Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

whitechocolate · 09-27-2010, 11:59 AM

That is why I use the term "infatuation" rather than love. I agree that Love is very complex. Infatuation usually means a short term intense passion feuled by dopamine and it often irrational. The sex centers are on overdrive so the passion in the sessions is very very intense. This state usually decreases after a few months or so but it is fun while it lasts. The relationship can still stay strong and be ongoing.

Guest110911 · 09-28-2010, 04:53 PM

i wouldnt call it love. it would be like falling in love with someone from a reality show. think about it...the women are bein nice to you...for $$....so you return with more $$. i mean, sure its great...some guys will get all big in the head thinking 'this beautifuly woman is all abou tme' but in the end...that is what she is being paid to do. So what if she gets to know the guy and starts to think...hey, he is a great guy...and has a lot of $$...i bet i could love him and get out of this line of work. pretty woman was just a movie...and notice it had no 'Part II'

whitechocolate · 09-28-2010, 06:37 PM

Fortunately, most of the clients do realize it is a fantasy game with the provider just doing her job of being an exceptional erotic actress but that doesnt stop the client from becoming infatuated with her to fuel his arousal and enjoyment while it lasts. It is a fun game.

PhantomofTheOpera · 09-28-2010, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whitechocolate

Fortunately, most of the clients do realize it is a fantasy game with the provider just doing her job of being an exceptional erotic actress but that doesnt stop the client from becoming infatuated with her to fuel his arousal and enjoyment while it lasts. It is a fun game.

there are signs everywhere

Alex Lieberman · 09-28-2010, 09:33 PM

I really don't think some guys get it. I just had a client send me an e-mail asking me if we could have dinner or lunch once a month just to talk and catch up. When I explained that I'd be happy to do that as long as he understood that I would still have to be compensated for my time he was upset and hurt.

I provide a service and that service is me and my time.....no matter where and when our time together takes place.

whitechocolate · 09-29-2010, 01:34 PM

Some guys dont get it and fantasize a true romantic relationship which can be very uncomfortable for the provider to deal with but others are just manipulative in trying to get extra time with a provider for dinner or a movie feeling that you need to eat or have some recreation so why not do it with them particularly if they pay. You just need to keep reminding them of the REALITY of it all.

charlestudor2005 · 09-29-2010, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Lieberman

I really don't think some guys get it. I just had a client send me an e-mail asking me if we could have dinner or lunch once a month just to talk and catch up. When I explained that I'd be happy to do that as long as he understood that I would still have to be compensated for my time he was upset and hurt.

I provide a service and that service is me and my time.....no matter where and when our time together takes place.

I don't have a problem with this...as long as I get all the time for which I pay, and the service is impeccable. Oftentimes, neither quality is present.

PhantomofTheOpera · 09-29-2010, 10:16 PM

Alex, yes, you are very right because some guys really don't get it and what is worse is they let it go to their head. However, some girls really don't get it either as they tell their patrons how much they want, or love, them because of their own insecurities. What those providers are really doing is being manipulative in order to make themselves feel better because they can't deal with the reality of their situation.

One gender is not anymore clueless than the other but for a provider to cross the line by doing what I described above, that, in my view, is worse but then I am a guy who was stupid enough to believe the lies, so what do I know.

Laurentius · 09-29-2010, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Lieberman

I really don't think some guys get it. I just had a client send me an e-mail asking me if we could have dinner or lunch once a month just to talk and catch up. When I explained that I'd be happy to do that as long as he understood that I would still have to be compensated for my time he was upset and hurt.

I provide a service and that service is me and my time.....no matter where and when our time together takes place.

I don't disagree that you should be compensated generally for time spent with clients. I make a practice of compensating escorts for non-sex time.

However, I wish to disabuse you of the notion that your disclaimer is correct. It's a disclaimer. A massage. It is not true. That service is NOT merely you and your time.

Here is how you can test whether you are correct, or I am correct.

Remove sex and all sexual acts completely from your menu, even for repeating regulars. Anybody who shows up doesn't even get a kiss, just nice conversation about strictly non-sexual topics.

Do this for a year. But you must maintain your rates at their current level for all meetings with clients. Continue advertising of course.

At the end of the year, let me know how your business is doing.

You and I both know you won't be doing that experiment because you know that you are not just selling idle conversation. You are selling sex and when you take sex off the menu; you are worth what a real (i.e. non-sex) escort gets paid -- at MOST, if you are devastatingly beautiful, about $85/hr. So assuming you currently charge more than that, you'd no longer be providing after a year was up, reluctantly or otherwise.

