Abstract
A growing but still limited body of research has examined the views and experiences of clients of sex workers. The current study is based on a content analysis of 2,442 postings on a popular forum where clients review sex workers and discuss their interactions with them. The article explores the reported experiences of a sample of clients who become involved in extended relationships with escorts and the emotional aspects of these associations. Findings show that there is a spectrum of experiences, ranging from counterfeit intimacy to an authentic emotional bond between the two parties. Many clients struggle with the unanticipated demands of an evolving romantic relationship and experience ongoing tension between its instrumental and expressive dimensions.
Until recently, very little research had been conducted on the clients of sex workers. This changed with the advent of the Internet and web-based browsing, which has provided opportunities for clients to discuss their experiences with other clients or with escorts. There are now many websites devoted to this, some of which have been content-analyzed by researchers. But several questions regarding clients have yet to be investigated. This article examines one such issue: those clients who become emotionally involved with a particular sex provider and the kinds of opportunities, dilemmas, and problems this relationship may generate. While a proportion of these clients initially become involved with an escort for sexual reasons, many develop strong feelings, resulting in a “relationship” that can become emotionally satisfying for the client and/or the sex provider or may cause significant psychological and interpersonal difficulties for one or both parties.
Clients of Sex Workers
Although research on the clients of sex workers remains small in comparison to that of sex workers themselves (Weitzer 2009), the literature on clients has grown somewhat in recent years. Some of these studies are based on in-depth interviews or large-scale surveys (Holzman and Pines 1982; Jordan 1997; Monto 2010; Sanders 2008b), while other studies utilize online discussion boards to examine how clients perceive and justify buying sex, how they evaluate prostitutes they have visited and describe their experiences, and the emergence of a code of ethics within the client subculture (Earle and Sharp 2007; Holt and Blevins 2007; Huff 2011; Pettinger 2011). The literature on clients shows that they vary considerably in their demographics, motives, and experiences with sex workers (Weitzer 2009).
Motives
Regarding motives, some clients buy sex opportunistically when they encounter a sex worker in a bar or on the street, whereas others plan a liaison ahead of time for one or more of the following reasons (see Cohen 1986; Jordan 1997; Katsulis 2010; McKeganey and Barnard 1996; Monto 2010; O’Connell Davidson 1998; Plumridge et al. 1997; Sanders 2008b):
some have difficulty finding a partner for a conventional relationship;
some are unsatisfied with their current partnered relationship;
some patronize sex workers in order to bolster their masculinity;
some seek to abuse other people and target sex workers because they are viewed as accessible and unlikely to report victimization to the police;
some are looking to fulfill a fantasy with a person who will engage in desired activities (such as role playing or sadomasochism), someone with a desired physical appearance, ethnicity, or cultural background (often based on stereotypes of other nationalities), or someone of a different sexual orientation (e.g., heterosexual men experimenting with gay or transgender individuals; heterosexual women seeking lesbian experiences, etc.);
some buy sex because they find it risky, thrilling, or sporting (calling themselves hobbyists);
some wish to avoid the obligations or emotional complications involved in a conventional relationship; and
some seek a limited romantic or emotional connection in addition to or instead of a purely physical experience.
Many of these motives also intersect with client attitudes toward sex workers. Some clients have stereotypical or poor opinions of these workers, while others have quite positive views of them (Earle and Sharp 2007; Holt and Blevins 2007; Lowman and Atchison 2006; Peng 2007; Sanders 2008b).
The Girlfriend Experience (GFE)
Several researchers have highlighted changes in sexual commerce in recent decades. This includes the diversification of erotic entertainment and the cultural “mainstreaming” of certain activities and products that were previously marginalized and highly stigmatized (Attwood 2006; Comella 2010). This partial normalization has also been observed in escort prostitution, where some encounters have come to resemble quasi-dating relationships. Many sex workers now claim to provide a GFE and this appears to be desired by many clients as well. This is not an entirely new phenomenon, given the historic recreational and affective aspects of brothel and courtesan prostitution (e.g., Hershatter 1999; Norberg 1998). But some analysts argue that the exchange of both sex and intimacy has recently expanded in indoor prostitution (Bernstein 2007; Lever and Dolnick 2010; Sanders 2008b). Rather than being modeled on dating or marital models, this relational form has come to encompass what Bernstein (2007, 103) calls bounded authenticity: an “authentic emotional and physical connection” that is genuine but limited by both time constraints and the fact that the benefits are purchased, not freely given. Sex remains part of the service but it is coupled with mutual sharing, support, and companionship. Like any other commercially packaged leisure activity, intimacy is now readily available for a price.
