Let's grant for the moment that you are the world's foremost authority on what you intend; and the rest of us not being mind readers -- things are as you say: that we misinterpreted your intent. Fair enough.
One reason this could be is that maybe we are generally aware of factors that you are not; or have at least given consideration to things that perhaps you have accepted without question.
There is a difference between a provider and a civie. Yes, I realize that in some contexts civies are essentially prostitutes and providers are civies. BUT -- within the context in which YOU see providers, they are NOT civies.
The tell-tale giveaway is that you provide cash money AND the person is using a Fake Name.
Just a basic hint -- if you have to pay them for sex, they do NOT love you in a romantic sense; and if they use a Fake Name with you -- no matter what else they may say, at some level they do NOT trust you.
Let me drive that point home to you again: the woman does not love you, and she does not trust you. (1)
Let me contrast that with a civie.
A civie can certainly have sex sans love; but in general she will reserve sex at least for someone who she thinks has the possibility of being worthy of love. Furthermore, you know her name, her address, her employer, where she went to school, often her parents, etc. There is a level of TRUST there.
Assuming that you are being honest about your intentions; you have seriously mistaken the difference in the situation with a civie and a provider.
By all means, with a civie, you can reasonably expect that in a committed, supportive and loving relationship where both people know and love each other, that partners will be willing to extend themselves beyond their typical comfort zone for little more than the asking. Perhaps there will be some negotiation, etc. And sometimes there will even then be outright refusal, and continued insistence could damage the relationship. But at least within such an environment, it is reasonable to TRY.
But, consider for a moment an entirely different kind of relationship -- one where the woman gives you a fake name, obscures even basic facts about herself (including age, etc.), you have no clue where she lives, you'll never meet her parents, etc. She doesn't trust you as far as she can throw you because while you were in the restroom, she was counting the money to make sure you weren't shorting her.
Why did she give you a fake name? Come on. Think about it. Yes, I realize the fake names serve many purposes. But in all of those other purposes if she felt the man could be trusted, she would reveal her real name to him when he entered. She gave you a fake name because she wants to keep you from stalking, threatening or otherwise molesting her. She wants -- nay, NEEDS -- to be COMPLETELY IN CONTROL, even of basic communications, in order to feel even marginally safe.
That means she is just a single wrong move away from feeling that you pose an eminent THREAT.
A person who is one step away from feeling you to pose an eminent threat is going to see your question in an entirely different light. Her comfort zone is hers and hers alone. Even the SUGGESTION of compromising that zone, via ANY means, is tantamount to her feeling a sacred space has been violated.
Look, I dunno who you are. Maybe you are just some wet-behind-the-ears newbie and you are unfamiliar with the GFE.
The GFE is an act. A total absolute act. (2) For all you know, the second you walk out the door she is washing her mouth out with Comet and projectile vomiting. Human beings did not evolve to separate well between visually implanted memories of things that are fictitious and things that are real.
But let me explain something. In the real world with a civie you aren't paying, circumstances similar to a GFE generally will prevail once a whole bunch of prerequisites are met. So sex with a civie is confirmation of an already existing situation. In fact, research indicates that one reason why men have a drive for sex with their wives is their need for sex as confirmation of their continued value to the woman. In the real world, then, sex is not the means -- it is an end that demonstrates your value.
In the hobby world, the GFE is just an act. It is provided without regard to whatever virtues you might possess simply in exchange for cold hard cash; and it is generally provided by someone who doesn't even trust you with the most basic information you would get from a civie.
The GFE, however, can easily be misinterpreted as having the same value as civie sex -- that is, as confirmation of the woman valuing the man.
Because sex existed in our evolution for millions of years with certain meanings; whereas money has existed for only a short time (just a few hundred years for most of us) and the GFE for even less ... some men are simply not equipped to be able to distinguish between the various meanings of sex within a p4p context without instruction or experience.
So you are reacting to a provider and the GFE as though you were dealing with a civie having sex. It is not the same thing. (3)
In addition to some providers seeing your suggestion as threatening; some hobbyists will also see your suggestion as threatening because they are intimately familiar with providers because they are married to current or former providers, or personally know providers who have been pushed out of their comfort zones and suffered for it.
These providers and hobbyists are not going to react to your suggestion kindly.
It is important to know and understand your audience. It is very easy to be misunderstood in an environment where there may be a large body of assumed knowledge, there is a constant sense of potential danger, and the somatic components of your communications are necessarily missing.
(1) I realize that there are situations with polyamorous providers, certain sorts of courtesans and also friendships that develop from time to time between providers and hobbyists in which these conditions are different. So I know I am not speaking about ALL situations. But I am definitely describing the preponderance of transactions within the "hobby."
(2) I realize that in the cases of some providers generally due to their mindset and methods of selecting clients, it is not an act. And I also realize that there are particular provider/hobbyist combinations where it may not be an act. But, in general, according to postings by many providers, it IS an act. That is not an adverse value judgment.
(3) In same cases it is close to the real thing; but these are exceptional cases, not the rule.
