Everybody has different personality quirks that make some approaches to various activities a better or worse match than others. None of these personality quirks should in any way be seen as denoting some sort of inferiority or superiority. They all exist for the reason that, over the millenia, they have survived the hot forges of evolution. So nothing I'm about to say should be seen as picking on anyone.
There are "let's fuck and now I hafta run" hobbyists; and there are "let's connect and fuck" hobbyists. This latter category is, I would guess, about 12-15% of hobbyists overall.
I belong to this latter group.
My "12" experiences are invariably with women that I just plain like as people. I admire them, respect them, and see them as equals. They are people whose company I sincerely enjoy; and would enjoy even without the sex.
When you combine that with sex, it is impossible to avoid some sort of emotional response. Nor would I wish to. To me, it is an inseparable part of what makes the experience a "12."
And it is easy for me to manage any emotional aspects because I don't have even the slightest tendency toward possessiveness. So I can simultaneously have very strong positive feelings about someone, and leave all boundaries intact without contradiction. (But what percentage, even of men who seek connection, are like that?)
But for me, on the hobby end, this is easy. I only have a few sessions in a year. It's easy for me to limit those sessions to just a handful of women without it being a problem because that is not how I make my living. I'm not going to have a hard time making the mortgage because I didn't have enough sessions. I'm also not usually going to have a problem with providers falling madly in love and stalking me either.
On the provider side, it would seem to me that having a preference for sessions like that would work fine if the provider has a sort of mindset compatible with "love without possession;" and that the concept could be abstracted to an ideal rather than the individual so much.
But there is going to be a numbers problem in two ways.
First, while the provider may have no problems properly contextualizing those emotions in a healthy way; the number of clients who could do so without explicit instruction/training would seem small -- I'll guess maybe 15% tops.
That is why most clients avoid emotion altogether and essentially "get busy fucking." In fact, many find the very concept of emotion within that realm extremely threatening; and appropriately so.
This is NOT a character flaw -- for them it is the only *healthy* way to do this. Denigrating them for just wanting to fuck and run would be like denigrating a provider for wanting to do a screening.
While *I* can be entirely enmeshed yet have zero issues with "I've fallen and can't get up" or with any sort of possessiveness or boundary crashing; the simple fact is that this is an unusual circumstance. Most people act in response to emotion, rather than placing it secondary. They simply cannot go, safely, where I can go.
(One problem people have consistently is projection. People who can't imagine being able to emotionally connect without experiencing all sorts of issues will idiotically accuse the hobbyists who seek connection of crashing boundaries, falling and unable to get up, being "manginas" as though they are less than men, etc.
On the other hand, some hobbyists who can't imagine hobbying without connection will idiotically accuse the hobbyists who avoid it of being knuckle-dragging morons, etc.
The simple fact is that both are entirely valid; and both need to recognize their mutual validity. Also, both need to gravitate to the specific types of providers that are best equipped to deal with their respective hobby styles so that everyone benefits. Now, back to my points ...)
And the percentage of people of either sex who can do that would seem to me to be quite small in all likelihood. Like I said -- maybe 15% (tops!) unless they have specifically studied and practiced or have the benefit of a wonderful personal instructor.
My concern in this first point is that providers who specifically seek this out could disproportionately find themselves encountering problems with hobbyists who have fallen and can't get up.
One very sharp provider, Ms. Solalove, has even tried to address this in some beautiful writing on her web page. Obviously, she wouldn't have addressed this as a means of instruction of hobbyists if she didn't feel it was useful.
Second, you can't pay the mortgage by excluding 85% of the hobbyist population that is primarily interested in fucking and leaving. These are the bread and butter than gets the bills paid. You don't want them excluded, and you most certainly don't want them to feel that some sort of deep emotional stuff is a necessary component of seeing you.
So, it may be something worth pursuing to make sure you have a few clients of the 12% variety -- provided you can make sure they aren't "fallen and can't get up" material -- but I simply can't imagine they would be your bread and butter.
The key is to do this without alienating the vast majority of hobbyists out there who will keep the lights on.