Have you ever connected so well with a hobbyist that you could see "really" dating them, or do you compartmentalize and keep business and relationships seperate?

DAMMIT...they are married so I just have wishful thoughts that they will return sooner than later...there is one in particular that I would date in a ny minute...he knows who he is

Sometimes men use women for sex and a bunch of other things. Sometimes women use men for sex and a bunch of other things.

The hobbyist you dealt with was an individual with his own desires, values and worldview that is all his own. Inferring from him that all hobbyists are unsuitable is unwise.

Structurally, it is no different than having a bad experience with a person who is (insert a race, ethnicity, religion or whatever here); and then using that inference to condemn all other members of that group.

Just as there are good men and bad men within the ranks of hobbyists; there are good women and bad women within the ranks of providers. (And even that is an oversimplification. It is not so cut and dried.)

Providers often yell and scream about stereotypes and double-standards when a hobbyist says something like "I would NEVER date a provider in real life" or makes some negative comment about "providers."

Many providers hasten to point out that his problem was with an *individual* and ought not be extrapolated to attribute malintent to an entire class of people.

Well, the same thing applies the other way.

I would encourage you to judge people as individuals rather than as members of a class.

There is one guy, everything about him is right.
He's the hottest man I ever seen, plus extremely smart, sweet, sexy and has the perfect tool and know how to use it
But, couple years ago he wanted to compete professionally (yes, he's an athlete too) and was in need of the best trainer out there to put him at the level he needed to be.
My SO is a trainer (specialized in athletes) and did fit the bill, he was the guy he needed to achieve his dreams.
I wanted to help him, so I had to make the hard decision: either keep him as a client (and possibly a future love fling) OR introduce him to my SO.
I did introduce him to my SO and, now, I cannot even have him as a client anymore because he's now my SO client (and friend).
Talk about irony, but I am very happy for him. He deserves the success he's having now.

That we had meet under different circumstances.

There are 2 that I would have dated in a heartbeat. Had it not been for a wife or how we meet or from another period in our life..

But, we didn't....

There are definitely hobbyists out there I'd be happy to "really" date. I've had my fair share of crushes BUT my business is not my personal dating service. One thing I couldn't abide is being asked to quit my business and lose my independence.

That was an amazing thing to do, very unselfish.

It would be completely unfair to ask a provider to stop providing in order to start dating.  But ultimately the discussion must come up.  Does she stop providing if it proceeds past dating?  If she doesn't stop doe he keep seening other providers?  If she does stop how does she keep her independence?

Difficult questions all around.  Answers are different for each pair of people.  I've seen it work and seen if fail.

Most providers will not date hobbyists for exactly the reasons she said.  And visa versa!

I understand your point, but must disagree.  Your words:  "Structurally, it is no different than having a bad experience with a person who is (insert a race, ethnicity, religion or whatever here); and then using that inference to condemn all other members of that group."

I personally know over a dozen women who have dated hobbyists.  It DOES NOT work.  There may be good intentions.  There may even be a small percentage who actually work!  But!  I personally would never date a hobbyist.  I even know of one hobbyist who befriended a new provider.  He flew her to see him a handful of times and NEVER paid her.  Instead he filled her head with BS about how he was going to leave his wife etc.  Riiiiight!  I would LOVE all the people on this board to know who he is, but I will stay out of it.  

I appreciate your point not to judge people as members of a class.  However, I also feel you are reaching here.  Hobbyists are a group.  Not a class.  To compare them to classes of race, religion, etc. is rediculous.  Hobbyists are men who pay women for sex.  Period.  Not a class of individuals in the true sense of the word.  

A hobbyist may not want to date a provider because he prefers someone more unexperienced or innocent.  I don't have a problem with that.  I don't think she is judging people as members of a class.  She has her own personal OPINION about hobbyist due to her own PERSONAL experiences with them.  I highly doubt she intends her personal opinion as malintent towards an entire class of people.  Once more, allow me to point this out:  Hobbyists are NOT a class of people.  They are a group of men paying women for sex!

