the minority in this community. There may be reasons/situations that permit people to rationalize/legitimize their activities in this community while married or in a committed relationship. Some may be more defensible than others. As I said I'm not passing judgement and perhaps it is somewhat obvious as to why I've chosen to use an alias. However there are in any group, and that would include this community, people of good character, good values with legitimate reasons (if not always legal) to participate in an activity or to make a conscious decision about
their own behavior that they consider acceptable. Then there are others who rationalize their behavior in such a way that their internal argument, no matter how flawed, results in the outcome that they desire. I think that applies to many areas of life, certainy not just the hobby.

I certainly would not see a provider who is married  or has an SO
and who has their SO on premises during the time she sees clients. That would simply be too awkward for me and broach the ethical boundaries I set for myself. I realize there may be men who are married to, or are the SO, of women who work as providers and are apparently able to deal with it. How they do it is beyond me.

I'm not so naive as to think that I know with certainty that a provider I may have seen either has or doesn't have an SO. So it is quite possible I have breached my own standard on this. If she is simply dating outside this community that might be somewhat different but as I said I have trouble answering the question in an absolute way.

Suffice it to say that it troubles me, I feel awkward about it, and I would avoid seeing a provider that I knew to be married or in a committed relationship.

Simply my perspective.



-- Modified on 4/4/2004 10:24:40 PM

asking where she is at, and what is taking so long.

The concept that there is only one way to conduct a relationship... hetero, monogamous, being the key words that I bet apply here. If you believe in alternatives to monogamy (helloooooooooooooooo to all the swingers of the world!), then it would not offend your moral sensibilities.  

It always amazes me to see people defending monogamy... I mean, LOL, after so much time of its NOT working (and of course, it's usually the women who get the short end of that particular stick), why bother? Obviously for the majority it doesn't work. So why not go with a poly relationship? (And kudos to all of you who CAN make monogamy work.. more power to you!!! To each their own, I always say.)

But, especially defending monogamy HERE on this board... !

So, essentially what you are saying is that it does not bother you to see a woman giving herself to any and all takers who will pay... as long as she does not ALSO receive love and affection in a committed relationship outside of her business.

Well, that's logical I suppose. In a sorta sick and twisted kinda way. But, MORAL??? Ummmm, I don't think so.

The only time I believe this should really affect the "fantasy" aspect of things, is when your fantasy is that the woman is in a relationship with YOU. Which, I would guess, her reviews can quickly dispell. This is why I don't like to refer to myself as a GFE... altho I may do all the things someone who is a GFE do, I do not want to be your girlfriend... don't even want you to think of me as your girlfriend.  I'm more, the girlfriend everyone wishes they had, at least once. LOL!

Or, perhaps, you believe that women are not deserving of love, their role in life is to play the whore for you, and THAT is why seeing a woman in a relationship would bother you? .......... Puts a different taste to your "morality" doesn't it? *blink!*

Oh well, conflict is, at least, INTERESTING! And I love to challenge beliefs... and if you put them out here on the boards, please do expect them to be challenged. Goddess knows all of my beliefs are frequently challenged and I love it! But I do not need you, or anyone else, to make my moral choices for me. I'm quite capable, thanks

BTW, all of my logic is based upon the fact that being in this 'biz is absolutely a MORAL choice for me. So if you believe that this is wrong or bad, we'll never be able to have a logical discussion about the rest of it.

Best,
Tamara

...in a more recent thread that offers a counterpoint to your posted response to me. It is from another provider who expresses more succinctly and directly the point I was trying to make,
at least in part.

http://theeroticreview.com/msgBoard/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=87927&boardID=12&page=1

The relevant part of her post in the event that the link does not work is as follows:

"If you meant can we do this and have an SO in the marital/carnal sense; No Way can I do that...I dont think that I would want to be with someone who was okay with my having sexual relations with others....something about that doesnt sit right in my world..."

Now I consider the view she expressed as far more realistic and emotionally informed than the viewpoint you seem to express. My personal viewpoint, nothing more!

I never stated in my post that there is only one way to conduct a relationship. I expressed a personal viewpoint with respect to seeing provider(s) who are married or have an SO. I was not attempting to defend monogamy as the only acceptable form of a relationship.

I made a point of stating that I was NOT passing judgement:
Taken directly from my post as follows:

"I am not passing judgement on those who participate in the hobby who happen to be married or have an SO."

In an attempt to clarify my position I'll take another quote from  a post of mine to that more recent thread as follows:

"The reason I would find it difficult to engage the services of a provider that I knew to be married or in a committed relationship would center on trying to put myself in her SO's place and have some sort of feel for how that might affect him, even if he seems to be OK with it. I personally would NOT be OK with it but that is merely my personal perspective. I'm not trying to be judgemental here."

"I was quite misinterpreted in an earlier thread about providers and SO's. Being male I approach this from the perspective of a male and I wonder about how some men are able to deal with their wife or SO working as a provider. I'm not suggesting that a provider is NOT entitled to a relationship outside of her work as a provider, is NOT entitled to experiencing LOVE, that is not my position at all. I was trying to imagine myself in the position of the man in such a relationship. There are evidently some men out there who can "handle" it. I would NOT include myself among them."


As for the quote below from your post:
"Well, that's logical I suppose. In a sorta sick and twisted kinda way. But, MORAL??? Ummmm, I don't think so."

I choose not to get into a name calling contest with you or suggest that when I have a different view than you hold that somehow you are sick and twisted or at the very least the implication that your logic is sick or twisted.


Further more I never suggested that I was somehow attempting to make choices for you, MORAL or otherwise, nor would I attempt to do so. You make your own choices as I make mine. If the notion of "a morality and ethics of convenience" applies so be it. If that's off the mark then pat yourself on the back and get on with your life.

However don't attempt to alter or distort another person's viewpoint just because that viewpoint perhaps, just perhaps, struck a chord with you in a way that perhaps you are attempting to avoid. I don't know if that's the case or not. Quite frankly I don't quite know what you were attempting to do other than display a little ego boosting bravado in stating how prepared you are to challenge those with a differing viewpoint than yours on this issue

Finally I have made several posts to these boards under my TER handle adamantly defending women, and their rights especially when there have been some rather condescending remarks made towards women in some threads on this board. I respect the women I have met in this community, the time I spend with them means something to me, I value sharing their time.

You know nothing more about me other than what you have read in my post. I intend to keep it that way and I would suspect on that we would at least be in agreement.

So with all due respect I haven't "blinked"

-- Modified on 4/5/2004 9:15:30 PM

-- Modified on 4/5/2004 9:22:17 PM