the best sex I have ever had has been characterized by a sort of ebb and flow of, or exchange of dominance -
a recent example with an Asian provider whose English communication skills were limited but who could apparently read my mind - or some other of my bits - this in the midst of our hour and a half together - she sat on my face, took me by the hair, and used my lips and tongue to pleasure herself orally and anally, and got off quite well doing so - then lay with me kissing me passionately - and after an interval she assumed the doggie position and indicated that she wanted a good hard pounding and would not at all be averse to having her tushie spanked and her hair pulled in the bargain - to which "end" I gave her a quite good and proper seeing to - much to her evident satisfaction the entire appointment really went like this - at first subtly and building in intensity - consisting of these ebbs and flows and exchanges of dominance, concomitantly with a significant increase in passion throughout.... Now I am generally happy with a fairly plan vanilla GFE - but this sort of exchange rocks my world so first off, I am wondering how providers in general feel about being on the receiving end of expressions of dominance in turn, given that safety concerns with unknown men have to be at issue, and also how many providers out there would find this interesting, in the context of pay for play. A timely world on how to go about approaching this conversation with providers in general without seeming, well, dangerous (lol) would not come amiss -speechless.
You have to understand the 'dominance' factor doesn't come naturally for a lot of men, at least I have found. If they have to 'ask' or attempt to 'act' dominant, it simply doesn't work, at least with me. It has to be 'part' of his makeup as a man. No 'words' ever need to be expressed to 'be' dominant hence the language barrier becomes void then.
You are either dominant or you're not as a man I believe. I have been with less than a handful of truly dominant men as part of their makeup. They were not made any other way and could not act any other way. Only one ever came close to 'taming' this wild one lol, and usually no words or very few words were ever said. He carried a very succinct 'presence' about him. If you have it, you can't fake it. And a connection between two individuals in this realm can be ridiculously profound if 'it' is there.
Damn lol, why did you have to make me remember. Guys like that don't come around every day. He was one I won't ever, I mean ever forget.
But let's get something straight. You are correct. I, as a provider, wouldn't let any man 'dominate' me here in this world anything over the 'vanilla' of dominance, no way, no how. The other gentleman was part of my 'real' world and way before 'Taylor'. They are two totally different worlds. It would take someone in this world on a completely different level to take it to any level of true 'dominance' like how it should be 'played', not 'acted'.
-- Modified on 5/19/2014 8:18:30 PM
I guess I'm and odd type - I find pure submissive to be boring actually. Best long term relationship of my life was with a Domme who provided bdsm services to women but who liked this sort of give and take and would egg me on until she got the dominance that she herself desired....
In my personal life I like it best when a lady responds well to some dominance but likes to make a bit of a contest of it :p to me it is the sort of ebb and flow or exchange of dominant roles that I like - I do not crave being dominated at all - but I do like when a lady asserts herself and takes what she wants from me - as long as she is willing to take as good as (usually better 
than she gives.... I do love an edge player :p
-- Modified on 5/19/2014 8:35:01 PM
There always has to be an exchange of some part. But my point was, the exchange has to be real, not faked.
And it is 'always' a game. That's why those relationships are so fun. If the 'mind' can be won over, which doesn't happen too easily for me because I don't buy into a lot of crap, then it's on.
I'm a hard sell in the real world, not here LOL
a very talkative sub. lol
You are more than welcome to 'think' of me what you like. I'm not stopping you. You're certainly not alone in that camp. Think away ...
But when it comes to submissive.... hell no. 
I bet I'm not anywhere near as talkative as you are. Lol
Think away .........
"pure" submissiveness is boring only for those more drawn to superficiality and games than stark truth and authenticity. now of course, this does not mean that the true submissive experience will be every man's cup of tea. but "boring?" that's just offensive.
i would also agree with your assertion that there is always some sort of "game" in play. if any part of my experience with my Master were a game, even for one brief moment, i would be devastated and disgusted. for some of us submission and Dominance are simply natural expressions, no more a game or role than our DNA. and for those i serve, including those men who were clients, i always gave of myself honestly, and provided nothing but authentic submission utterly void of any kinky and shallow "games." for the men naturally wired in such a way, they will accept nothing less
it's something you're born with or learned during the growing-up stage. Pretty damn hard for a shy or submissive guy to change to a dominant kind of guy especially after he's all grown up and no longer a kid.
Exception might be when there's something traumatic / dramatic happened that significantly changed the way he is.
A lot of b-schools seem to disagree though, they seem to think that dominance and/or leadership can be trained and learned by learning the traits of leaders and following them. What do you think?
