Like some of the posters, I don't do dfk and so it it wouldn't matter to me at all. I would say that as long as the advertising is coded clearly and expectations are understood, then everyone (client and sp) should be able to set whatever limits they want. I do think it's out of bounds to advertise GFE and then not do DFK.
The one thing I want to add is that an SP can most certainly be passionate and enthusiastic about the time together even if she doesn't do dfk. In fact, I'm not sure I see any connection between the two. I understand it would break the illusion of a girlfriend-type intimacy, but that's an illusion (and, for many, a wonderful one) to begin with. A few people have said that if the girl doesn't do dfk, then it seems like they're just in it for the money. I know how that goes, and it is indeed depressing to be with a woman who looks uncomfortable (or worse) with her job; I hate feeling like I'm exploiting someone. But even the best chemistry is conditioned by the mercantile nature of the experience. The great 18th century author Samuel Johnson famously said that "no one but a blockhead ever wrote except for money," and the same is true in this "hobby," which is a hobby only for one side of the participants. I recently saw Alexandra from Vogue and she is the closest thing I've experienced to an SP who is in it for the experience ... sigh ... but she did not turn down my payment at the end of the night. Personally, GFE is not my thing and the fact that I'm paying for pleasure doesn't ruin it at all for me; in fact, weird as it may sound, it's sometimes part of the pleasure, certainly part of the reciprocity of the evening. In short, when we treat SPs like wonderful professionals (and not either objects or friends), and as long as expectations are clear, I don't see any connection between passion, pleasure, business, and the specific "menu" options.
I probably shouldn't come out here on a quiet Sunday afternoon. Gets my motor running with nowhere to go....
The one thing I want to add is that an SP can most certainly be passionate and enthusiastic about the time together even if she doesn't do dfk. In fact, I'm not sure I see any connection between the two. I understand it would break the illusion of a girlfriend-type intimacy, but that's an illusion (and, for many, a wonderful one) to begin with. A few people have said that if the girl doesn't do dfk, then it seems like they're just in it for the money. I know how that goes, and it is indeed depressing to be with a woman who looks uncomfortable (or worse) with her job; I hate feeling like I'm exploiting someone. But even the best chemistry is conditioned by the mercantile nature of the experience. The great 18th century author Samuel Johnson famously said that "no one but a blockhead ever wrote except for money," and the same is true in this "hobby," which is a hobby only for one side of the participants. I recently saw Alexandra from Vogue and she is the closest thing I've experienced to an SP who is in it for the experience ... sigh ... but she did not turn down my payment at the end of the night. Personally, GFE is not my thing and the fact that I'm paying for pleasure doesn't ruin it at all for me; in fact, weird as it may sound, it's sometimes part of the pleasure, certainly part of the reciprocity of the evening. In short, when we treat SPs like wonderful professionals (and not either objects or friends), and as long as expectations are clear, I don't see any connection between passion, pleasure, business, and the specific "menu" options.
I probably shouldn't come out here on a quiet Sunday afternoon. Gets my motor running with nowhere to go....