Alex Lieberman · 09-29-2010, 11:24 PM

I won't be doing that experiment because it doesn't make sense. I am providing a service. That service is my time with someone. What they want to do with that time with me is their decision. If they want a sexual experience fine, if they want conversation that is fine too but the hour will cost the same no matter what happens. What bothers me is when a man enjoys my companionship but thinks because he is isn't having sex he doesn't need to compensate me. You know as well as I do a good companion is the whole experience. Otherwise you could fuck a knot in a tree or use your hand.

Camille · 09-29-2010, 11:58 PM

One of the biggest ???? I have had..and this has just been brought to the forefront of my mind by the above back and forth between Alex and Laurentius....is when women advertize a seperate rate for a "coffee date" or "platonic time" only..or a "public only" date etc..you get the drift. I can see what they are doing but hell, if I were LE I would be ON THAT like shit off a shovel. I see that as making a differentiation that (for safetys sake) doesn't need to be made! Thoughts?

Laurentius · 09-30-2010, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camille

One of the biggest ???? I have had..and this has just been brought to the forefront of my mind by the above back and forth between Alex and Laurentius....is when women advertize a seperate rate for a "coffee date" or "platonic time" only..or a "public only" date etc..you get the drift. I can see what they are doing but hell, if I were LE I would be ON THAT like shit off a shovel. I see that as making a differentiation that (for safetys sake) doesn't need to be made! Thoughts?

From my perspective, I actually like this idea because it gives me options. Sex can be a pain in the @ss. There is the before sex super-scrubbing, the after-sex super-scrubbing and all that jazz. Sometimes I just want to enjoy the lady's company and just be normal. So for that, I think a "public date" rate is a great idea so long as the lady doesn't try to turn it into something else. (She can always sell me on a LATER sex date, just not try to turn THAT date into a sex date. But really it isn't needed. If I'd pay a lady for public, I'd pay her for private.)

From an LE perspective, I think differentiating between a public and private date is not an issue. After all, being alone behind closed doors with anyone who is unknown, even if it is platonic, carries risks that don't exist in public.

And considering how many escorts (unwisely, IMO) put specific sex-act menus on their sites; the sex/no-sex designation doesn't do any more damage than they have already done. Though I agree with you that absent those other specific menus it would be unwise.

So public/private good, sex/no-sex bad. LOL

Here's a funny anecdote.

I once emailed a provider asking for a public date at her full rate. That's all I mentioned other than saying rather vaguely that I liked her website.

She sent me back this amazing screed about how she didn't want to spend time with a man who didn't think she was attractive enough for sex.

I was scratching my head for a while over that one. LOL

discreetgent · 09-30-2010, 12:14 AM

But what about those times, rare as they may be, when love does enter the equation? Too further complicate things, not only does love enter the equation but the gent is secure enough so that the lady not only continues as an escort but does so mostly on multi-day dates?

While that scenario is one in a million it should not be discounted.

Camille · 09-30-2010, 12:18 AM

I understand the man's value to that rate...but I still don't see the risk as being one worth taking from an LE perspective. I have heard so many underhand stories about how LE apprehend women that in theory your statement should hold against further pursual...but I'm afraid I don't think it would. In the US, I think it's a red flag. Just MO though...
Fully agree on the sex acts listed....or even the notation of a different rate for PSE than GFE. I avoid accro's altogether. Don't care for them anyway....

C xxx

atlcomedy · 09-30-2010, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camille

I understand the man's value to that rate...but I still don't see the risk as being one worth taking from an LE perspective. I have heard so many underhand stories about how LE apprehend women that in theory your statement should hold against further pursual...but I'm afraid I don't think it would. In the US, I think it's a red flag. Just MO though...
Fully agree on the sex acts listed....or even the notation of a different rate for PSE than GFE. I avoid accro's altogether. Don't care for them anyway....

C xxx

The converse to this are all of the disclaimers to the extent of "all monies are for time and companionship only..."

Like that really offers any protection from LE

Similarly I don't think offering "public date" option really puts you at any additional risk with LE. I would take caution to not word it as a "dinner date" as I think the widely held understanding of that is it includes BCD time after a meal.

Let's face it: LE trolling say EROS knows what is going on regardless of the text. IF LE is going to target you for a bust it will be on the basis of your words/actions at the time of the meeting (assuming you aren't just downright explicit in your ad text).