Biggest misconceptions about SPs?
- Thread starter godfather_77
- Start date
I think that my biggest misconception about SPs was thinking that they were very open when it came to sex and relationships. I have learned over time a few things that contradict this assumption.
1) MOST SPs don't think of themselves having sex with clients as cheating on their boyfriend/spouse.
2) Many SPs don't tell the guys they are dating/married to that they are SPs. (See point #1 above) because they feel that it isn't any of his business.
3) If someone dating or married to an SP has sex with another girl (SP or not) THAT is considered cheating, despite #1 above.
4) Some SPs don't sleep with the guys they are dating because they are saving it for marriage (not sure what IT is)
5) Some SPs who provide certain services as SPs, refuse to provide those same services to their boyfriend/spouse (greek and CIM are two that have been mentioned)
6) Some SPs who regularly do fully interactive duos will flat out refuse to have a 3some with another girl (SP or not) with their boyfriend/spouse.
The hypocracy that I hear from some SPs sometimes baffles me
1) MOST SPs don't think of themselves having sex with clients as cheating on their boyfriend/spouse.
2) Many SPs don't tell the guys they are dating/married to that they are SPs. (See point #1 above) because they feel that it isn't any of his business.
3) If someone dating or married to an SP has sex with another girl (SP or not) THAT is considered cheating, despite #1 above.
4) Some SPs don't sleep with the guys they are dating because they are saving it for marriage (not sure what IT is)
5) Some SPs who provide certain services as SPs, refuse to provide those same services to their boyfriend/spouse (greek and CIM are two that have been mentioned)
6) Some SPs who regularly do fully interactive duos will flat out refuse to have a 3some with another girl (SP or not) with their boyfriend/spouse.
The hypocracy that I hear from some SPs sometimes baffles me
wow. That was a harsh comment on the state of my mental well-being and my emotional security, especially when I was referring to the thread in general, not to a person in particular, and for all that I wrote I might not even have been referring to SP(s) at all. Still, a general comment from me turned into a direct attack from you, and some pretty big assumptions, all things considered. Most of them wrong too, I might add, although I'll happily confess to a healthy (but not excessive) degree of cynicism.
Wasn't this thread, and in fact almost all of the SP comments in particular, directed at dispelling the fallacy of preconceived notions and assumptions? And yet here we are, with you making some gigantic ones yourself. Sort of flies in the face wouldn't you say?
I said MANY SPs, not Most SPs. I'm sure that there are many of them, maybe even most, who are honest with their SO. But, there are many who are not honest with their SO about what they do.
As for your other comments, your attempted justifications serve only to show that my points were correct. I never said that there weren't reasons or whatever, I simply said that those things were things that I did NOT expect to be the case and then I found out that they were the way things were.
SPs
I find it laughable you've appointed yourself an expert who is qualified to speak on behalf of all SPs; are you an escort?
And I find it laughable that you somehow came up with that interpretation of what I said.
I am not saying anything on behalf of any SP, much less all of them.
I was answering the OP, and giving details about a misconception that I had about SPs and the truth of the situation which I have discovered through talking with many of them and reading posts on this and other boards.
but I guess that distinction is beyond your ability to understand.
Another possibility is that they have only seen SPs who are superficial and shallow and then they assumed that ALL SPs were the same.
I think that's another huge misconception made by many. They see a small number of SPs, all with the same personality type and then they assume that ALL SPs are similar.
What they really should be asking themselves, especially if they aren't happy about the personalities of the SPs that they have seen, is what made them chose those particular SPs instead of others?
Isn't it also strange how so many pooners choose an SP based entirely on how beautiful her face is and then they spend their session looking at the back or top of her head.
And that would make twice in a row that you've made a giant assumption about me that is totally incorrect. I can absolutely understand why people can enjoy sex with strangers or care about the less attractive. If someone who knew me heard you saying that about me they'd laugh their asses off. You have, again. misconstrued amusement over something to be judgment about something else, to your error and my detriment. You're being far more judgmental than I am here, and what you inferred about my previous posts was completely incorrect as well. In fact, there's not one thing that you've said about me or have inferred from my posts that has been correct so far.
As far as the "roasting" goes, have at it if you like. If you say something funny I'll laugh right along with you, but the thought provoking, introspective psychological self-examination you're looking forward to is based on a faulty premise.
As I said to another poster some time back, as a psychologist you make a good hair dresser. That doesn't invalidate some of the points you made, which are good ones, but they're good ones that simply don't apply in the context where you're trying to use them against me here.
Mythconceptions more like it....
I would say I shared those common ideas about this work and the girls who do it as relayed by popular media. I could not have been any farther from the mark.
Like so many things in life, knowledge dispels ignorance.
