MightyPen

As I said in my comment within your post, you already said pretty much everything I was going to. But I wanted to highlight this part in particular, and how closely it matches one of my core beliefs about human relationships. Other people are awesome and exciting and intoxicating... but they always remain other, separate people, and they are not subject to a prison built of our own needs or emotional expectations. Losing sight of that boundary leads to dark places.

Similarly, I usually end my business meetings with one last cup of my client's ass.

That would be a very, very good idea. Not to set or enforce prices; but to provide support to every single provider, so that they can be informed and market-savvy and each set the highest price that works for them.

I've been reading this thread closely and, while the discussion has been frank, sometimes blunt, and there are strong and conflicting opinions, it's been pretty civil. It's been valuable to me to read these different yet honest views of real, live women who do sex work for a living and each know what they're talking about. Although I can see how this might make some people (especially consumers) uncomfortable, I disagree that the discussion is un-CERB-y. A thread whose premise was "Sally X is charging way too little! Let's confront her!" would be bad. A general thread about "hey, how are prices set? How should they be set?" strikes me as smack-bang on topic for the board -- provided it's civil. I think as long as there are informed and respectful viewpoints to share, those inclined to contribute something meaningful should be allowed to do so. For my part: I don't know anything about the experience of being a sex worker so I only have vague concepts to go on. My uninformed feeling is that "enforcement" of prices is bad in principle for a bunch of reasons. But... what about a hypothetical voluntary sex workers' association that reaches out to SPs, invites them to work with their fellow providers, and keeps newbies informed about their options in the business? One that just invites everyone to cooperate to help maximize revenue from a very human and intimate service? I'd be cool with that. It would have problems and failings of its own, but it would have a lot of human merit, too. Open, free markets are sometimes efficient... but they're never, ever wise or compassionate, and some of that is necessary too.

Wait, wait... I know exactly who's responsible for this: CULPRIT And FUCK that guy! He's too much. I always though he was a creep anyway... though he's certainly having a good year.

Yup...this is the first time I'm actually keen for the start of the new season. Heretically, the books never really grabbed me (though maybe it's time to try them again). I kind of liked the first season, but wasn't overwhelmed. Then I was more intrigued by the second (and blown away -- ha ha! -- by the Battle of the Blackwater). Then I found the third season really took off with depth and moving the pieces forward. I'll be watching tomorrow night, and then follow it immediately with PVR'ed Cosmos. Should be a good night! :)

Wow! Nice job RG! Let's see: RG "Joined Date: 0/01/2010". On average that's... uh... seven posts a day every day for over four years! Congratulations... and keep 'em coming.

Haha! Well done! Took a minute before I remembered what day it was. :)

For a very long time our culture insisted that one relationship could and would be the sole source of all our relationship and human-to-human needs: passionate love wild eroticism responsible love dutiful pair-bonding partners in big projects (kids/careers/whatever) mutual support in crises of whatever kind ... but it turns out that in fact, one person is seldom all of those things, or at least not all of those things at the same time. And that's true for both men and women, even though our society has been deeply reluctant to acknowledge that wives and mothers crave sex and excitement too. People find different ways to deal with this: the martyrdom of dutiful resignation, enormously risky secret affairs, whatever. But it's no surprise that even in happy marriages, people crave things on the outside, and inevitably lots of people take steps to acquire it. What's surprising is that we've been so narrow-mindedly terrified to admit it and change our views on relationships, human needs, and how to satisfy the latter honestly and responsibly.