I used to be a total GFE girl, multiple hours, overnights, romantic trips with clients.
Once I met my SO and things started to get serious between us, we just had a long talk about my "profession".
He knew, from the beginning, what I do for living and he had no problems with it, as long I did stop to offer certain things and reserved them just for him.
It was a fair request and my clients had to adjust their sessions with me, if they wanted to continue our business relationship.
I told them the truth, that I met someone wonderful and some things we used to do would not longer be available.
If you are honest with your SO & clients, is possible to be an escort and have a happy relationship with all the men in your life.

My conclusion would be for provdiders to avoid dating married men, not hobbyists.

My pool of personal, and/or anecdotal experiences exceeds your's, and I have had no worse experiences dating providers than I have "civvie" women. Of course I am not married, and there lies the difference.

Hobbyist/Provider relationships come with their own unique set of challenges, but to make generalazations regarding "all" hobbyists or "all" providers is patently unfair.

Each of us have finite limits regarding time, resources and energy. Given that, we consciously and unconscious make decisions to maximize our odds in maintaining our safety, and getting those things we seek after. Fairness is a great ideal, but really has little place in all of this.

what's your point?

Until the USING on both sides halts we're stuck with assholes around us.

Using blanket assertions.

You clearly claim that "it DOES NOT WORK".

I'm sorry i beg to differ.

You have been correct to claim "IT" works rarely.

Yes, I have.

It is my hope to build my career around people who I can genuinely throw myself into the arms of.

I must say, it makes for a wonderful way of life.  I'm deliriously happy with some of the people I've met.

I give them permission to be themselves, and they do the same for me. And as it turns out, who they are is fascinating, truth worthy and kind.

And best of all: sane. We both know what the other wants and what we're comfortable with, and it's a simple matter of being up front and having compatible expectations.

I think becoming a professional companion is a wonderful solution for any woman who wants to practice polyandry.  It's the only way it can function in a modern monogamous Judeo-Christian world. It has in fact worked for polyamorous women for centuries.

When you're spending weeks with one person on end,  putting your life into a state of suspending animation, constantly traveling to different cities while having a flexible enough schedule that you can be there whenever they desire, your lovers have to support you. It's nothing to compartmentalize, it's not extortion, or manipulation, it's not a dissociation or a suggestion that there are no real emotions involved.  If someone is going to devote their life to it, and wants to live a comfortable and stable financial life, then they need their lovers to help support them.

Further more, the best part of "bounded intimacy" is that there's no real basis for people to get jealous, and you have a fair way to split up your time between your various lovers that will not cause discontent. What it does compartmentalize, is the men from each other - which lessens the drama when women are polyandrous outside of professional companionship.  

Dating and professional companionship don't necessarily have to be separate. That's the point of being someone's mistress.



-- Modified on 5/25/2010 12:33:39 PM

I understand that people who have bad experiences will naturally derive "rules of thumb" from those experiences to better their odds of avoiding being taken advantage of and stuff.

There are experiences you've had that I don't. I've been the civie BF of a provider; and I've been a hobbyist who is a friend of a provider ... but I've never been a hobbyist who has dated a provider. (Nor do I wish to be.)

She DOES have a right to her opinion; of course. But her opinion, and yours ("would never date a hobbyist"); while you have a right to it, I believe could be formed better by looking at the intent rather than the content.

To an extent, I can see hobbyists and providers as "affinity groups." That is, people who voluntarily engage in similar behaviors. As the behavior is arguably illegal; a lot of negative inferences could be made. However, unlike another illegal affinity group such as a group of hit men; fundamental motivations for hobbying can be sufficiently complex and inter-related that assignation of negative motivation or correlation of other undesirable attributes is likely weak and misplaced.

Looking at the intent of a rule rather than the content is more difficult; but has greater applicability and flexibility.

