What would your friends think?

Ive had some tell me what they do and it not change how I viewed them at all. That being said, you never really know what others think of you...

I will disagree. They may accept but they won't think the same about me again. It's human nature. There are very few people in this world whose thought of me matters. With them for sure , I will take this world to the grave......

Sixx Originally Posted by sixxbach

well naturally they will think different of you but I don't think it qualifies someone as being a labeled "loser" because they seek the company of a provider, a horny man maybe but not a loser.

does not matter to me.

I have told a couple of my friends, and they had lots of questions. Heck by the end of lunch I think both of them wanted to know how they could do this without their SO finding out

I have one girl that we always go out to lunch before our date begins, but the clock doesn't start until we get back to my place. She calls herself a Lunch Slut. With another girl we always get Pizza before our date begins, and it is a time for us to catch up on what has been happening. I have never paid a fee to have dinner with anybody other than picking up the tab.

For those of us who care less, I understand. And I used the word 'loser' not in my classification of these men, but that was the way it was said to me. "I would feel like a loser if I had to pay a girl to eat with me." Yes I laughed really hard. Most of my engagements are dinner dates and longer. It's because the men that connect with me don't have the separatist illusion that I'm just a hooker, and therefore different from a wife or a civvie girlfriend. What I get from statements like 'you're a loser if you pay a working girl to eat' is that you should feel the same way if you have to pay me for anything. I'm just glad that MY clients don't have the same mentality.

But this was more for that man. I just found it to be such an oxymoron. Dinner dates are not supposed to be an alternative for dating, but merely two adults having a meal. Although what happens after or before was guaranteed, we should not be seen as second class, or unworthy of a meal.

As far as your families finding out, I didn't mean it in a literal sense. But if you had to say the girl your friend saw you with in a restaurant was an escort, or that you pay for our time in any fashion, I didn't mean to imply that you would be disowned, but for the most part, many of you couldn't live it down. They would crack a joke about it every time they saw you.

I just posted this to offer a different point of view on the subject, not to change anyone's minds. You fellows will only do to us what you're allowed to do, and there will always be a lady for every one of you, no matter how you feel about us or choose to patronize us.

When it gets down to the nitty-gritty, LIVE AND LET LIVE.

Tiffani,

I understand that you're expressing your point of view about the psychology of men who would feel like a loser if we paid a girl to eat with us. We are expressing our point of view. And conceivably our point of view (about our psychology, in fact) has some merit to it as well.

I emphathize with your friend and occasionally have similar thoughts, yet I think your analysis is incorrect with respect to me -- and possibly with respect to your friend and others. To wit:

It's because the men that connect with me don't have the separatist illusion that I'm just a hooker, and therefore different from a wife or a civvie girlfriend. Originally Posted by Tiffani Jameson

Several ladies have alluded in this thread to clients being reluctant to pay them to have dinner because those clients think of the ladies as second-class citizens. I've heard none of the clients who don't pay ladies to have dinner saying we think of the ladies as second-class citizens. Our attitude arises, in fact, from something quite different from the "class" of the person with whom we're eating.

It's true that many civilians buy into the stereotypes that prostitutes are drug addicts, morally challenged, or otherwise "inferior" in some way. I realize that some P4P clients hold on to those same stereotypes as well, but certainly not all of us or even the majority of us. I've perhaps run across a few ladies in P4P who resemble that stereotype, but I've also run into civilians like that. Most of the ladyfriends I've met in P4P are just . . . people. In many cases, rather extraordinary people. Continued exposure to a group of people has a tendency to dispel stereotypes. If civilians knew that the woman who lives across the street, or whose kids played with theirs, was an escort, gradually they would drop those stereotypes as well.

What I get from statements like 'you're a loser if you pay a working girl to eat' is that you should feel the same way if you have to pay me for anything.

I think you may be reading more into those statements than is intended.

In fact, many civilians feel it's shameful to have to pay someone to have sex with them. It's an extremely prevalent male attitude. Perhaps we have overly fragile egos compared to women. That's probably a contributing factor to the relatively low percentage of civilians who become P4P clients. They may try to pick up girls at a bar, or have an affair with a co-worker, but not P4P. That would accept an implication that we are not worthy (in the women's eyes) of having sex for free.