Many clients of indoor sex workers desire expressions of emotionality from the provider, and the latter have become increasingly sensitive to making this part of the experience (Castle and Lee 2008; Earle and Sharp 2007; Holt and Blevins 2007; Plumridge et al. 1997; Sanders 2008a). In fact, the quality of the physical experience is often contingent on the perceived reality of at least some emotional chemistry between the parties (Earle and Sharp 2007; Sanders 2008b). To a degree, therefore, this type of sexual commerce offers intangible benefits that mirror nonpaid relationships—except that the amity and intimacy are paid for. Seeking a meaningful GFE, these clients want to engage with women whose capacity for emotional expression is equal to or more important than their physical attributes (Earle and Sharp 2007; Milrod and Monto, 2012). Cuddling, kissing, and being emotionally cared for is often desired. The men also pride themselves on their ability to provide pleasure to the sex worker (Huff 2011), rendering the sexual enjoyment more reciprocal than what generally occurs in street prostitution (Lever and Dolnick 2010). One study of call girls found that 17 percent of them reported that they had received oral sex from their last client; in 30 percent of the cases, the provider’s last client performed nonsexual massage on her and in 42 percent, the two parties engaged in hugging, caressing, and kissing (Lever and Dolnick 2010).
Intimacy as Commodity
Giddens (1992) argues that intimacy is a function of a “pure relationship” whose participants are equals engaged in interpersonal sharing. The pure relationship rests on a foundation of “plastic sexuality, freed from the needs of reproduction” (Giddens 1992, 2) and entered into for its own sake. Accordingly, the setting of clear boundaries becomes important for sustaining an egalitarian concept of intimacy. One implication of the pure relationship is that the intimacy involved transcends any economic relationship between the two parties. Other theorists, however, have challenged Giddens’ formulation. They argue that relations involving intimacy are not necessarily insulated from economic activity. Intimacy becomes a factor in relations that include “a set of distinctive understandings and practices that operate within a boundary, designate certain sorts of economic transactions as appropriate for the relation, bar other transactions as inappropriate, and adopt certain media for reckoning and facilitating economic transactions within the relation” (Zelizer 2005, 35).
The GFE version of prostitution fuses economic and affective dimensions; it does not demand unlimited emotional investment in the transaction, but it does conflate and commodify both the physical conduct and the emotional intimacy (Constable 2009). GFE is offered as a specific service in which intimacy is presented as a valuable commodity, and the client expects at least a facsimile of affection. The preference for the GFE begs the question: do those clients who become emotionally involved with a sex worker recognize that the latter may be offering only “counterfeit intimacy” (Boles and Garbin 1974; Enck and Preston 1988), where the provider’s expression of feelings is entirely manufactured? Boles and Garbin (1974) describe the counterfeit intimacy used by dancers in strip clubs as simply an exploitative tactic and a means of reaping material rewards from customers, while Frank (1998) suggests that this does not necessarily apply to dancers’ relations with regular clients where genuine bonds may develop over time. Likewise, clients of prostitutes may convince themselves that there are authentic aspects of their “relationship” with a sex worker. Clients who repeatedly see an “all-time favorite” (ATF) often develop what they perceive to be a genuine emotional connection with this person. They also believe that their feelings are experienced and reciprocated by the provider. The issue then becomes one of boundary slippage—the usual constraints imposed by the time-sensitive paid encounter are relaxed in the client’s mind, thereby creating both opportunities and problems for the client.
Men who develop romantic feelings for a particular sex provider thus depart from the conventional view that clients simply commodify and objectify prostitutes. One study of indoor clients in Britain, for example, described them as “respectful of sex workers as women and as workers rather than simplifying their identities as Others”; the men did not view the providers “simply as bodies” or as “targets of sexual conquest” (Sanders 2008b: 60, 98), but instead as persons with whom they could have a meaningful personal connection (see also Jordan 1997; Plumridge et al. 1997). Drawing on data from a client discussion board on the web, this article explores the ways in which clients make sense of their relations with sex providers and how they negotiate the boundaries of these relationships.
Methods
Data for this study were drawn from the TheEroticReview.com (TER), a publicly accessible website devoted to client reviews of sex workers and discussions of all aspects of commercial sex. TER has over a million registered members. The site receives between 250,000 and 300,000 unique visitors daily and contains more than 800,000 reviews, including the names and contact information of 75,000–100,000 “providers,” a name for sex workers who can be located using the site. There are over fifty discussion boards on TER. These are open boards that can be accessed by anyone and do not require login for viewing. Boards are listed by US metropolitan area or according to special interests such as “The Erotic Highway,” which is centered on relationship issues between clients and providers. After registering once with an anonymous username or alias, visitors to The Erotic Highway can post questions and initiate discussions about sexual/relationship issues between heterosexual male clients and female providers. Clients, and to a lesser extent providers, participate in discussion threads ranging from deeply relational matters to advice on client and provider etiquette, specific sexual techniques, and general sexual education.
We reviewed and coded 2,442 postings in 394 threads on The Erotic Highway from the inception of the board on May 9, 2006 to July 15, 2011. The threads for this data set were specifically identified on the basis of content related to sexual and romantic relationships. The goal of obtaining eighty relevant threads was set for each calendar year. Beginning in May 2006 and examining consecutive threads through July 2011, a total of 394 discussion threads were chosen for review: eighty threads per year from 2006 to 2009, forty-four threads in 2010, and thirty in 2011. Threads regarding administrative issues or technical queries pertaining to the general use of the website were excluded. Similarly, threads requiring specific medical advice or referring to other discussion boards on the site were also omitted. Original usernames of posters were retained. To create the final data set, the threads were copied, pasted, and saved to Rich Text Format (.rtf) files using HyperRESEARCH qualitative data-analysis software. We began with line-by-line open coding, and then performed the “constant comparison” procedure to identify recurrent patterns in the data as well as variations on core themes, resulting in more fine-tuned coding. In this analytic framework, comments and concerns related to client–provider boundaries and intimacy were used to understand client assessments of their relationships with providers. Through repeated appearances in the postings, codes were distilled into categories that were used to structure the analysis according to standard grounded theory procedures (Strauss and Corbin 1998). The authors each coded approximately half of the threads. To ensure consistency, a random subset of 10 percent of the threads was coded independently by each author. An agreement score of 92 percent indicated strong interrater reliability.