I have a whole bunch of general rules that I apply to hobbying and dealing with providers.

Yet, for nearly every rule, I have broken it at some point for some particular lady based on something specific.

For example, I have a "First date is always one hour" rule. I tend to repeat, and I tend toward somewhat longer dates generally. But my general rule is that first dates be short.

But that is just a mindless rule. The INTENT of the rule is to keep me or a provider from feeling obliged to spend time with someone whose company we don't enjoy.

So when I am pretty confident of a mutually enjoyable first date; I might waive that rule. It's not as if someone is pointing a gun at me or something. LOL

The purpose of general rules is to keep us safe. But applying them blindly or in a blanket matter defeats their purpose by also "protecting" us from opportunity.

So rather than saying "I don't date hobbyists" a lady might be better off by applying the underlying intent of the rule (which is to avoid being taken advantage of by unscrupulous men), which would protect her from malicious men whether hobbyists or not; while still giving her the flexibility to explore.

So what I am saying is that whatever negative traits are correlating to hobbyists as a whole might also be found to correlate to stock brokers or pharmacists or any number of other affinity groups.

Rather than using a sort of shorthand in saying "I don't date hobbyists" it might work better overall to say "I don't date men with X, Y and Z character flaws."

I don't think we're disagreeing as to the intent -- but more as the method.

Either way I don't see it as a big deal, and agree that you and the other poster have a right to your opinions.

I simply think more positive outcomes could be produced differently.

Sweep him off his feet that is

You just sucked all of the oxygen out of here.LOL

in determining whether they could be interested in a genuine relationship with him.

A provider described this view to me this way:  "I could never be in a relationship with a man who paid me for sex".

... something else?  LOL

Executive summary.

If you have a rule, work from its intent rather than a literal interpretation.

And if you are woozy, have a seat so you don't fall down or something. LOL

So very true.

I do like this Intent situation..it keeps from making hard and fast rules and does give a little wiggle room if the signs are positive to alter ones choices.

It was a total relationship, NO business....I plan to reconnect with him in the near future!
We went our separate ways when I am came back to being a Provider...had to get back on my feet...etc...

Who knows what the future will hold!

Sad but true.

The term I have used if "other" for a client in the sense that an SP would never date them.

In terms of changing from a client to dating a provider? Yes, definitely happens, definitely possible, and probably one of the toughest relationships to succeed at, but it can be done.

I am glad this has worked for you.  The two of you adressed the key questions and decided what worked for the two of you.  I agree for it to work adjustments are needed, and those adjustments are different for different people.

Good luck, I hope it continues to work for you.

I never thought about actually dating a hobbyist, but something a long the lines of a sweet, TGTBT sugardaddy pops in my fantasies kinda often

"I could never be in a relationship with a man who paid me for sex"

That is so hipocritical it's not funny.  She could never see someone who stooped so low as to pay her for sex, but same person who had been paid for sex would go along their merry way "being in a relationship" with someone who they were hiding their profession from.  

No other way to read that one.  Being a part of it (as a client or provider), or accepting it from your SO...so what line hasn't been crossed there?  You're either hiding from your SO, or he knows of it and accepts it.  In which case someone needs to explain how that makes him a better, more dateable man than someone who "paid me for sex".  Maybe I get it.  "Pimp, okay, John, not so much".

Please tell your provider friend to try and go around proclaiming her profession, yet not date someone who stooped so low as to pay her for sex.  See where that gets her.

I understand this is not the ideal way to meet a serious significant other.  Who wants to tell that story around Thanksgiving dinner?  But it appears your friend deems someone who pays her for sex as unworthy of her.  All the while she's selling herself to strange men, yet feels she's more worthy than the men she sells herself to.

Pot, meet the kettle.

