He doesn't need a "hall pass" from a woman.

It's not fair because he's in a relationship with her and isn't being honest about what he's doing.  And the way he puts it makes it sound like he's trying to get back at her despite the fact he claims to be OK with what she does.

It really depends on the two individuals... There is no one size fits all IMHO... I think the key is open communication... If I was too date someone from this world, I would be clear upfront what the ground rules were. I would have no problem with her continuing to work if she so desired. As for whether I continued to play, that would depend on her views. If she would be okay with it or not. Then I would have to decide if I could live within those boundaries. But I would make sure that it was discussed upfront and not assume.  

Solo mis dos centavos.

You know what they say "what's good for the goose is good for the gander".  

My only issue would be that he should "man up" and disclose that he is seeing providers. She was honest with him and disclosed that she provided. The fact that she sees anyone that books her and he gets to choose doesn't make a difference to me. Should he step his criteria down in a attempt to match her clients? I don't think so. He is entitled to book any lady he desires. Just needs to disclose his continuing activities to his lady.

Speaking for myself, I couldn't stay faithful to a provider GF so that is just one of many reasons I wouldn't date one. The other biggee is that I can't have my woman fucking other men.

But let's all be honest here. This is very, very complicated for most. Sex fucks with many peeps emotions and clouds our judgement, on both sides. When one is out doing it with others multiple times per week while the other is being monogomous, I think you are just begging for a potentially disastrous ending.

Everyone here can get on their high horse and tell us all they would NEVER cheat on their hooker GF. Well, ok, but saying you will be loyal and actually being loyal are two vastly different things.

Just seems to me that human beings were never meant to be with one person and that is an antiquated notion. Show me a guy who has been with the same gal for 30-40 years and I will show you a man that is in a sexless relationship or a man that cheats. Is that an ironclad rule? No, but I think it is the overwhelming likely outcome.

So, to your point, I can't say who is, and who is not "entitled" to have sex with others but it is my experience that it is a road to ruin for almost all at some point if only one is being the text book defintion of "faithful."

I dated a guy, a few years back, who felt it ok to fuck anything that walked.  When he got caught, he used this argument to justify it.  He knew from day 1, what I did for a living.  I, on the other hand, never knew of his escapades, until I caught him red handed.

Had I known, maybe I could have handled it, but I was never given that choice. I was met with dishonesty and anger, when confronted.  Lesson learned.  I will NEVER date while I am still escorting.

I may be a hoe, I am no liar  Enough said.

does something, that justifies you to do the same.   Being "fair" has nothing to do with it; being honest and non-judgemental is most important here.  Then, if both agree, all should be good.  

We almost never truly know another person's situation completely, but feeling entitled to anything is never a good quality in someone--especially having sex with others shortly after starting a relationship.

So, she told him at the very beginning what she does. That was honest and probably a little nerve wracking. Seems like he's decided that since she is a P4P provider, it's only "fair" that he be allowed to continue as a P4P client. That's his perspective and he's not allowing her to offer hers because he's afraid of what it may be. The "it's only fair" argument only holds water if she's the one he's having the debate with. In other words--if she knows about it.

I dunno about the getting to choose your partner thing, but one thing that definitely seems unfair here is the one-directional flow of information.

Rule of thumb: if you're doing something and you have an instinct to hide it from her/him, it's probably cheating.

I married my wife because she gave great blow jobs.  When she stopped giving blow jobs, I started seeing providers.  The wife has figured out that I do.  I told her I would stop going out if she would take care of me at home, which is true.  10+ years of hobbying and no BJ's at home in sight

Do I agree that there SHOULD be a hall pass?

Yes, I do. I think it is in the best interest for a provider / civie relationship that they be in an open relationship of some form. Those are the only provider/civie relationships that I have personally seen and known to work out long-term. And even if it's not even fully open. Maybe just "ajar?" ha ha

However, the fact that they never openly discussed it, I think clearly puts him in the wrong. So no, clearly there is no "automatic" hall pass. What I believe he is doing could qualify as cheating at worst. Or gaming the system by making assumptions at best.