In terms of limitations, The Erotic Highway’s moderated question-and-answer format and its specific relationship-oriented subject matter may have restricted the range of content on the board, leaving out other issues or some experiences of some posters. Some users were frequent posters and others posted lengthy comments that often contained multiple or overlapping themes, thus making it impossible to precisely quantify the number of board participants in any particular category. It is also not known if posters on The Erotic Highway are representative of the majority of individuals on TER or the larger population using the Internet to access sex providers. Moreover, we were not able to assess the veracity of the content posted on a website where users are anonymous. Nevertheless, the detailed nature of the narratives and the experiences reported on the site lend credence to the conclusion that what is written probably reflects most posters genuine desires, perceptions, and lived experiences.
Findings
An Emotional Connection
Some men pay for sex because of they wish to avoid emotional involvement with a partner. In one survey, 32 percent of customers arrested for soliciting a prostitute said they bought sex because they “didn’t have time” for a conventional relationship, 28 percent did not want “the responsibilities” inherent in such a relationship, and 18 percent said they would “rather have sex with a prostitute than have a conventional relationship with a woman” (Monto 2010). But other men seek an emotional connection with a sex worker. In our data, approximately one-third of the 2,442 postings contained discussions of emotional intimacy in client–provider relationships. A significant proportion of these clients discover, at some point, that they want some emotional connection in addition to the sexual component. These clients express a desire for intimacy beyond the mere physical release. Some who post on the discussion board insist that “the hobby” almost always involves some emotional element. One man cautions:
Men in this hobby who think they are only after sex are deceiving themselves. Sex always involves emotion, with the possibility for eventual affection, closeness, and emotional connection always lurking there. People can fall in love when they least expect it. And that love can last, even while one or both parties are married . . . and even when one is a provider. (Bostongreg)
Another poster, Mrfisher, similarly believes that “the money for sex should not be and is not the main focus. The main focus is the chemistry, companionship, friendship, care, love, and hopefully great sex that are shared during their time together.” One-Is-Al-One concurs: “I love the sex, but it has recently occurred to me that I do it for more than sex. I do it for the affection, closeness, emotional connection, and the sexual release.” He says this helps erase his loneliness, even if temporarily. These men attach significance to touching, conversation, and sharing their private feelings with a sympathetic other. Some men, however, seem cognizant that the affective dimension may be nothing more than a fantasy but nevertheless mine the relationship for whatever emotional rewards it potentially offers: “I am here less for fun and more for the credible illusion of a deep personal connection” (Claudius42310, emphasis added). Men who doubt that the intimacy is genuine constitute our first type, discussed in the following section.
“Can’t Buy Me Love”: Counterfeit Intimacy
Approximately one-fifth of our clients’ postings are by individuals who are convinced that true intimacy cannot be bought. They believe that any apparent emotional “connection” or “chemistry” with a sex worker is being feigned by her, and that many providers give the appearance of caring in order to entice the man and perhaps turn him into a regular customer. In other words, these men recognize what researchers (Boles and Garbin 1974; Enck and Preston 1988) have documented in various arenas of sex for sale: that some sex workers engage in emotion work that is nothing more than “counterfeit intimacy.”
These men counsel others on the site not to fall into the trap of believing that a provider’s displays of emotion or fondness are genuine, and to remember that at least some providers actively strive to fabricate this charade. One client notes that these providers can turn intimacy “on and off at will” (OhmygodwhathaveIdone) and another poster declares that the women “bait their clients into thinking” that they may have a connection that goes beyond the immediate commercial transaction (BigSplooge). Others echo these sentiments:
Some of these ladies are the mistresses of deception. They will lead you on and even tell you they are in love with you . . . and deny everything when you are no longer useful to them. (Lockedheart)
If you think about it, it’s in their interest to do so. Providers tend to play us all the same. We tend to think with our little heads . . . and they take advantage of it. It’s all part of the allure of the event, and if you’re not careful it’s like heroin. (LandDownUnda)
Some providers [are] being unfair by misleading their clients down that slippery slope. It’s always a two-way street and we can’t blame the hobbyist for falling for a gorgeous, sexy, younger woman when she may pull the hobbyist along knowingly. (Addicted2Lust)
Your time with them will seem magical and perhaps even better than any girlfriend you’ve ever had. It is not reality, however. . . . It is the client who crosses the boundary when he starts getting “infatuated” or having other emotional reactions and confuses the nice service he received with something else. (G2)
The sex work literature has documented a variety of situations in which sex workers are commodified by their clients and managers. At least a few clients, however, see themselves as being treated as commodities by sex workers, some of whom are portrayed as gold diggers. As one poster states: “Women in the P4P [pay for play] world ultimately hold men as a commodity to serve their needs, which means that you will ultimately be expendable” (OhmygodwhathaveIdone).