Great thread. I have a wide array of personal kinks and fetishes I like to pursue with SPs. Since I grew up with them, I feel pretty understanding of others whose unique psychology leads them to seek out stuff that might not make sense to me. My basic philosophy: if you're all adults, consent makes it cool. I haven't seen a lot of hostility to alternate lifestyles here on CERB, but maybe I haven't been reading all the threads closely enough. I DO want to acknowledge one particular thing you raised though, Meghan: that "wham-bam-thank you ma'am" is actually okay. We spend a lot of time on this site extolling the virtues of respecting SPs as human beings and finding the value in the human connection that's available within sex work. Not just "we" -- I spend a lot of time on that subject here. Maybe we dwell on that part of sex work disproportionately on CERB because so few other sex-work communities do. But it's important to acknowledge that just as romantic soft-focus "lovemaking" isn't the only or even the "highest" form of sex for a couple, neither is there only one "best and moral" way to see a sex worker. Entirely healthy people sometimes hunger for an anonymous but sweaty fuck. If that's the thing a client is after, that's entirely cool. For my part, time spent with SPs has allowed me explore stuff that I know has been a challenge to play with in my conventional relationships. I can only cheer for others who have the same experience, even if their particular kinks don't happen to push my personal buttons.

Heehee! "I demand." Great strategy there. Do you think that's ever actually worked for him? Dick: "Where are you?" Jane: *silence* Dick: "I DEMAND an explanation!" Jane: "Oh, well in that case, since you're demanding... the answer is..." I doubt it. I certainly hope not. What was I saying before? People are weird. (Also kinda reminds me of " " from A Few Good Men.)

Man, people are weird. The subject of communicating with SPs completely aside, who on earth imagines that once any conversation gets to this point: ... that things can possibly go well? What happy outcome do they imagine is going to transpire from there? And the icing on the cake, following that with: ... uh, maybe because you've just been filling my phone with dickish, petulant texts? Sigh.

Remember this is a public board; so nobody's eavesdropping on conversations when they post here, or being presumptuous in responding. Posts are how you participate and join in the community. In your workplace lunchroom scenario I think it's much more like this: FRUSTRATED GUY: (Aloud to room) "Dammit! I just tried calling my ex and she won't answer my calls! We just broke up last week, you'd think she'd be over it and could at least answer! I don't get exes, they're so frustrating. Argh! I just had to get that off my chest. GUY 1: "Hey, you may want to give her a little more time. It's pretty soon after the breakup." GUY 2: "Yeah, sometimes No Contact is just the way to go for a while dude. Helps people get over things and move on with their lives." GIRL 1: "Yup. I've had a few rough breakups and I know I needed some space for quite a while. Sometimes I just can't talk to the guy again." GUY 3: "Hey, Frustrated Guy, maybe just don't call he for a while and get out with some people? There's a new place opening up this weekend, maybe go there. It might be a good idea to get your mind off your ex and meet some new people... first new steps and all that." GUY 4: "OH JEEzuz come off it you bunch of arrogant suckups! What's with you people and this ridiculous place!?" GUY 1, GUY 2, GIRL 1, GUY 3: "Huh?" Sorta like that.

Hmm... I'm having a hard time with this sentence, too. Someone posts a question and people offer their answers, and you think those answers are probably right... but you're troubled that the people are taking the time to answer? That's just an interpretation, though. You're assigning motives based on supposition. Isn't it possible that people are just honestly answering the question? We're on a board where posting words is the community's primary currency. Even if the answers are fundamentally the same, several matching replies suggest that the answer is a commonly held opinion. Plus, people tend to add their own nuances, touching on new facets and related ideas... and that's what keeps a conversation going. If everyone backed off after any question gets a single reply, it'd be a pretty dull place.

That'd be a shame -- I honestly hope you choose to stick around instead. Reading back over the thread, it looks to me like most people have been pretty respectful of you when responding. It's probably no fun for you to hear the same thing ten different times, and a few of those replies showing some sharp edges. But basically I think people were just trying to answer your question best they could. I know I was. You asked a good question, and got some honest answers. I hope you decide to stay and ask some more questions, and to help answer others.