Those of us who are P4P clients have, for the most part, overcome that attitude -- although many do so by adding on some rationalization, such as that we could get sex for free but see escorts to avoid emotional commitment or for convenience. Because otherwise we might have to admit that we can't (or would find it very difficult to) get sex without paying for it. That would be a rather depressing thought: we have to pay + people are willing to pay the lady = we are inferior. I am not denying the accuracy or validity of this conclusion, by the way, merely explaining how it might make us feel.

P4P clients have mostly overcome the attitude that it's shameful to have to pay someone to have sex with us. However, paying someone to eat dinner with us is something qualitatively different. It's one thing to acknowledge that ladies would be unwilling to have sex with you for free; it's significantly more to acknowledge that a lady is unwilling to have a meal with you for free. The implication of inferiority, from having to pay, is much stronger when it concerns an activity that is less emotionally freighted, and less tied up with our image or sense of self-worth, than sex. Most women, in my experience, are significantly less selective in sexual partners than in dinner partners. If we don't even make the cut for the latter, that's even worse.

Although what happens after or before was guaranteed, we should not be seen as second class, or unworthy of a meal.

Most of us don't think of the ladies we see as unworthy of a meal. Many of the comments above have mentioned having meals with the ladies they see, just not paying them a fee for that time.

Personally, I would enjoy having a meal with most of the ladies I see, if an additional fee were not involved. I don't ask them, but that's because I understand many ladies are wary of such requests. Either they are concerned about a client getting too close emotionally and turning into a stalker, or they understandably just don't want to spend their free time with clients. I would not be offended if I offered and they said no, for those very reasons; I don't even ask so that I avoid giving offense or putting pressure on them in the first place. When ladyfriends have suggested it, though, I've been more than happy to take them (usually lunch), and I pay the bill, we don't split it.

That's because, once again, for me (and I suspect many other people), it's not about with whom we're having that meal, but that we're asked to pay her an additional fee.

Above, you contrasted escorts with wives or civvie girlfriends. Well, when we take them out to dinner, they don't charge us an additional fee. I'd gladly treat an escort I see the same as a civvie girlfriend in that respect -- take her out to lunch or dinner and pay the bill, but not pay her an additional fee for her time. Neither would I expect a civilian date to feel obligated to have sex later on just because I bought her dinner. The two are not connected, in my mind.

As far as your families finding out, I didn't mean it in a literal sense. But if you had to say the girl your friend saw you with in a restaurant was an escort, or that you pay for our time in any fashion, I didn't mean to imply that you would be disowned, but for the most part, many of you couldn't live it down. They would crack a joke about it every time they saw you.

True. In fact, some of us might lose our jobs. And of course, those of us who are married might face even more consequences.

Any feeling of embarrassment or shame, however, is primarily the result of us "having to pay for it" (i.e., we are inferior, because unattractive as potential sexual partners) rather than because the escort is inferior. It wouldn't be associated with the meal per se.

In fact, if we told our friends: "Yes, this lady I'm having lunch with is a professional escort, who is paid to have sex with her clients. I am not one of her clients, but met her under other circumstances. She's a really nice person. I consider her a friend and enjoy having lunch with her." -- I don't think they would disown us or crack a joke about it. They would disown us or crack jokes not because we know an escort or have lunch/dinner with her, but because in fact we are her client and "have to pay for it."

I just posted this to offer a different point of view on the subject, not to change anyone's minds. You fellows will only do to us what you're allowed to do, and there will always be a lady for every one of you, no matter how you feel about us or choose to patronize us.

I understand and respect your point of view. I don't look down on an escort who asks to be paid an additional fee to have lunch or dinner with a client. I fully understand and am not offended if a ladyfriend doesn't want to have lunch or dinner with me without compensation. I don't criticize clients who pay an additional fee for that lunch or dinner. That's up to them; they may value that service more than I do; they may not infer the same things from paying that fee. WALDT/CASG.

And I just posted this to offer my different point of view on the subject. Probably a waste of time as well, because I doubt if I'll change anyone's mind either.

When it gets down to the nitty-gritty, LIVE AND LET LIVE.

We agree.