Many of the men in this category take pains to remind other clients that their involvement with a sex worker is first and foremost a fantasy world. This hardly means that all men who buy sexual services define their experiences with a provider as a fantasy divorced from reality. Many clients in our sample take a rather different view—rejecting the notion that what they experience is counterfeit and citing “evidence” in support of their conclusions that their affective connection with a provider is both genuine and mutual, whether limited or going beyond the bounds of the paid encounter. Still, other men are quite confused by their experiences with a particular sex worker.
Bounded Authenticity: A Paid Relationship
The concept of “bounded authenticity” refers to a genuine but limited sexual and emotional experience, whereby the client’s perception of intimacy is real but restricted by temporal and financial parameters. This kind of client thus differs radically from those who consider the affective component entirely fictional. For clients in this category, it is more appropriate to say that they feel they are in a paid relationship—albeit part-time and remunerative—rather than simply paying for sex.
The majority of clients’ postings fall into this category. The following quotation illustrates both some perceived “indicators” of authenticity as well as a recognition of its boundaries:
She’s been very open about her life and husband, as I’ve been about mine and my wife. We give each other emotional and intellectual support. When I think of her, I do not think so much about the particular sexual things we do (which are certainly fine) but about who she is . . . what she’s going through this week, etc. Yes, it’s a paid friendship—but it’s still a friendship. After all, a wife is in a real economic sense often essentially paid too. (Bostongreg)
Note Bostongreg’s belief that his marital relationship involves some remunerative aspect. Sleepydasher offers a succinct definition of bounded authenticity:
She is a total pro and won’t let a business relationship get out of control. She views the provider-hobbyist relationship as a “wonderful box” where, while in the box, we are free to totally explore our feelings and passions. The “box” protects both from agendas [and] expectations beyond the box, and creates the freedom while in the box. In this hobbyist/provider relationship, we freely love and support each other when together, express feelings, talk about the other’s strengths and attractions, and have a whole lot of fun. Out of the box she goes about her life and me mine. Works quite nicely!
Other men cogitate about the twin pillars of “authentic” and “bounded” in quite elaborate ways. Consider these narratives:
I’ve seen the same woman for a number of years now. I didn’t like the acting part of the fantasy [performed by previous providers], and I considered leaving the hobby because of that, until I met her. She took the time to read me, and our time was very realistic. I do know she enjoys being with me, even though the financial aspect will always be there. . . . We’ve developed a friendship as well. In the most basic terms, it’s a mistress without the fear of attachment. That comfort of someone who knows me, who I am safe with, knowing that she won’t ruin my life, is very appealing. (Youngrepublican)
I spent over ten hours with one of my regulars this past Friday and paid her for two. We had a “matinee,” hung out, had dinner, and then boinked and talked until well past midnight. On other visits she has stayed over. We have become great friends and keep in touch between sessions, but the one constant is the envelope full of cash that is always waiting for her when she arrives. (Bostonguy57)
Many clients in this category perceive their relationship with a provider as a friendship. This, more than any other construct, is cited to affirm the authenticity of their mutual affective connection:
My ATF, which I have been seeing for over seven years now, and myself have declared we are . . . friends who just happen to have sex together. We communicate on almost a daily basis, see each other at least once a month, spend time with each other outside of the hobby, and just enjoy each other’s company on occasion. So, I am an occasional client and we are also friends. (Sgandolfs)
Two providers that I like a lot as people—not “in love,” not wanting to cross any significant line—I just respect them, they me, we enjoy each other’s company a lot. I compliment them, let them know what I see in them and like, even gently confront areas sometimes, as they do me. It has forged a friendship that does involve occasional off the clock dinner and phone calls, but the provider/hobbyist relationship is still there. (Sleepydasher)
At the same time, friendship is qualified by the bottom line: money. Hotjoe2, who has become “close friends” with his favorite provider, notes that the friendship is nevertheless conditional: “She made it very clear to me from the beginning of our friendship that just because we are friends, I should not expect ‘free sex’.”
The notion that some of what takes place is “off the clock” can be interpreted as ways in which the boundaries are occasionally stretched but not to the extent that the relationship evolves into an entirely unpaid one. In other words, the boundary remains intact albeit sometimes suspended:
I had an ATF for about two years. . . . By our second date, she had told me her real name and some of her life story. Our third “date” was not a session at all, but an afternoon just hanging out at her place—talking, web surfing, getting to know each other as people—no nookie, no fee. But for two years, we did have a more or less regular provider-client relationship, which occasionally strayed outside the boundaries. We would get together for a session two to three times a month, at her regular rate. Every now and then we would go out to eat, off the clock, or get together to just hang out. (LongandWindingRoad)
Authentic, Mutual Intimacy
A small minority of clients try to expand or suspend the original boundaries. If successful, they begin to convince themselves that the bond they have with a certain provider is not only authentic but also “boundless” and mutual. This is especially true for those who have been regulars of a particular sex worker for a lengthy period of time. Not only do these men fall in love with their favorite provider, they feel that the woman reciprocates this as well. Indeed, some of the men in this category come to believe that their special person is marriage material and fantasize about this coming to fruition.