And then reality sinks in and I realize this is only a fantasy and should remain that way.

perhaps what this provider meant by her declaration was not that she considers hobbyists to be low, vile creatures unworthy of her awesomeness, but that she believes a hobbyist may always look down upon HER.

we all know that many men within the hobby world have a rather negative (and mightily hypocritical) view on providers. and no, i am not talking about the misogynistic jerks and brutes of the world...those are obvious. i am talking about your average guy who greatly enjoys the company of providers, love what they do for him, and may even befriend a provider...but maintain a deep-seated belief that something must be fundamentally WRONG with a woman who chooses to provide companionship and sex to men for money. she must have past abuse issues, or severe self-esteem issues, or total lack of morals, or SOMEthing. yet one day they may find themselves becoming completely bewitched by a particular provider and wish to take that relationship to the level of a civie relationship. they try and stuff down their doubts and go forward. but always, always, there is that part of them that sees this woman as "damaged" and "less than."

and perhaps this provider recognizes the none too small possibility of this, and this is why she would never date a hobbyist.

and of course your theory could be correct and she is simply an egotistical hypocrite, but i just wanted to throw an alternative out there for you.

Sorry Lilli,

I'm not buying it because what she said was she could never be in a relationship with someone who paid her for sex.  She didn't say that she couldn't be in a relationship with someone who knew SHE took money in exchange for sex.  It sounds to me that a hobbyist is good enough for her to take money from, but not good enough to have a relationship with. I guess that makes us all tricks, johns, [insert favorite euphemism here] to her.

I guess I have a different take on things than others in the hobby. I tend to accept people at face value and try not to judge them based on what they do for a living or how they choose to live their lives. I also feel that if I call a lady I've seen as a client a whore, that makes me nothing but a trick/john/asshole. You just can't condemn anyone that is in this hobby without condemning yourself as well.

Just my .02

Good post Lilli. I agree that possibility exists.  But I think, from the nature of the statement "I could never date someone who paid me for sex", that she sees those who have done so as unworthy of her, or of lesser value than someone who hasn't paid her for sex.  Sounds like the whole "do what I say, not as I do" thing.  That burns me.  I believe there are many great men and women who partake in this hobby, for whatever personal reasons.  My own are significant (was greatly damaged due to a bad relationship), and my ATF's are pretty significant and understandable as well.

I don't want to be judged by a provider because I entered into this "hobby", just the same as I don't judge a provider for doing so.  If they're a solid person, they're solid, end of story. I'd sooner date a trustworthy, solid provider than I would some civie who couldn't be trusted.  All other things being equal, the ONLY reason I'd have a tough time dating a provider is because I honestly don't know I could be completely okay with her sleeping with other men when it came to a point that I'd truly fallen for her (not johns, but men).  No different (and perhaps even more understandable and acceptable to me) than were she a civie who just couldn't stay faithful.  Given the choice, I'll take the provider who's heart is with me, and not the civie who's heart isn't.

The fact that we (as men) may pay for companionship from time to time, or they (as women) take money for it, has not a damn thing to do with what's inside that person, how trustworthy they are, or what kind of relationship potential they have.

The thought that a provider, taking money to provide this "service", yet looking down on or seeing those very same men she provides the service to as unworthy is more than a little troubling and is quite the display of her true character.  THAT provider would never need worry about me pursuing another appointment with her, let alone a friendship or civie relationship with her.

I have a friend, who is a provider, who I hold as one of my all time greatest friendships.  Were she to ever leave her SO (not happening), I'd date her in a minute. Extraordinary woman, and what she does for a living has not a damn thing to do with that.  Were I to find she thought less of me as a man because of how we met, our civie friendship would be over (professional relationship ended a year ago).

There are many hobbiests who are cheating on their wives or SO's while engaging in this activity.  What makes them (or us as a whole) any damn different than "the hot guy at the end of the bar"?  Are the percentages any greater?  I hang out with a lot of guys, and I don't think so.

...don't you think?

I have had many, but there seems to be a line you gotta know how to enjoy yourself. It's one of the most beautiful things, and then you go your separate ways until you meet again.....