Chevalier...... You have a very good way of expressing yourself and I couldn't agree more with every part of you above post.

Especially this part....

Those of us who are P4P clients have, for the most part, overcome that attitude -- although many do so by adding on some rationalization, such as that we could get sex for free but see escorts to avoid emotional commitment or for convenience. Because otherwise we might have to admit that we can't (or would find it very difficult to) get sex without paying for it. That would be a rather depressing thought: we have to pay + people are willing to pay the lady = we are inferior. I am not denying the accuracy or validity of this conclusion, by the way, merely explaining how it might make us feel.

Several years ago, in fact, I ran into a discussion about a stereotype about P4P clients, on the blog of an escort in England. See here. Extended exposure to clients led to her revising her stereotype as well.

It would be an interesting question, or rather pair of questions:

For the clients: Before you began hobbying, what stereotypes did you have about sex workers, and how (if at all) have your experiences changed your opinion?

For the ladies: Before you began sex work, what stereotypes did you have about P4P clients, and how (if at all) have your experiences changed your opinion?

------------------

My guess is that the majority on each side of the aisle began with a somewhat negative stereotype of the Other -- a stereotype that turned out to be inaccurate. For every stereotype of a drug-addled, money-grubbing thief of a prostitute, there's a stereotype of johns as pathological misogynists or unattractive, socially inept losers incapable of normal relationships.

By the way, I do not fit into the pathological misogynist category. Beyond that . . . no comment.

I would not say a man who pays for a dinner date is a loser! Hell no!
But I refuse to go on FREE dinner dates. If you want to go for free, then so be it. Just don't expect me to have dinner with you for free.

Years ago I embraced this truth:"if you knew how rarely they thought about you, you'd care less what they thought about you". After the shock wears off, I'd likely get requests for the lady's number!

I would not say a man who pays for a dinner date is a loser! Hell no! Originally Posted by incognito isis

Some would, though. Including some of the men considering whether to pay for a dinner date.

But I refuse to go on FREE dinner dates. If you want to go for free, then so be it. Just don't expect me to have dinner with you for free.

Perfectly natural. Only two or three ladies over the last ten years have had lunch with me for free, at their suggestion. Maybe a couple more would have been willing if I'd invited them. The vast majority wouldn't have been interested without compensation. I completely understand and respect that viewpoint. I suspect that, for most clients, our not wanting to compensate a lady to eat with us doesn't mean that we expect her to eat with us for free. Totally separate questions.

(And I have paid for occasional lunch/dinner dates with escorts.)

Chevalier,

I always appreciate your responses. You know why? You're very intuitive, and not afraid to be honest.

It is not my point of view that these men are losers. Not at all. But my point is not to mince words. Of course, everyone's point of view has merit, and not looking to discount anyone at all. I have no shortage of men who take me out to eat on paid dates, but my point to those who do not is don't berate the ones that do. I don't judge those who don't patronize my services for one reason or another, or the ones that choose not to take me out to eat.

Tiffani,

I understand that you're expressing your point of view about the psychology of men who would feel like a loser if we paid a girl to eat with us. We are expressing our point of view. And conceivably our point of view (about our psychology, in fact) has some merit to it as well.

Several ladies have alluded in this thread to clients being reluctant to pay them to have dinner because those clients think of the ladies as second-class citizens. I've heard none of the clients who don't pay ladies to have dinner saying we think of the ladies as second-class citizens. Our attitude arises, in fact, from something quite different from the "class" of the person with whom we're eating. Originally Posted by Chevalier

Some things don't have to be said when they're implied. When a fellow says he can't take a hooker out to eat, or pay for the time, because he can take a hot civilian girl out for free, we don't doubt that. I understand that not everyone has the wherewithal to take a woman to eat AND pay for the time, even if they wanted to. Despite their patronage some men are still in the mind frame that we are just escorts. Some still feel that there is nothing to talk to escorts about, let alone spend enough time with them to eat. Paid or unpaid.