I have been in one leadership role or another for most of my life - military, business etc - I am of the personal opinion that leaders are born, not taught -
I've seen many people attempt to lead by following all of the best advice / techniques and fail at it -
and I've seen natural born leaders "do" a lot of it wrong and inspire passionate devotion
I think it is the same thing with intro/extroversion, dominance/submission etc. It's a matter of how one is wired....
It always 'rises to the occasion' for me. 
fabricated. You are either a natural born leader your whole life or a follower. There is no inbetween.
Love your words here.
In my case, I was quite content to follow for many years until I got good in my profession. Over time, I've developed strong convictions about how things should be done, and have become much more comfortable leading both my clients and my staff. The difference for me is that with experience I have developed real convictions about how things need to be done to achieve the results that I want to see.
I have seen "natural" leaders that know little, its not pretty. I don't think its black and white.
Love your words here.
I do hear what you are saying, however, I still believe it can be rather black and white as far as leaders vs followers in this world. Followers are the majority in any realm anywhere on this planet. Leaders come few and far between who truly know how to 'lead', but it is instilled in them to lead. Following is not an option for them on any level. Whether they succeed or fail is not the point, they are doing things they need to do 'their' way and how they seem fit. And it's usually through their failures that they usually grow to be the fiercest of leaders, but it was and is always there inside of them ... to lead.
just because you have the qualities to inspire and command followers and devotees does not mean that you are leading them in a direction that is good for them -
that is the story of the 20th century in general
and American politics in particular....
nothing more dangerous than an effective leader who does not care about the wellbeing of those he or she leads - or who is just not in touch with reality....
I guess only with the blue pill... LMAO
I have tears in my eyes from your comments on this post. Never change DA
And those with the necessary experience are the ones leading those "natural" leaders along. Ha ha
Part of what makes first meetings so electric is discovering the balance in this area. If a woman is too dominant or too submissive, it's not as exciting. Where it goes after the first two minutes of the session is largely based on that discovery and the mesh of dynamics we approach each other with. Most providers want to be in control of the session structure (where it happens, what the menu consists of, what boundaries we observe), so that gives them like the first-move advantage. Were it chess, they'd always start with the white pieces. And this is a healthy challenge, whichever way it goes.
Of course, coming out "on top" doesn't always mean being the most dominant in the usual sense. Giving each other permission to take charge is an important way to explore each other's sexuality. And taking charge without permission is an even better way (IMO).
The energy dynamics are also important for me. She might have a higher or lower intensity about her, and sometimes I find our two dynamics becoming the same. But that happens with everybody during the actual act, picking up the same rhythm, etc. How our dynamics gel or harmonize during the buildup is, for me, a more exciting exploration.
The thread below asked, "How well do we know...?" And the question implied how well do we know each other's history or outside life. The ebb and flow the OP refers to here deals with a more important way (IMO) of knowing each other. Experiencing the person as they initiate and react. It's like going to a Symphony orchestra playing works of Beethoven. I don't want to learn about where the various musicians studied or how Beethoven went about composing his symphonies, I much more want to experience and enjoy the music, the finished work. In this way I "come to know" the orchestra and the composer, even though I couldn't really tell you much about who they are.
Sex is more fundamental and at the same time more creative (IMO), but the metaphor is close enough.
I agree with you to the extent that when two people have good chemistry and if neither is strongly oriented as dominant or submissive, there is an exchange of initiative that make for good sex - I think I am speaking of something a bit more pointed in this case though perhaps the difference is one of degree and not of kind - and I also think based on my slice of experience that it is something that is a bit more limited with providers than otherwise - anyone observing the session I mentioned would have thought that one or the other of us was quite a dominant type if they had not seen enough of the encounter to observe the exchange or roles. I don't really know what to make of this but I have experienced this sort of dynamic exchange of roles most frequently with Asian women - provider or otherwise... again though I have a number of experiences to draw from certainly not enough to be statistically significant.....
Perhaps it is even "special" in terms of kind. I feel a difference in GFE whenever the woman seems to abandon the usual "routine." Maybe all I'm referring to here is not starting off with BJ OR DATY, but including those activities later in the session. I don't know. If breaking it down to positions and such, that deviation stands out as the easiest facto to point to.
One lady took me by surprise with her approach. After a comfortable prelude of light kissing and caressing over Champagne, I took a shower. When I entered the bedroom, she was kneeling on the bed in doggie position, grinding her ass at me invitingly and glancing over her shoulder. There was a condom between her ankles, and I put it on and did her. Why was that oddly dominant/submissive play? It's not easy to say. She was in a submissive position, but definitely taking charge in what she wanted. Who was dominant? Who was submitting to whose desires? It was definitely a major factor in the energy between us, but, after the session, not (to me) obvious as to how it worked.