I have shared fantastic times with many women since entering this hobby. I have discovered that, for the most part, they are women I would actively pursue in the real world (perhaps I have and didn't know it!)
I would rather spend a day at the lake with most of the SP's I've met then a number of people I now spend time with in my life.
There is an honesty in what we do, why we meet. What brings us together. I appreciate that and enjoy it immensely.
I have discovered that many of these girls are beautiful inside and out, educated and entertaining, and just plain out-and-out darn sexy.
Works for me!
xoxo to all the ladies...
Vid
I would say I shared those common ideas about this work and the girls who do it as relayed by popular media. I could not have been any farther from the mark.
Like so many things in life, knowledge dispels ignorance.
I have shared fantastic times with many women since entering this hobby. I have discovered that, for the most part, they are women I would actively pursue in the real world (perhaps I have and didn't know it!)
I would rather spend a day at the lake with most of the SP's I've met then a number of people I now spend time with in my life.
There is an honesty in what we do, why we meet. What brings us together. I appreciate that and enjoy it immensely.
I have discovered that many of these girls are beautiful inside and out, educated and entertaining, and just plain out-and-out darn sexy.
Works for me!
xoxo to all the ladies...
Vid
lolHey this is the internet.. and yes, indeed I most certainly make assumptions about posts read here and can extrapolate all kinds of thought from them. Your post made me think those thoughts.... since I've seen posts just like yours before, and it smacked so much of the same cynicism that my response was already ready.. I knew what I thought of a person who would assume we are liars if say we enjoy our work.
Automatic responses are wrong sometimes, but they are what we need to have the edge to survive in our world. We group similar experiences together, classify them, and react based on previous outcomes. It is a natural thing to do, and it is a part of what misconceptions are all about.
I don't know you from Adam and I have no real idea of who you are, of course! It is how you present yourself, however, that is quite telling.. and I see from the thought process imbued in your replies, that there is more to you than meets the eye.
If you want to be seen as the person you are, perhaps being a bit more prudent on keeping the nasty side from sight might be an idea
xoxo
Nina
there was nothing nasty about my post at all, only your interpretation, and what you inferred about me from it. Since you're going to insist that I was talking about SPs (despite my quite strongly implying otherwise in my responses to you) I'll clear it up for you. I didn't bother before because I quite frankly didn't think my remarking that I was amused would cause you such a stir, but hey, I wasn't specific about why I was amused, so I guess you're entitled to misconstrue, if not to jump on the attack. You could have asked what I thought was funny first.
I was laughing because there's a number of unintentional ironies scattered throughout the thread, whether the authors were aware of them or not. One of the more innocent and obvious ones is that one poster commented that the girls were only in it for the money. Well gee, it's a job, and for what reason does everyone go to their job, whatever that might be? For the money? Ya think? To use this as an example indicting SPs struck me as both ironic and funny, since it equally indites the author. There's a few other ones in there that I'm not going to point out since I don't plan to get into flame wars with half the board over some unintentional humour, but if you read carefully you'll find them yourself.
The prudence you mentioned would have involved finding out what it was you were lambasting me for rather than the automatic response you mentioned. If you still want to attack on this basis, since I've elaborated a little, you should feel free to do so. I have nothing whatsoever against you, knee-jerking aside, and I've got a thick skin and a well-developed sense of humour, so go for it.
Hmmmm, I wonder if your envy of the mental mastery of the very people you ridicule is an example of one of those ironies?
Thanks for the interpretation Nina, I never know what the heck I'm talking about.lol I'm gonna read into your comment, and think you just called me smart!
I'm going to assume you're just as awesome as can be.. and yes, I still love ya, darlin!!
xoxo
Nina
I thought I was calling him stupid, but your take on it makes more sense, it's no wonder I love ya!
I think there is a big difference between being in it for the money and ONLY being in it for the money.
Everyone who goes to work is in it for the money. Would they go if they weren't being paid? Not likely.
But, I feel sorry for anyone who does any job ONLY for the money and receives no other pleasure or satisfaction from it.
Everyone who goes to work is in it for the money. Would they go if they weren't being paid? Not likely.
But, I feel sorry for anyone who does any job ONLY for the money and receives no other pleasure or satisfaction from it.
Nope. mental mastery of the straight face (which is what I was referring to) isn't something that I envy, nor does it denote intelligence or the lack thereof, nor did I call anyone stupid here. I only said that Nina was mistaken. Nina is anything but stupid.Hmmmm, I wonder if your envy of the mental mastery of the very people you ridicule is an example of one of those ironies?
What a shame when being able to see the humour in the world is a bad thing. Ah, well, suffer me gladly for a fool, because I wouldn't have it any other way.(no matter how silly that sounds. I feel more than free to laugh at myself too)
a nun, a rabbi, and a camel walk into a bar...