It's true that many civilians buy into the stereotypes that prostitutes are drug addicts, morally challenged, or otherwise "inferior" in some way. I realize that some P4P clients hold on to those same stereotypes as well, but certainly not all of us or even the majority of us. I've perhaps run across a few ladies in P4P who resemble that stereotype, but I've also run into civilians like that. Most of the ladyfriends I've met in P4P are just . . . people. In many cases, rather extraordinary people. Continued exposure to a group of people has a tendency to dispel stereotypes. If civilians knew that the woman who lives across the street, or whose kids played with theirs, was an escort, gradually they would drop those stereotypes as well.

And that's the type of attitude I have. Civilian women can be vacuous and co-dependent just like some companions can be. As a matter of fact, interactions with companions are just more transparent than some civilian interactions. I would dare say that some civilians can be bigger whores than any of us.

I think you may be reading more into those statements than is intended.

In fact, many civilians feel it's shameful to have to pay someone to have sex with them. It's an extremely prevalent male attitude. Perhaps we have overly fragile egos compared to women. That's probably a contributing factor to the relatively low percentage of civilians who become P4P clients. They may try to pick up girls at a bar, or have an affair with a co-worker, but not P4P. That would accept an implication that we are not worthy (in the women's eyes) of having sex for free.

Those of us who are P4P clients have, for the most part, overcome that attitude -- although many do so by adding on some rationalization, such as that we could get sex for free but see escorts to avoid emotional commitment or for convenience. Because otherwise we might have to admit that we can't (or would find it very difficult to) get sex without paying for it. That would be a rather depressing thought: we have to pay + people are willing to pay the lady = we are inferior. I am not denying the accuracy or validity of this conclusion, by the way, merely explaining how it might make us feel.

P4P clients have mostly overcome the attitude that it's shameful to have to pay someone to have sex with us. However, paying someone to eat dinner with us is something qualitatively different. It's one thing to acknowledge that ladies would be unwilling to have sex with you for free; it's significantly more to acknowledge that a lady is unwilling to have a meal with you for free. The implication of inferiority, from having to pay, is much stronger when it concerns an activity that is less emotionally freighted, and less tied up with our image or sense of self-worth, than sex. Most women, in my experience, are significantly less selective in sexual partners than in dinner partners. If we don't even make the cut for the latter, that's even worse.

And that's exactly my point. I would like to encourage men to be more confident in the decisions they make to get their needs met and/or get their jollies. I think once it's okay in their own mind. No one can make me feel bad about being who I am because I have come to terms with me, and have used my own head to feel good about my decisions. I've just learned that I am human and will never be happy striving for another's view of perfection.

Most of us don't think of the ladies we see as unworthy of a meal. Many of the comments above have mentioned having meals with the ladies they see, just not paying them a fee for that time.

Personally, I would enjoy having a meal with most of the ladies I see, if an additional fee were not involved. I don't ask them, but that's because I understand many ladies are wary of such requests. Either they are concerned about a client getting too close emotionally and turning into a stalker, or they understandably just don't want to spend their free time with clients. I would not be offended if I offered and they said no, for those very reasons; I don't even ask so that I avoid giving offense or putting pressure on them in the first place. When ladyfriends have suggested it, though, I've been more than happy to take them (usually lunch), and I pay the bill, we don't split it.

That's because, once again, for me (and I suspect many other people), it's not about with whom we're having that meal, but that we're asked to pay her an additional fee.

Above, you contrasted escorts with wives or civvie girlfriends. Well, when we take them out to dinner, they don't charge us an additional fee. I'd gladly treat an escort I see the same as a civvie girlfriend in that respect -- take her out to lunch or dinner and pay the bill, but not pay her an additional fee for her time. Neither would I expect a civilian date to feel obligated to have sex later on just because I bought her dinner. The two are not connected, in my mind.

True. This is where we apply the 'to each his own' policy. There are ladies who will make this decision to go to dinner with a client on and off the clock for themselves.

I understand and respect your point of view. I don't look down on an escort who asks to be paid an additional fee to have lunch or dinner with a client. I fully understand and am not offended if a ladyfriend doesn't want to have lunch or dinner with me without compensation. I don't criticize clients who pay an additional fee for that lunch or dinner. That's up to them; they may value that service more than I do; they may not infer the same things from paying that fee. WALDT/CASG.

And I just posted this to offer my different point of view on the subject. Probably a waste of time as well, because I doubt if I'll change anyone's mind either.

