would you marry/have child by provider?

I have a distinct AVERSION to marriage....but I would have no problems having a romantic relationship / live in relationship with a provider outside of the hobby. Providers are people too! They have the same human wants and needs that go beyond the sex part.
I'm at an age where I prefer the company of a great woman more than I crave her sex. Life is more than just sex..and a great connection between the ears is just as important, if not more important, than a connection between the legs!

I'll keep your post in mind Adrienne!

Yes and Yes.

However, I wouldn't be able to provide anymore.

This profession of mine requires me to give a lot of myself intimately to others, which, at the end of the day, what can I give of myself to my partner if I'm always putting it up for sell?

If I love someone, I wan't to be able to give them my all. Mind and body. Originally Posted by Adrienne Baptiste

Sam....any man would be lucky to have you! I'm with you on the marriage part...and have no desire to have children with anyone!

No….since I have no desire to be married or have babies with any man. :-) Originally Posted by samantha thom

[QUOTE=Whenever I've been in a relationship while providing - and I've tried your method, though it doesn't work for me - I've been up front about my expectations for monogamy. Though you may call it unrealistic, there are men out there (and women) who are willing to be monogamous with a sex worker...and those relationships can be quite fulfilling for both parties. It's not all about sex, y'know. [/QUOTE]

MONOgamy by definition is an agreement to be sexually exclusive with ONE person. Having sex with someone else and calling it a job doesn't grant some sort of provider diplomatic immunity and definitely falls outside of the definition of monogamy.

Good think I DON'T BELIEVE IN MONOGAMY! Monogamy is a judeo-christian way of regulating a persons behavior. I have no opposition to religion...I just believe that two consenting adults should be free to play with others. Love does NOT equal monogamy!

MONOgamy by definition is an agreement to be sexually exclusive with ONE person. Having sex with someone else and calling it a job doesn't grant some sort of provider diplomatic immunity and definitely falls outside of the definition of monogamy. Originally Posted by Frique-Me

Good think I DON'T BELIEVE IN MONOGAMY! Monogamy is a judeo-christian way of regulating a persons behavior. I have no opposition to religion...I just believe that two consenting adults should be free to play with others. Love does NOT equal monogamy! Originally Posted by planojim

I agree 1,000% PJ

Good think I DON'T BELIEVE IN MONOGAMY! Monogamy is a judeo-christian way of regulating a persons behavior. I have no opposition to religion...I just believe that two consenting adults should be free to play with others. Love does NOT equal monogamy! Originally Posted by planojim

Monogamy developed due to a variety of biological and cultural influences existing way before the Judeo/Christian adoption of the practice.

MONOgamy by definition is an agreement to be sexually exclusive with ONE person. Having sex with someone else and calling it a job doesn't grant some sort of provider diplomatic immunity and definitely falls outside of the definition of monogamy. Originally Posted by Frique-Me

Monogamish, then. Conditionally monogamous.

Whatever term makes you happy to clarify that outside of my job - a known quantity - neither of us would be getting any that isn't us.

If the woman is having sex for money or free it's still sex.

What if the man considered having sex with random women part of his work? If he does it for free it could be considered charity work.

The truth is a marrying an active provider requires a lot more sacrifice on the mans side unless the girl lets him sleep with other women or is profiting off the providers business............

There's also the elephant in the room, many active providers have boyfriends, girlfriends, husbands & wives but we call them "pimps" instead.

In that case the pimp/Boyfriend/husband is apart of your work, he's part of the business, and he won't be bothered by these issues.

This pimp/provider relationship is the only feasible alternative to an open relationship in which the man can see other women and the active provider can continue seeing other men.

I'm not wading into the larger marriage convo because I think it's silly. In other words, it doesn't matter to me what the work someone does is-- if I'm in a position where I want to marry someone, then the important stuff has to do with other criteria.

Monogamish, then. Conditionally monogamous.

Whatever term makes you happy to clarify that outside of my job - a known quantity - neither of us would be getting any that isn't us. Originally Posted by Rudbeckia

I like the cut of your jib, Rudbeckia. The point of a healthy relationship is that all involved parties are going into it with informed consent. Getting hung up about known quantitites seems like self-sabotage (or more likely dishonesty with one's self).

Of course, I'm speaking as someone who has dated sex workers before (in what feels like a past life). To any of you guys wondering: it ain't no thang, for serious. The only hang ups are what you bring into it in the first place.

Absolutely. Have found one I'm going to leave in pretty good shape financially after I bite the dust. Why not, she makes me feel good acting or not and I love her dearly for doing so.

All seven of my children are from guys on this board. Why do y'all think I never work? I make like a grand and a half per kid each and every month. Comes straight outta their paycheck. BAM! Simple as that. Rollin in the dough. Babies make it rain.

disclaimer: joking Originally Posted by thathottnurse

Jesus Fucking Christ I'm dying laughing!

If I had a dick, yes.

Me, too.

If I had a dick, yes. Originally Posted by YummyMarie

You mean like this??