Was this spontaneous or planned? Maybe that experience comes close to the dynamic you speak of.
your 'every move' by the minute of life LOL. I don't. And that certainly goes for any date. 'Planned' does not work on any level, you should know this. I'm actually surprised I have to tell you of all harmonious people this very notion.
Learn to be spontaneous ... it's the spice of life.
I often feel that the PROVIDER had a set pattern that she follows.
Much like:
1) hug,LFK, chat
2) DFK, Enter bedroom (shower, etc.)
3) BBBJ
4) DATY
5) K9, 69, or CG
6) MISH & remaining positions
7) 1st pop
8) cuddling & 2nd BJ
9) second pop
Frankly, the predictability of that routine gets old.
-- Modified on 5/20/2014 9:27:48 AM
those girls who recycle guys hourly who look at you as a damn # and not a human being. To each his own, but if you don't want 'routine' don't see 'routine'.
I don't think I've ever done anything in the same routine EVER...that would personally freak me out. LOL Each guy is different, each date starts different and ends different. How in the hell can it go the 'same'. Wow that's just bizarre to me now that I think about it. And thanks, now I have this mental disturbing image of a very very odd factory of johns coming in, recycling the same girls over and over again on this conveyor belt who perform the actions over and over again. Thanks WB. Ewwwwwwwwwww LOL. You are talking to a very visual person here lol. My imagination is odd and wild to say the least.
Yeah, that mental image of the conveyor belt haunts a lot of us.
A lot of what this whole "get to know your provider" stuff stems from that, I'll bet. Wanting to be treated as "something special," some men try to learn more about the provider than she's normally comfortable sharing--about her home life, history, likes and dislikes.
Maybe the only way I differ is that I want to feel special be tuning into the energy she runs on. To learn what she feels is sexually pleasing to a man, that sort of thing. All of this can be totally non-verbal, but try, for example, to ask a provider for a non-verbal session, where nothing is spoken (or mimed, gestured, indicated) from the time I walk in the door until I'm getting dressed to leave, and you won't BELIEVE the responses some of them give.
So, bring some wine, chitchat, ease into a blowjob, etc. right down the 9-point routine I mentioned. Those who get it simply get it. No problem. But most can't even imagine such a thing. As far as it JUST HAPPENING spontaneously, that would be even rarer, and probably only because we didn't speak each other's languages. Which isn't the same thing at all.
That's why I repeat a lot, with excursions out, and besides--I wouldn't want EVERY session to be non-verbal.
Complicated to explain, Taylor, but yeah, escorts who have the same numbers lined up like a club act they want to stick to are sort of...too common...? At least on the West Coast. Haven't ever had sex with a provider in New York. So, wouldn't know how universal this is.
Wouldn't be so bad even at that if they didn't all have pretty much the same act.
agree completely -
I prefer to break the pattern very near the outset -
some warm-up is a good thing when meeting someone new - a little get to know you goes a long way - or at least get a feel for you, get comfortable, from the provider perspective, find some reason to like you for an hour or so :
but sometimes it is not at all necessary....
but yeah, I don't let it go like that.... it does become repetitive - probably for the provider as well -
every interaction is different - it is just as important for the provider as for the customer to find and go with the flow and break the preconceived routine....
When dom/sub play ends up being are we or are we not going to break out of the standard routine, things flatten.
Sometimes the energy dynamics tend to suggest fantasies, but even "role play" seems limited to a dozen textbook examples.
Usually, that gets half setup before the session. A provider will suggest wearing a schoolgirl outfit or a secretary outfit, meaning of course the obvious professor or boss roles, but those are not at all the type of role-play that I enjoy or would want to explore. I usually end up suggesting a sarong, as that leads AWAY from standard pretend games, and not toward anything specific. But role-play is just a fitting form, the dynamics, chemistry, energy pitches and ability to simply tune in to each other make up the plaster poured into the form.
Because some women "get it" right off the bat, while others seem to respond with slack-jawed confusion, I tend to repeat with those willing and able to go where things take us. I guess committing and trusting with the confused would also lead SOMEWHERE (and it might be a lively time), but...for me that's not what it's about.
Besides, role-play is only one option, and requires too much forethought usually.
Once, when asked if there was anything special I wanted her to wear, I responded, "No, I don't want you to wear anything," and she actually got the picture. That was good. Other women, seem to miss the point. Most of them
Absolutely not. Not here not anywhere. It is not a turn on in the least for me.
And yes I have tried it.