I don't believe you look down on an escort because of the way she runs her business. Just like I don't fault anyone for feeling the way they do. I wish that some men can just be honest about things instead of trying to mask them with machismo. People are gonna do what they want.

Thanks Chevalier!

Chevalier,

I always appreciate your responses. You know why? You're very intuitive, and not afraid to be honest. Originally Posted by Tiffani Jameson

Thank you! Although I suspect that you (and Eccie Addict) are in a very small minority.

I have no shortage of men who take me out to eat on paid dates, but my point to those who do not is don't berate the ones that do.

It's difficult sometimes, especially online, to express a different opinion without it coming across as berating those who disagree. I hope my statements that I (usually) am not willing to pay to eat lunch/dinner were not seen as berating those who are willing. Some people may indeed be implying that. Others, not.

I'm familiar with the problem also from being on the receiving side. Perhaps I over-react when I hear people say they see no reason for paying more than $X -- the old "no piece of ass is worth more than" screed -- and infer criticism of me and others for paying more, even when that criticism was not intended. On the other hand, sometimes it probably is intended as criticism of those of us who sometimes spend more than $X. Sometimes it's downright explicit rather than implied.; those are easy.

Some things don't have to be said when they're implied.

Always the difficulty, isn't it? Knowing whether something was indeed implied or is only inferred. You may be right.

because he can take a hot civilian girl out for free . . . Despite their patronage some men are still in the mind frame that we are just escorts. Some still feel that there is nothing to talk to escorts about, let alone spend enough time with them to eat. Paid or unpaid.

Although one civilian I eat lunch with often would qualify as "hot," many of my lunch companions do not. Even remotely. Physical appearance is one factor in my decision whom to see for BCD -- call me shallow. But it is not relevant to the decision of with whom I'll have a meal and extended conversation; other factors predominate. Some escorts I wouldn't find that interesting; some civilians I wouldn't find that interesting. But I've met many escorts who would qualify under both sets of criteria. Although not always enough for me to pay an additional fee for having lunch.

I would like to encourage men to be more confident in the decisions they make to get their needs met and/or get their jollies. I think once it's okay in their own mind. No one can make me feel bad about being who I am because I have come to terms with me, and have used my own head to feel good about my decisions. I've just learned that I am human and will never be happy striving for another's view of perfection.

I agree with that viewpoint. For what it's worth, I suspect that the "loser" feeling your friend expressed is mostly something that has evolved over a long, long period of time, rather than under the influence of statements (such as some in this thread) that other guys would not pay a lady to have lunch with them. At least, I hope that most men have the confidence to think for themselves rather than depend on what strangers on a P4P board tell them to think. I don't think the comments I've read on ASPD or ECCIE have influenced my feeling on this issue, anymore than they've influenced me to limit my sessions to those ladies with rates $200 or less.

So even when some appear to berate those who pay a lady to have lunch with them, that may have very little to do with the "loser" feelings that others express. Stopping the berating may not, by itself, have much effect on eliminating the "loser" feelings. Overcoming something that's developed over a long period of time and, perhaps, buried deep in the subconscious is much harder to overcome. Your opinion, and that of some of the other ladies who've posted here, that men who pay a fee to have lunch/dinner are not losers . . . well, I'm sure, those opinions are appreciated but similarly may not help much to overcome those male feelings.

I wish that some men can just be honest about things instead of trying to mask them with machismo.

Reducing the machismo used by men to mask feelings??? OMG! Truly the impossible quest!

Thanks Chevalier!

And thanks to you. It's been a more interesting discussion than most here. At least to me.

I would not say a man who pays for a dinner date is a loser! Hell no!
But I refuse to go on FREE dinner dates. If you want to go for free, then so be it. Just don't expect me to have dinner with you for free. Originally Posted by incognito isis

Haven't you just liked a guy enough to enjoy a nice meal with him without charging. I do this quite a bit with the girls I know. One girl that I always have a meal with before a date, even enjoys meeting just for lunch with nothing to follow. We have a regular group that goes out on Fridays and I had one girl ask if she could come when she heard about it. I know this is about the money, but why not just have some plain old fun also. I am not saying take time away from you business to do it, but if you aren't doing anything, why not enjoy a meal.