As so many others are saying, be careful how you position your relationships with SPs in your life. SPs offer awesome times, but it's paid companionship for a specific duration. I don't think SPs should really be expected to maintain that relationship outside your sessions. Not only would that be impractical to keep up with every client; it also erodes the boundaries that keep sex work healthy and sensible for both parties. One of the big hazards as a client is getting confused about the nature of your relationship with an SP. It's cool and awesome but it's at heart a professional relationship -- not personal. Also, maybe think about the way you're interacting with the SPs when you contact them casually: If you just want to let her know that you're thinking about her or wish her well, send her a quick message and leave it at that. It's one-way, and you aren't expecting anything back or measuring the outcome by her response. This kind of message is thoughtful and generous. But... if you're sending an SP a message in order to get a reply, and to start a conversation... well, that's different. Now you're asking her to give YOU something -- her time and attention -- and that's not really being generous any more. In fact, it's kind of the opposite. Last thing: you mention that you've been seeing SPs for five years, since you turned 18. I don't know you, but that kind of worries me a little. I hope you're also making time in your life to develop personal relationships with "civilian" women in your everyday life. Time spent with SPs is awesome, but that experience is just a very tiny subset of a full relationship. It takes work and meeting responsibilities to earn an ongoing place in someone's thoughts and life. More time and energy on that stuff for a while, maybe? Just a thought.

Naturally I agree completely that disreputable "breeders" suck and should be hounded (ha ha!) out of business. But reputable breeders are cool. What I would like to see changed is some people's automatic assumption that a breeder is the only good place to get a dog. As Cristy points out, there are shelters aplenty with wonderful dogs who need a good home. I'd love to get the word out that there's not just virtue in rescuing a dog, there's a real reward in the loving pets you can bring into your life this way. Rescue dogs don't need to have unmanageable "issues"; they can be marvellous. Sigh... back in the '90s I rescued a tiny little dog with my partner at the time. The little creature had awkward limbs and broken teeth from lifelong confinement breeding puppies... but once she learned to trust us she was marvelous. I could tell stories... About five years later she shuffled off this mortal coil, but those were five very good years (I like to think her best). This reminds me too of this story I saw recently. I haven't done the checking to be certain it's all true, but I think it is: Ode to a rescued dog

It's a shared responsibility, and for that reason it's a good idea to simply assume it's yours. Maintain a general sense of time during the session, and know when it's time to start making motions to go. If you think the SP might genuinely want you to stay longer, you can say something like: "Oh! I see our time's almost up. I'd love to stay and talk some more but I don't want to intrude." If she really wants you to stay, she'll let you know. If not, she'll smoothly find a way to let you know that too. But don't just decide to stick around until she says something: it's kind of inconsiderate to put the SP in a position where she has to ask you to leave. That said, if your sense of time really does slip away from you and you find you've exceeded your appointment's boundaries, then you did the right thing -- offer a tip for your oversight and the additional time you've consumed. I've done exactly this before -- we were so caught up in a discussion and the flow was so natural and comfortable that I didn't notice the time at all, so I gave her something to cover the extra.* Once again, if the SP was just plain enjoying the extra company, she can just decline the tip. But it's her choice, so offer the tip and let her make the decision. * Some years ago, I also made the opposite mistake: one SP and I were getting along famously and I totally lost track of time until just moments before the end of the session. I kind of panicked and very clumsily said something like "Oh! My time is up! Sorry!" and practically leaped to my feet and fled her place while dressing myself. We traded some e-mails later in which I explained, and she said "Yeah, I wondered what was up!" Shame, what a wasted opportunity for a nice evening. I've learned since then.

Sure, some others are losing interest. Some aren't. The trick right now is to look inside yourself and ask: why exactly are YOU losing interest? You've noticed a change in yourself; now pick up that thread, and follow where it leads inside yourself. Do that, and you'll learn something unique about YOU that nobody else can tell you. Additional Comments: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! Hissssssssss. :)