But to be perfectly frank ... if a civie and provider engage in a relationship WITHOUT this topic ever coming up? That just speaks to an underlying lack of communication on both participants. And to me, that underlying lack of communication will eventually spell the downfall of their relationship. Much more so than whether one person or the other is violating any hall pass rules or not.


-- Modified on 3/13/2016 1:48:07 PM

This is not a symmetrical situation, and the honesty that all are calling for is required.

But I have to also observe that he did tell her he was a hobbyist, and for her, of all people, not to assume that he is continuing in that path, is telling me she is not being honest with herself.

If she couldn't handle dating a hobbyist, she should not have started down that road.

A discussion for another time is whether all women and men should respect the sexual needs and desires of their mates.

That's where this thread eventually leads

He can see "strange"  once a week for all I gaf.  

Posted By: DebbieNoonerGirl

Here's the situation that sparked my question: a longtime client and friend recently began dating a provider.  The interesting thing here is that he didn't actually meet her as a client; they simply happened to meet at a regular civvie social function.    
 I don't know who asked who out... but on their first date she was very up-front and told him that she moonlights as a provider.  He assured her that he had no problem with that, had seen providers in the past, and didn't look down on her for it.  Great.  
   
 He told me about her very shortly after they began dating, and as I see him about every 2 weeks, he was filling me in on their relationship fairly frequently.  After maybe 2-3 months, he said something that made me think this woman did not know he was still seeing providers.  So I just flat out asked him, and he replied that they'd never talked about it.    
   
 This prompted me to ask, "Are you sure she's okay with it?"    
   
 His response, "Well she's still doing this, so it's fair, right?"  
   
 He was genuinely shocked when I told him,  "NO, I do not think it's fair."  
 In my opinion, the fact she is being honest with him, while he is keeping his activities secret,  is unfair right there.    
   
 His defense: "But she's fooling around, so that means I get to do it too, doesn't it?!"  
 I asked him if he honestly thought she would see it that way, to which he admitted he was afraid to bring it up because she'd already shown signs of having a jealous nature. :smh:  
   
   
   
 After talking about this issue with several men, it seems the majority feel that if any man dating an active provider, then it would be "only fair" that the man get to have sex with other women.  Almost all of them said that, hypothetically, if they were in a relationship with a provider, then they would expect to have sex outside of that relationship.  
   
 If you're looking at it in a very general sense, then yes I do see the logic... a provider is having sex with other people, so her S.O. having sex with other people too would be equal.  But since her activities are P4P, I think there is more to the equation than that.  
   
 My feeling is that this is NOT a fair trade-off because he would be getting to choose his partners; to pick the women with whom he wanted to have sex.  In general, providers really don't get that luxury.  Our clients choose US, not the other way around.  Yes, we can and do have fun during P4P dates.... but it is NOT the same to me.  
   
 What I'm saying is that I don't believe someone dating a provider is automatically entitled to have sex outside of their relationship.  Now, if they want to be swingers and she is going to be having her own civvie hookups too, then that's a different story.  
   
 But this notion that just because she's a provider, he should be allowed additional playmates while she gets no other sex outside of her P4P and him?  No, I don't think that is "fair".  
   
   
 These are my opinions; I am curious to hear YOURS.  
   
 *****(EDIT)  This is my real question: If someone is dating a provider, is that person then entitled to have sex with other people?  
   
 I'd genuinely like to know if the majority of men and women here share the mind-set of those I've already asked, that "It doesn't matter that it's P4P, If she's having sex with others, then he should get to do it too."    
   
 Or if there are more here who see it closer to the way I view it.    
   
 If my notions are just plain weird, well...... I'm used to that being the case. LOL.    
   
 xoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxooxxoxoxoxo  
   
   
   
   
   
 NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.  

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:13:19 PM

Unless or until he's willing to supplement the income she's making as a provider he's in a deal breaker
Besides, personally, I don't believe in cheating. Never have
When I'm dating anyone, especially after we are intimate, I don't see anyone else for sex
There's a few reasons but no sense getting into it here
For this guy, he knows it's not right, otherwise he'd be upfront with her
He's never going to be monogamous.