In reaching the conclusion that something truly deep and wonderful is happening, clients cite concrete indicators that they interpret as evidence that the emotional connection is genuine. Many of these cues are related to the suspension of the ordinary time constraints governing commercial sex encounters (off the clock), while other relational cues take the form of tangible and intangible rewards that they receive without paying for them, thus distinguishing this category from that of bounded authenticity. Clients in our sample often seem quite astounded by the evolution of their association with their favorite provider; they did not anticipate that this would happen when they first started paying for sex.
One client, LostSoldier, said he was pleasantly surprised when his ATF asked him to spend Thanksgiving with her, her friends, and her parents; she introduced him to them as her boyfriend. MongrMan mentions other indicators that his relationship had grown beyond its previous bounds:
I am now “in a relationship” with my ATF. We have exchanged the L word (she initiated), there is no envelope [containing payment], and she insists that I call her by her real name, whereas before she went apeshit when I used it once. She wants us to meet at my house (only if it’s OK with me) when she comes to see me because she is concerned about the money I spend on rooms, whereas before she “didn’t give a shit” about how much I spent before (her words).
HappyCamper123 mentions familial indicators of relational depth:
We do most everything together with her young daughter. . . . We have shared our private lives together to the point where we know many of our inner feelings. She has told me several times that she now has a sense of family when I’m around, which has been missing for a long while.
Meanwhile, Wormwood implies that he would like to take the relationship to the next level—marriage—but that it is not possible at this time:
We began by talking about the things that we really liked/loved about each other. “I love the way I feel when you. . . ,” “I love that you’re so. . . .” Eventually, we got to the point where we could use the dreaded L word without the possessive baggage that usually comes along with it, although that stuff still crops up for me sometimes. What I ended up with by taking that risk is one of the better friends I’ve ever had. A person who knows me better than my significant other in many ways and who can be totally honest with me as I am with her. It’s a very difficult relationship to sustain, not because we argue, etc. but because we aren’t in positions to pursue it beyond the level of friendship and that causes a great deal of emotional turmoil for each of us sometimes.
Underscoring just how profound some of these relationships can become, several men in this category use the term “love”: One is “willing to leave my wife for her. That’s what my heart is telling me” (Manypoppins). Another declares, “I know the relationship is wrong but I love her so much and she truly loves me” (CptnKirk). And IchiMusashi describes the “emotional bond” he feels in a deeply romantic way: “Love is held to a higher standard. It is the hope and wish that we can be bigger than everything else that stands in our path. That together we can overcome all obstacles. . . . In gazing into her eyes I can lose myself. In her simple embrace I feel whole.”
At the other end of the spectrum are men who lament losing a provider that they considered a soulmate:
After about 6 months, we became lovers off the clock. And after about another 6 months we actually discussed moving in together, and our children from previous marriages were introduced and became friends. . . . To this day I consider her the one that got away. She has everything I could have ever wanted and I didn’t make the commitment she wanted. (Gregofsd)
Landem was involved for a few years with an escort who is now deceased: “for the time that it lasted, she was the love of my life and I the love of hers.”
One of the more unexpected aspects of the relational boundary work that clients engage in is to maneuver around the gradual loosening of paid time constraints. After repeated, increasingly intimate encounters, the provider will sometimes offer off-the-clock activities and/or special favors to the client. Clients tend to view this as evidence that the relationship is genuine, even if off-the-clock time happens only occasionally. Such activities can take the form of invitations to social events, mutual gift-giving during birthdays and holidays, and even refusals to accept money for sexual services. Most commonly however, the provider informs the client that she is willing to reduce her rate for a multihour package that includes nonsexual activities, or she may spontaneously extend an hour appointment significantly longer:
There was a provider where I thought the relationship was hovering between a client relationship and a nonclient relationship, so when I made the appointment I asked, “Will this be on the clock?” She said, “Friend rate.” I thought, “OK, we are on the clock, but at a reduced rate.” However, she ended up going to sleep in my arms, and the one-hour appointment turned into a 16-hour overnighter. (Mathesar)
To some clients, this signals a shift toward greater authenticity, while to MongrMan, the increased level of intimacy may be confounding or just too good to be true:
I have a “relationship” of sorts with a provider. Everything started normally, of course, as far as P4P. She’s been claiming an attraction or “bond” since our second date. I didn’t believe it, and am really not sure what I believe even now, as I am very much a cynic. Now we talk daily (sometimes for hours) and see each other about once, sometimes twice, per week. I’ll offer the two or three hour donation for the time I would like and can afford. She started staying longer and even suggesting we go out to eat afterward. At this point we are usually together for 5-8 hours each visit. She told me she would like to spend two days together, and will only ask for the 12-hour normal donation.