Totally with you Meg! On average, people today are absolutely less engaged with their fellow human beings, and tend to see other people as objects in their environment, instead of entities and peers. I don't know that the e-world is to blame though; more like the impersonal nature of the e-world is just an extension of the same tendency. This has been a trend in cities for 100 years; when you force a LOT of people into an environment like sardines, one of the only ways to keep your sanity is to create a bubble of private space. I remember a tv show called War, by journalist Gwynne Dyer, that aired in the 80s. He conducted an experiment where an actor lay down on the ground and curled up in two places: a) a big city (I remember it as New York but could be wrong) b) a modestly-sized village in (I think) Norway In a), people just stepped over and past he prone figure. The city had trained them not to recognize other people as actual human beings, but rather objects in the environment. In b), it took only minutes before someone stopped, bent over, and touched the prone actor and asked if they were okay. Clearly, I never forgot the example. De-personalization is a natural consequence of urban life (and a few other factors I think). Seems like the canary in the coal mine for our society's future. By the way, I promise that if I'd seen you slip, I'd not only have helped you up, but I would have insisted upon a brief parking-lot waltz, just to amaze the natives. Really! :) ps Today I learned: my typing turns to shit after two glasses of wine.

I don't put a lot of value on glitzy stuff for stuff's sake, so my big-ticket items are just modest and practical with quality. I'm a really cheap date; I'd rather eat at a pub than a fancy restaurant. I do have some hobbies (not just this one!) that consume a chunk of my play money, and two dogs I hope I take very good care of (with associated vet bills); but these things give me more than enough pleasure in return to justify the expense. I do allow myself to spend on some pleasures from time to time, always put aside a chunk of any windfall for silly fun, and when I'm on holiday the rules change and I really enjoy myself; if I'm a spendthrift, that is the time! Other than that, pretty conscious of managing my finances. But... my eventual aim is to ultimately spend everything I've earned before I'm done, and ideally arrive at exactly $0 in assets in the moment right before I keel over and die. :)

Wow; it's been a while since I've looked forward to a couple of continuous hours of great TV, but tonight was one such evening. Both at 9pm: a) The last episode of True Detective Okays, so I was late coming to this particular party; I just watched the preceding season over the last week, and watched the final episode tonight. It's been a hypnotic journey through a sprawling mystery in Louisiana spanning two decades, and told in a braided narrative of past, more recent past, and present. Plus, brilliantly shot and directed, not to mention strikingly well acted. Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson both do brilliant work. McConaughey's performance stands out more because he's given a character with much more to work with; deep philosophy, draining nihilism, catastrophic past and a singlular obsession with the series' central mystery. But Harrelson does a similarly remarkable job with a more familiar and "safer" character, defined mostly by a burning anger and fidelity issues. The series takes a sometimes brave look at the way two people can claw at their relationship and burn it to the ground. And yet, years later, still recognize the shadow of their ongoing connection. Did anyone else here watch this? The second treat was: b) The first episode of the new Cosmos I remember being a young teen when Carl Sagan's original Cosmos aired on PBS in 1980. I watched the whole series again a few years ago; but when I tried again this year its age was showing. They've just begun to air a new series that follows the template of the original but promises to take its own journey. I was a bit worried that Neil DeGrasse Tyson, whose jovial 'buddy" persona sometimes resembles "Chuckles the Astronomer", might not be able convey the depth of the ideas Cosmos explores in the way Sagan did all those years ago. But in the end I think he did fine, and I'm really curious to see how they spend the remaining 12 hours. So... if you haven't watched True Detective, I encourage you to go back and watch it now that the season is done. And if you didn't watch the premiere of Cosmos, I recommend you start watching next week. (But PVR it and watch it later; the commercials would be irritating as hell if you had to actually watch them.)

Or a "Pelt our troops with rocks and garbage!" sticker.

Plus, your boss who paid for the trip insists on hanging out with you all the time, and keeps insisting you go everywhere he wants to go and do the things that interest him because after all, he's the one paying. I think the guys in question just assume that their own company is at worst a neutral factor for the SP, and more likely in their minds a positive one ("because look at me, I'm awesome!"), when in fact the perpetual, enforced company of a stranger quickly becomes tedious. But the kind of person most likely to miss this point, is also the one least likely to ever understand it even if it's explained to them.

Remember! When choosing you professional descriptor, there's no more reliable source than the Dungeons and Dragons Dungeon Master's Guide "random harlot table". Simply decide your classiness for the day and choose the appropriate title... or go full-on Random Encounter and roll d00 before composing your ad!