You mention you asked several guys about their opinions about this and then stated that the majority think they would continue to see hookers "IF" they were dating a hooker and I can see how the "average" guy might feel that way.

My question is, "How many of these guys answering in the hypothetical have actually ever dated an active provider?"  

I think if you asked only guys with any experience with the subject, you might get a whole different set of answers. It's a very rare guy who can date an active provider in the first place, I don't think the average guy has a clue what he would do if he were dating a provider.

Absolutely FUCK NO

its not a "hall pass" for him. He's already getting a pass if he's not paying. Absolutely positively END of discussion.  

Posted By: DebbieNoonerGirl

Here's the situation that sparked my question: a longtime client and friend recently began dating a provider.  The interesting thing here is that he didn't actually meet her as a client; they simply happened to meet at a regular civvie social function.    
 I don't know who asked who out... but on their first date she was very up-front and told him that she moonlights as a provider.  He assured her that he had no problem with that, had seen providers in the past, and didn't look down on her for it.  Great.  
   
 He told me about her very shortly after they began dating, and as I see him about every 2 weeks, he was filling me in on their relationship fairly frequently.  After maybe 2-3 months, he said something that made me think this woman did not know he was still seeing providers.  So I just flat out asked him, and he replied that they'd never talked about it.    
   
 This prompted me to ask, "Are you sure she's okay with it?"    
   
 His response, "Well she's still doing this, so it's fair, right?"  
   
 He was genuinely shocked when I told him,  "NO, I do not think it's fair."  
 In my opinion, the fact she is being honest with him, while he is keeping his activities secret,  is unfair right there.    
   
 His defense: "But she's fooling around, so that means I get to do it too, doesn't it?!"  
 I asked him if he honestly thought she would see it that way, to which he admitted he was afraid to bring it up because she'd already shown signs of having a jealous nature. :smh:  
   
   
   
 After talking about this issue with several men, it seems the majority feel that if any man dating an active provider, then it would be "only fair" that the man get to have sex with other women.  Almost all of them said that, hypothetically, if they were in a relationship with a provider, then they would expect to have sex outside of that relationship.  
   
 If you're looking at it in a very general sense, then yes I do see the logic... a provider is having sex with other people, so her S.O. having sex with other people too would be equal.  But since her activities are P4P, I think there is more to the equation than that.  
   
 My feeling is that this is NOT a fair trade-off because he would be getting to choose his partners; to pick the women with whom he wanted to have sex.  In general, providers really don't get that luxury.  Our clients choose US, not the other way around.  Yes, we can and do have fun during P4P dates.... but it is NOT the same to me.  
   
 What I'm saying is that I don't believe someone dating a provider is automatically entitled to have sex outside of their relationship.  Now, if they want to be swingers and she is going to be having her own civvie hookups too, then that's a different story.  
   
 But this notion that just because she's a provider, he should be allowed additional playmates while she gets no other sex outside of her P4P and him?  No, I don't think that is "fair".  
   
   
 These are my opinions; I am curious to hear YOURS.  
   
 *****(EDIT)  This is my real question: If someone is dating a provider, is that person then entitled to have sex with other people?  
   
 I'd genuinely like to know if the majority of men and women here share the mind-set of those I've already asked, that "It doesn't matter that it's P4P, If she's having sex with others, then he should get to do it too."    
   
 Or if there are more here who see it closer to the way I view it.    
   
 If my notions are just plain weird, well...... I'm used to that being the case. LOL.    
   
 xoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxooxxoxoxoxo  
   
   
   
   
   
 NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.  

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:13:19 PM

I know two providers one met her husband in this world the other like Debbie was met outside of this world. Both of them have the strongest relationship of most of my friends.

Couple 1 She brought him into this world to show him what it was about. He was allowed to hobby till the day she was ready to give it up. They both quit the same day. Been married eight years with two kids. They swing together now and they will be married another 30+ years,  

Couple 2 He booked her. She thought he was alright nothing special he booked a second time he made her laugh and that was the start. He told her after the fifth date that he would never book her again told her straight out how he felt she wasn't ready but he proved to her he was serious. They hooked up six months later and they haven't left each others side.  