The most extreme version of off-the-clock is when the roles of client and sex worker have been all but abandoned and the two parties seem to be moving toward an unfettered romantic relationship. Some clients welcome this development, but it can cause anxiety for others:
My situation is “strictly” off the clock and she insists on paying her own way (although I occasionally attempt, and sometimes can, treat). We seem to have, in a very short time, developed a connection that I did not have with my ex of twenty-plus years, or in any prior relationship. . . . My dilemma is that I know I should just enjoy it while it lasts. It will inevitably come to an end. I just am scared to death that it will end. I’ve never felt this way and can’t handle the emotions. We take walks along the beach, go out on normal dates, spend days at a time together, but both know we are too different, and she has suggested we just enjoy each other for three months and then never see each other again. Not my first choice but better than nothing at all. I can’t come to terms with fully trusting her, but the kicker is I don’t want to be without her. Her background and life choices don’t gel with my ethics. (Serriouslyneedhelp)
This man’s anxiety is due to a clash between his deepening feelings and a fear that the relationship will end, and his final comment suggests that her biography is also an impediment to his willingness to have a romantic relationship with her.
“Dazed and Confused”
Some men become very confused by their relationships with a provider. They may develop strong feelings for the woman but may also come to feel, as the 1969 Led Zeppelin song, “Dazed and Confused,” laments: “Wanted a woman, never bargained for you!” In our data, there are posters who seem to feel that they got more than they “bargained for,” but at the same time wonder whether the perceived bond is authentic or counterfeit:
I have an ATF provider that I thought I had made a “connection” with. . . . There was some real level of caring between the two of us, although we didn’t really interact outside the hobby. . . . Lately, I sense I’m just another one of her clients. . . . Maybe it was all a part of the illusion from the beginning. She’s one of my favorite people in any context, but I’d rather not see her if I’m just another client. (Daydreamin)
MeetJoeBlack is pained by his conundrum:
I have feelings for her that I have never had for another provider. I so want to give her everything she wants and be with her all the time. . . . I know she doesn’t feel about me the way I feel about her. I know in the real world if she saw me or met me at a party or a club, etc., she wouldn’t give me the time of day. I feel I have gotten too close to her. I have been thinking it’s time for me to walk away from her for good. I don’t know what to say to her. . . . I know it’s just about the money and expensive gifts, even though she has never asked for them. I created my own problem. Is it time for me to walk away from this provider and when do you know its time to walk away from a provider?
The following relationship featured a mixture of satisfaction, emotional stress, and boundary puzzlement:
Where did the provider/hobbyist relationship end and the personal one start, knowing we’d never be life partners? Believe me it was difficult! Both knowing a LT [long term] relationship was out of the question, but wanting each other so much. We ended up “purposely driving each other away” then reversing it back and forth a couple times. . . . Decided to take a break from each other to clear our minds. (RookieHobbyist1)
Clients in our sample grapple with how to interpret reality, both at the level of their overall association with a provider and also in response to specific relational cues. IchiMusashi shares an example of this difficulty:
I cannot tell what is truly a genuine remark from her and what is “scripted.” We seem to hit it off and we share a lot in common. I have never felt so comfortable with a woman as I do with her. I am fully aware that this is her job and that one of her main directives is to make me feel this way. . . . This just compounds my problem and adds to my question: am I hurting myself by allowing this?
Other men point to a particular behavior or statement as the source of their emotional confusion:
After a lengthy session, mutual OS [oral sex], she looked me in the eyes and said “I love you,” gave me a sensuous DFK [deep French kiss], and then laid her head on my chest and we held each other for a while. I was unsure what to do . . . but in the aftermath am wondering if it was just part of the GFE experience or if she meant it and was inviting me to expand the relationship. (NYConBusiness)
This man seems to define the “GFE experience” as part of the provider’s manufactured intimacy rather than reflecting her true feelings, but he is unsure what to make of this particular event. Experiencing a similar confusion, Lynn99 states, “It can be very hard to determine which is an Oscar-winning GFE performance” or something more genuine. IchiMusashi also wonders if his relationship is a fairytale:
The problem is: does she like me outside of our little fantasy world? . . . It is impossible for me to tell based off of normal interpretation of body language and those tell-tale signs that someone likes you. Mirroring, grooming, laughing, and the like. All of these are present. Are they “scripted” or are they real? Impossible for me to say. . . . Now it is no longer as clearcut as it was for sex. Now I am paying for an emotional fantasy and this is what I worry about.
There is a subset to the dazed-and-confused category, namely one where the sex worker herself begins to ask for more than what her client “bargained for.” Despite the wishes of many clients for a relationship of some emotional substance, a few find themselves in the paradoxical position of having to erect their own boundaries when a provider begins to get too close. These men thus perform relational work to clarify and maintain certain limits on the depth of the relationship. Being married can serve as an obvious and convenient barrier to further engagement—the relationship can progress in duration, but remains firmly bounded by limits imposed by the client, despite the provider’s emotional overtures. As one client recounted,
I have urged her to get a boyfriend because she can’t get “love” out of a married man twice her age, but she says she has been hurt too often. Recently she wrote me a text message saying that I am the best she has and all she needs. But because I am married, we both know that it will never go anywhere. Nor should it. She invited me to go with her to a museum, but I have pretty much ignored that because I don’t want her to rely on me. (Kornlover)
Despite one provider’s desire for “something more that just a pure client/provider relationship” and the client’s similar feelings toward her, another client states that “we knew our boundaries since we both had significant others” (Strangerone). But perhaps the most significant adjustment to the increased intimacy is the unexpected relational work that confronts the client. Much like a conventional relationship, the client who gets too deeply involved faces stress from amplified emotional investment, with its associated risks and benefits. Jsdc24 explains:
I started having “feelings” for my ATF provider not too long ago. We really clicked in the bedroom—like I have with no other woman, including my significant other. She would say things like I was her “daily treat.” I decided that I needed to take a step back and think critically about the situation. I pictured how a date with her would go. I thought about the differences in our background (of which there were many). Call me a coward, but I just could not go through with it after envisioning how things might go. Imagine throwing your life away only to learn that your “feelings” were not truly reciprocated. For me that was enough. I unfortunately have stopped seeing that provider, but I still think fondly of her and would give her the highest reviews.
