Hello Qziz,
No need for Nina to do her research when she has people to do it for her! 
Originally Posted by Qziz
And it`s so much more fun to gather information together and learn! Thanks to you and others for participating!
Amour fou = Andre Breton/crazy-impermanent-reflexive love reference, correct? I would consider that a mistress relationship - and those in my experience do not have a hard and fast expectation of money exchanged for services relationship. (They also have been by far the most expensive of my relationships. Then again I tend to be very generous. Then again that's probably why said mistresses were attracted. We're back to self-analysis again. ) I suspect we may be speaking of different things - at that level it no longer is in our particular demimonde. Up until that, yes, it is very much a services rendered/cash on delivery expectation.
Originally Posted by Qziz
Sorry for responding so late, was busy travelling.
Amour fou: Yes, kind of. It is very interesting that there is no sufficient explanation of the words "Amour Fou" in english. It is basically a kind of sympathy (a delusion of love) that has no foundation in reality whatsoever. "Fou" refers to a "flash of lightning" that hits you and renders you impossible to clearly judge your actions. It refers to a kind of infatuation with a person with no clear or unclear references to love. "Coup de foudre" might be another explanation, I will check later if wiki has a reference to that in english. "Love at first sight" it says, which , strictly speaking, is no love, but an aspect of mystical or spiritual infatuation....
I take it now from your words you meant the term "Mistress" as in no "escort" but rather a private "secret lover". I was referring to "mistresses" in a kind of relationship that evolved out of the "escort Relationship". I am at the same line here with you, and would put into the argumentation of the "no money expected", that sometimes in (private) encounters it is not "obvious" or "spoken out" that money is wanted, but implicitely it is stated within the context of society you exist or "put room to a relationship". Non-verbally or thru circumstances surrounding the intricacies of the relationship. I take you are a married man and mistress hence refers to secret lover?
In one of my latest blog articles on my wordpress blog I was referring to the differences between a paid encounter and a private secret lover. Article is mainly about plagiarism , mostly, but a good bit of it touches the topic we discuss here , too.
Of course it is. But women manipulating men through emotion and passion is a habit as old as a certain profession.
Originally Posted by Qziz
Maybe, I do think you are right here, but men manipulating women is also a habit non of unknown territorry as well ;-))). I think , that, otoh, we escorts (or at least the majority of escorts, who I do think are honest and good people not manipulating - in contrary to the "solid" women) are more honest at that approach. We try not to delude men. We say how it is, Of course we play with fire , like an ecstatic and skilled fire-dancer, but we don´t burn our hearts out, nor put fire on our audience. Or at least not anyone with a certain respect for humans and their emotions, and a certain dignity within self reflection does so. Please correct me, but I think the majority of mature (as in wise, not in age) escorts are honest about the fact that a chemistry can develop between a client and a escort, but we tend to not exploit it. Much rather, in the rare cases I have fallen in love with a client, I waived the "pay for time" bit. In others I decided not to see clients anymore. Unfortunately it happens too often that I cannot see a client anymore, because they fall in love, and it bothers me, because I can`t repeat and I don`t want to exploit them, either. In the love area: In one case a guy wanted me to quit the job, and asked me to take money as compensation for the loss of my job. That went on for a while, until I found a regular job and declined his money for good, even while he offered support. Nevertheless of course he was generous , too. But it was talked about in an honest way, and the sympathy was not dependend on the financial aspect.
I think that is a part where usually escorts differ from regular gold diggers. We draw the line financially where "love and romance" begins, where cold-hearted regular women (or some dumb deluded whores
)-..... lol) draw the line for the aspect of "gold digging" with the manipulations of romance. Or consider money an aspect of romance.
As in your position, I do see the generosity on your mistresses behalf largely based on the fact, that - I assume so (correct my assumption, if I am completely wrong) - she was an illegitimate relationship within the shadows of a marriage. Hence, the financial aspect is always interwoven, and correctly so. A mistress is "submissive" to a marriage on more than one aspect, a marriage is a financialo se3curtiy contract, which the mistress supports with her code of conduct (which is secrecy and submissiveness) so, rightfully - IMHO - she has a right for financial compensation, since she basically is "non existent" politically and a second class citizen. I mean if she is left ,she has nothing. He has it all, the wife , too and I have been in a situation where I remembered , WHY I charged money in the first place. It`s a non full relationship, and it has nothing to do with true love. Things like this have a tendency to get ugly, specially when the worlds collide for some reason or the other. Men make excuses to please their wives, put mistresses down, blame it all on them and whatnot. At the end it`s a game and it`s more fun to play when money and security is involved. (that was a cynical joke). That said, people who marry (and don`t take that the "light" way) are searching for relationship circumvented by social security and finances, hence the payment aspect. So, no surprise that they pay escorts AND mistresses. Some don`t, and I consider them scumbags
) (lol)....
Why scumbags? Because I consider someone that truly shares "love" as in "romantic love" with one (or more than one, hence polyamory) person to not be selfish. And consider either to come clean , or to take responsibility. This means, either releasing the mistress, or releasing the wife (in terms of monogamy). Since this does not happen, the aspoect of "aspect of services rendered" is always implicit. I take it, escorts are smarter than secret mistresses when it comes to grasping that aspect, and hence charge money for secrecy. I do say of a client relationship within psychotherapy similar. It embraces the aspect of the selfishness (or lets say - less "mean" - self-centered-ness) is inherent as well. A therapy is not abouit the therapist, except you use him as a tool and pay him. But the therapist does not knock at your door and sob abouit his marital issues with you at 6am in the morning. Married lovers do. Mistresses don`t , because hardly any mistress has access to the married man`s life in the same way, a married man has access to a mistress` life. It`s shaped one-sided.
Yes, when I speak of the commodification of relationships/emotion (to completely generalize it out), especially in reference to a "Shades of Grey" style relationship - which by the way I would consider, purely IMHO, very infantile in nature - it is more that of two people seeing themselves as having value to offer and bargain and working with each other on that basis. Which is explicit in our world, and rapidly more and more implicit in the wider world outside - which "Shades of Grey" can be seen as a benchmark for an ever more explicit expression thereof.
Originally Posted by Qziz
Totally agree!! Super thought triggering point. I really love this discussion and the brainstorming aspects of veering off topic within! Thank you!
I guess you get that pun a lot...
She loved watching me with other women and joining in. If it wasn't for TWA Flight 800 taking her mother and sister we would still be married today. Though after she had the girls she settled into housewife mode. But even to this day when she brings them down to visit she slips out of that mode into the kinky little minx I married eons ago.