If they work together anything is possible.  

Every relationship is different. My thoughts are if she is still providing she is having sex with other people which is fine but I should also be allowed to have sex with other people. If you want to make it I can't pay for it that's fine I will pull a girl out of a club not as much fun and not as easy as a sure thing but I can see that mind set also.

Those are my thoughts.
I hope it works out for them.
 

Posted By: DebbieNoonerGirl

Here's the situation that sparked my question: a longtime client and friend recently began dating a provider.  The interesting thing here is that he didn't actually meet her as a client; they simply happened to meet at a regular civvie social function.    
 I don't know who asked who out... but on their first date she was very up-front and told him that she moonlights as a provider.  He assured her that he had no problem with that, had seen providers in the past, and didn't look down on her for it.  Great.  
   
 He told me about her very shortly after they began dating, and as I see him about every 2 weeks, he was filling me in on their relationship fairly frequently.  After maybe 2-3 months, he said something that made me think this woman did not know he was still seeing providers.  So I just flat out asked him, and he replied that they'd never talked about it.    
   
 This prompted me to ask, "Are you sure she's okay with it?"    
   
 His response, "Well she's still doing this, so it's fair, right?"  
   
 He was genuinely shocked when I told him,  "NO, I do not think it's fair."  
 In my opinion, the fact she is being honest with him, while he is keeping his activities secret,  is unfair right there.    
   
 His defense: "But she's fooling around, so that means I get to do it too, doesn't it?!"  
 I asked him if he honestly thought she would see it that way, to which he admitted he was afraid to bring it up because she'd already shown signs of having a jealous nature. :smh:  
   
   
   
 After talking about this issue with several men, it seems the majority feel that if any man dating an active provider, then it would be "only fair" that the man get to have sex with other women.  Almost all of them said that, hypothetically, if they were in a relationship with a provider, then they would expect to have sex outside of that relationship.  
   
 If you're looking at it in a very general sense, then yes I do see the logic... a provider is having sex with other people, so her S.O. having sex with other people too would be equal.  But since her activities are P4P, I think there is more to the equation than that.  
   
 My feeling is that this is NOT a fair trade-off because he would be getting to choose his partners; to pick the women with whom he wanted to have sex.  In general, providers really don't get that luxury.  Our clients choose US, not the other way around.  Yes, we can and do have fun during P4P dates.... but it is NOT the same to me.  
   
 What I'm saying is that I don't believe someone dating a provider is automatically entitled to have sex outside of their relationship.  Now, if they want to be swingers and she is going to be having her own civvie hookups too, then that's a different story.  
   
 But this notion that just because she's a provider, he should be allowed additional playmates while she gets no other sex outside of her P4P and him?  No, I don't think that is "fair".  
   
   
 These are my opinions; I am curious to hear YOURS.  
   
 *****(EDIT)  This is my real question: If someone is dating a provider, is that person then entitled to have sex with other people?  
   
 I'd genuinely like to know if the majority of men and women here share the mind-set of those I've already asked, that "It doesn't matter that it's P4P, If she's having sex with others, then he should get to do it too."    
   
 Or if there are more here who see it closer to the way I view it.    
   
 If my notions are just plain weird, well...... I'm used to that being the case. LOL.    
   
 xoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxooxxoxoxoxo  
   
   
   
   
   
 NOONER: (noun) A sexual encounter during lunch hour, especially one that is illicit.  

-- Modified on 3/13/2016 3:13:19 PM

I think that should be understood and not assumed.  So he should be open about it and let the girl make a choice if it's okay with her or not.

I also agree with your point about P4P being a bit different from the provider and the hobbyist because one is income related, a job and not often just a choice of partner for the provider as you've pointed out. However, I'm not sure how far that goes and it seems to be a legitimate position that if she's not stopped her moonlighting activities then she probably should be a bit tolerant about his activities as well. Again, the key here is both being on the same page about what the current status is.

She was up front and honest with him before they began their relationship. He entered into the relationship knowing that was how she earns her living. For him to keep seeing providers without her knowing is not only unfair, it is the same as cheating ... dishonest.