The depth of feelings experienced by this client and the demand for increasing intimacy leads him to reexamine the emerging rules and boundaries, resulting in the realization that the relationship cannot progress further. One client describes how he grapples with the heightened intimacy:
In my relationship with my ATF, she demonstrates her desire for me and after a set time, I must walk away. On a conscious level, I know the rules and the need for them, but on a gut level, it doesn’t make sense, because we are not accustomed to having to break off the dance of intimacy with someone who desires us. . . . So often my gut and my head are in conflict. (Mattradd)
Clients Cautioning other Clients
Some clients offer advice and cautionary tales to their fellow “hobbyists” in order to help them avoid making mistakes. These men emphasize the emotional risks involved in long-term associations with a sex worker and freely share their own perceptions and experiences of how to avoid getting hurt. Some acknowledge the possibility of developing a real friendship with a provider who offers them companionship “off the clock”; however, this can be achieved only after building trust over many months or years while remaining in control of one’s feelings. Moreover, clients are advised to wait for cues from the provider before redefining the relationship as more than a paid one. According to G2, “the quickest way to smash the wonderful fantasy that the provider weaves and get shown the door in the process is to express your infatuation with her.” Another client cautions that “good providers are extraordinarily adept at intuiting what their clients need and assuming that role. It can lead to some intense encounters and make it difficult to keep thinking clearly if your head’s not on straight” (Wormwood). Managing feelings becomes a balancing act for the client. Learningtojuggle speaks of the emotional tightrope: “My one regular can, and knows she can, wrap me around her finger any time she wishes. Truly a wonderful, dangerous, intoxicating woman, so I need to be very careful—performing without a safety net, so to speak.” And another client warns clients about providers who become too possessive:
Two major warnings that you are no longer in a safe normal John zone: The first is when the provider will not give you references [to other providers]. It will manifest itself in two ways . . . . You find out that she never returns e-mails or calls on those requests. Or she tells you that she will not do such a thing and asks why you need to see other women. The second is if she partners for doubles but never offers this to you, and if you see a colleague, this upsets her; well you are screwed. (DreadPirate Roberts)
Finally, Bostonguy57 warns other clients to be careful in imagining that they have developed a relationship based on genuine trust: “I can tell you that trust is the hardest thing to surrender for both parties. It is the one thing in a provider/client relationship that cannot be bought with cash in an envelope.”
Terminating the Relationship and Lessons Learned
What about clients who decide to terminate a lengthy involvement with a particular sex worker? Do they experience emotional challenges in attempting to end the relationship? We found that many of the men in this category try to follow a relational script that echoes a conventional breakup. Rather than exercising the option of abruptly cutting off contact with the provider, Learningtojuggle concerns himself with the proper way of saying goodbye: “Polite apologies, mild pleasantries are only a civilized way to gently close the book, and that is where we left it. No confrontations, no inconvenient displays of emotion. My main concern is whether I am being too harsh, not a good friend, something like that.” Another client, Giddyup1979, struggles with how to end his long-term relationship according to proper protocol:
I had a session recently with one of my ATF’s that I’ve been seeing for three plus years and the passion is gone. My session with her this evening was for an hour, but I was in and out in approximately twenty minutes. She seemed to be in a big rush and told me she would be calling me in about week to set up another appointment. If the passion is not there it’s time to move on. My dilemma, how to tell her the passion is gone and I want to move on. Should I just stop returning her calls or do we need to talk this through?
Departing from the rules of bounded authenticity and entering into conventional romantic relationships with escorts can present a set of unforeseen circumstances that may culminate in a desire to end the association. HappyCamper123 is not able to cope with the jealousy he experiences and considers leaving the relationship:
I was comfortable with her just seeing her regular clients, but now she wants to begin to see new clients again. I guess the time has come for me to decide whether I should continue with this relationship. I am asking how I should handle my feeling about her now being a full-time provider. We normally do not talk about her being a provider when we are together. Is it possible for a relationship to exist under these circumstances? How have others handled this relationship? I don’t want to tell her that if she becomes full-time, then I may need to end this relationship. How can I make this work for both of us?
Learningtojuggle reflects on the inevitability of an end-stage based on pecuniary conditions: “I do miss her and am saddened that this happened, but it is inevitable, isn’t it, in this world.”