No Hall Pass For Dating A Provider.

No guy gets a Hall Pass for dating a Lady. Civvie or Provider. All us guys pay for Sex in one form or another.  

As for dating a provider I'm kind of in this situation. I'm seeing a provider on a steady basis. I help her outside of our playtime. We have OTC time together. So I know I'm not getting freebies with her. And that's fine with me. Dating a civvie or a provider a guy is going to pay for the sex either way. There's no Hall Pass in both cases. Should the guy be honest? Tough question to answer. She's providing for the money. He's playing around because it's fun. If he told her about seeing other providers my guess is that she would be offended. Would my provider be offended if she knew I was seeing other providers? Most likely.  She's under the impression that she's the only girl I'm seeing.

He is not being honest with her about his seeing ladies so its wrong.
  Once the two of them discuss and layout ground rules then live by he rules set forth.

Glancing over some of the provider's comments. Not know ing the ends ands outs of the situation, but here's 2 cents.  First, her honestly with him on the first night should be applauded, in return yes the right thing for him to do is disclose his hobbying habits to her. On the other hand, I don't see how a provider could feel like or demand that their man should not continue seeing other ladies.  

One argument was the provider saying that she was doing it for "work" ooh ok, the light bulb just went on, I get it, totally fine with that as a suitable excuse (Not).  It takes a certain mindset to moonlight as a provider, so I'm not knocking that, I respect the business. But you have to be able to check yourself back into reality if you choose to provide and at the same time be in a relationship outside of providing.  

Just because it is a job does not justify the fact that a man will feel like you are giving away his punany, so why shouldn't he be able to see other women.  He may know that you provide, but I am sure he's not being told play by play whats happening for every client etc.  

Or just go by the old saying, "whats good for the goose is good for the gander."

Is it serious? Are they dating (CIVIE) others??

When, I got serious with a civie, I quit the hobby.

Personally, I could never have a (Civie) relationship knowing she was or is providing

sex is merely the source of the deception. An omission in this case is a deception, a lie.

You have to have trust for a relationship. Deception is a breach of trust and a betrayal.

That is my answer.

My opinion is the two need to have a full discussion of sex and boundaries. Honestly, I don't think there are entitlements about sex on either side, whether provider (the "But I do it for money" or "But I don't get to pick the guys") or client ("But you get to have sex with others"). Both are whining, bullshit arguments as alternatives exist for both.  

Anyway, no two people I know have the same marriage or relationship rules as another couple, so neither do I expect that any pair of provider/client couples would have the same relationship rules.  

Let them work out what works for them.  

I just have a feeling that starting with deception won't help any couple make it

Prostitutes aren't interested in monogamy, let alone from some john.

And since the john is out paying for prostitutes, he certainly isn't interested in monogamy.

So what's the point on either side?  They're both seasoned liars.  And will continue to do so.

Nope not fair Deb....

If he agreed to this lifestyle, he agreed to it. To want to change his mind now is a form of resentment. My fiancé found out that I was doing this and his reaction wasn't "all well, I'll do it too" it's devastating for a real man to know that his woman is having sex with strange man for money......no reasonable person is going to say "No problem" unless they don't care. And as far as sex, No you accepted I did this that means you won't do the same. I don't know, i find these stories of people like this so weird.

It's how she pays her bills, her "job". This is a perfect example of how ladies in the biz are still not taken seriously when embarking on a personal relationship with a guy who knows all about P4P.

Steph

It's something that should be talked about if they've decided to be 'exclusive'.  Her job would be excluded from the monogamous aspect of the relationship.  Then if she's OK with him doing outside P4P, understanding the nature of it as only a provider would, then they would hash that out.  

If she'd rather him quit his P4P while they are exclusive, then that's something he'd have to agree to and follow.

Now, if they haven't yet talked about being exclusive, then he shouldn't feel guilty about his P4P activity.  I would feel more guilty doing P4P behind a non-provider's back, simply because they aren't in the industry and understand the risks and safety.

In polyamory, there is no need for "hall passes" and all that crap.  Only honesty.