Not all clients are able to exit their liaisons without having learned some emotionally costly lessons. Some recount their gullibility and naïveté in falling in love with a provider despite having been warned on various discussion boards, though this does not lessen the pain they feel after discovering that the relationship was not an authentic one. Funwithaleo says:
I am one of those people who got burned on this journey of life. I fell in love with a provider years ago—my first. . . . I told her my feelings, which was difficult but felt it was needed, and spent too much money seeing her. Looking back, I was doing most of the communicating and she was doing most of the “accepting.” Was not healthy but, hey, I was in love. She will always have a special place in my heart, but I think I am more wary now.
Nevertheless, there is a certain sanguine optimism among some, despite the realization that illusion and fantasy are part and parcel of the commodified intimacy in the GFE. For one poster, the opportunity to achieve intimacy with a variety of women despite the potential emotional hazards appears rewarding:
I ignored all the advice and became “beyond the bounds” in closeness with several providers over time—one I was head over heels in love with, had a full affair with, and would have left my wife for her. I learned early on in my hobby experience that I absolutely love the direct, open, accepting, “living on the edge” personality that many really good GFE providers have. (OhmygodwhathaveIdone)
Another client, 2nd2nun, who appears emotionally equipped to withstand the ambiguous aspects of his relationship with his favorite provider, arrives at this conclusion:
I was “fired” by my ATF about four months ago and up until recently did not know why. At that time we had, or I thought we had, something special beyond the typical hobbyist/provider relationship and I also was infatuated with her. . . . She indirectly told me that it had to do with the money, or lack thereof I had paid for her time. I have since hooked up with her again (oh yeah, life is good). . . . I have come to the conclusion what many seasoned hobbyists already know: it’s all a fantasy and one must look at the relationship with a provider from that point of view or they will become emotionally and financially broke. Do I think she cares for me? Yes. Do I think she loves me? Don’t know. Women are the most beautiful and complex creatures put on this earth, be they a civvie or provider; men have yet to understand or figure them out, after thousands of years.
We find, therefore, that relations with an ATF provider can take a heavy emotional toll over time. Many clients enjoy going “beyond the bounds” and falling in love but also struggle with their feelings being truly reciprocated. Ultimately, some end up regretting their involvement altogether while others feel that it was worth the ride.
Conclusion
It is commonly argued that men pay for sex in order to avoid emotional commitments or having to invest time in a romantic relationship, and some scholarly work highlights this motive as well. One of the five client motives listed by McKeganey and Barnard (1996) is no-strings-attached, instrumental gratification; they make no mention of any expressive reasons for buying sex or of any emotional experiences that might arise in the course of such encounters. Subsequent studies demonstrate that some clients put a premium on nonsexual intimacy as well (Bernstein 2007; Plumridge et al. 1997; Sanders 2008a). Our analysis of 2,442 client postings on The Erotic Highway discussion board shows that a significant portion of clients initially visit escorts with no desire for or expectations of nonsexual intimacy. Their goal is, instead, one of unilateral and purely physical satisfaction. But men who become regular clients often develop feelings for their provider and begin to value having an emotional connection in addition to sex with her. Many of the narratives reveal surprise over this development: what first was purely a sex-for-pay transaction shifts toward one in which feelings emerge, yet the client questions if the provider’s displays of emotion are merely feigned (counterfeit intimacy) or are grounded in mutual friendship and shared, deep feelings.
An intriguing group of clients are those who experience confusion regarding the affective dimension. Clients who initially contract for a set of commodified services and are focused on their unilateral enjoyment often get more than they bargained for, developing feelings for the woman and a (often conflicted) desire to expand the relationship. Postings in this category repeatedly bear witness to struggles with unexpected feelings or a craving for increased intimacy, and these clients experience a tension between what they alternately define as counterfeit intimacy and as emotional authenticity. While the provider may simply be engaging in emotional labor in response to the client’s expectations (Bernstein 2007; Frank 1998), the client often finds himself participating in his own emotion work, for which he seldom seems prepared. These men become involved in what Zelizer (2005) calls “relational work,” where the ties are continuously reworked or renegotiated, as problems or opportunities arise. Relational work includes the tending and deepening of these ties and sometimes their termination. Such men experience escalating tension between paid sexual gratification and the possibility and challenges involved in expanding the relationship to include multiple dimensions of intimacy.
For the majority of clients in our sample, the phenomenon of “bounded authenticity” is recognized and accepted. They cherish what they believe are genuine feelings but also realize that they are paying for intimacy during a set amount of time. For some others, however, the process of engaging with a provider entails a different experience of intimacy—one in which a shift toward unbounded affect and even a romantic relationship may occur. In their narratives, these clients describe concrete indicators that signal, to them, an increase in a provider’s affection and emotional commitment. These cues include such things as the reduction or suspension of hourly fees and a wide variety of “off-the-clock” activities. Such boundary-breaking events can mirror ordinary relationships, as illustrated by the man who spent time with a woman and her children at a park or the client who was invited to Thanksgiving dinner with the provider’s friends and parents. Many men in such relationships fall in love with their favorite provider. They follow a conventionally romantic script that normalizes the liaison and destigmatizes what had been a prostitute–client relationship. Such normalization may manifest itself in a merger of finances and families and perhaps a monogamous partnership. The provider ceases to be a fantasy persona participating in an illusion and is elevated to the status of a bona fide romantic partner.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.