AMP Reviews
  • You asked and we delivered! AMPReviews now provides the option to upgrade to VIP access via paid subscription as an alternative to writing your own reviews. VIP Access allows you to read all the hidden content within member-submitted reviews AND gives access to private VIP-only forums in each city. You can upgrade your account INSTANTLY by visiting the Account Upgrades page in your own user profile and using a valid credit card to purchase a subscription. You can get to this page by clicking the link in any review, by clicking the red "See the Details Now" banner on the home page, and by clicking the Purchase Private Details link in the navbar at the top of every page

Providers you would date

HeisenbergJohn1003

Registered Member
Messages: 13
Reviews: 2
Joined
In my opinion, there are civilian girls who can't be trusted and working girls who can be trusted, and (obviously) vice-versa. Most providers choose not to date while they're working simply because they've never met a guy capable of dealing with their jobs. Pretty much the same goes for strippers, and in both cases, I know there are girls who are totally normal outside of work and would be thrilled to have a relationship where their jobs weren't an issue. Also, just like with strippers, guys are notorious for meeting them as clients and then expecting them to quit the jobs where they met them in the first place, which is total bullshit, IMO. I continue to be amazed by guys who are all in on this hobby as clients but who still care about how many guys their potential girlfriends have fucked. In my opinion, if you're in this hobby and you don't think fucking dozens of girls for money makes you an untrustworthy person (or worse), you should be above all that nonsense about "nice girls" vs. "sluts" and all that shit.

Also i am 1 of those guys that do care about how many potential partners a hypothetical girlfriend has been with simply because its not the same for guys to get laid as it is for girls. im sure you are aware of this already but a girl does not have to work on herself for guys to find her attractive where as no guy can just be born and simply maintain his appearance and be hit on and asked out by girls.
 

richardp2918

Review Contributor
Messages: 1,214
Reviews: 7
Joined
I agree with you that the job doesn't define how trustworthy a girl is and also circumstances can also play a factor ie. a girl can be very trustworthy in some areas of life but not so much in others. i would however disagree with you on the latter part. I have been in this hobby for quite some time mainly because i find it hard to date in the USA but i would never see myself as an untrustworthy person. I don't know this for a fact but i would imagine alot of men who have cheated are not mongers. And simply paying for sex doesn't automatically make you an untrustworthy person. on the contrary some may argue there is nothing more honest.
one of my current favorite kmp girl was traumatized by a civvie bf that cheated on her. She was dating him when she was not working and the guy cheated with a civvie, which caused her to become single and came back to work the rooms. It's an interesting and nuanced logic bc she's lied to him about her past (he doesn't know) and has had sex with literally thousands of guys, maybe tens of thousands of men, but apparently she never cheated on him when they were together, which gives her the moral high ground.
 

Zippy17

Review Contributor
Messages: 979
Reviews: 25
Joined
Also i am 1 of those guys that do care about how many potential partners a hypothetical girlfriend has been with simply because its not the same for guys to get laid as it is for girls. im sure you are aware of this already but a girl does not have to work on herself for guys to find her attractive where as no guy can just be born and simply maintain his appearance and be hit on and asked out by girls.
OK, but consider this: Except for the relatively rare opportunties that most (regular) guys get to actually date the girls who really knock them out, almost every girl guys ever do get to fuck in their lives involves some level of deception, where the guy has to pretend he has more of a romantic potential interest in the girl than he really does. That's because if guys were totally honest and said something like "Listen, I'm probably not going to want to date you in a serious way, but you have a great ass and nice blowjob lips, I'm horny, and you're pretty fuckable; so I just want to fuck you a few dozen times before moving on" guys would never get laid. So, there's an element of genuine immorality involved almost every time any regular guy ever gets laid. Conversely, any halfway-decent-looking girl can get laid any time she wants by doing nothing more than putting on a pair of heels and just smiling back at any of the 100 guys who check her out on any given night out. No deception, no dishonesty, and nothing immoral involved, whatsoever. So, it's always struck me as totally backwards that guys get a moral pass for banging as many women as they can sort of dupe into a casual sexual relationship while women get tagged with bad reputations for going home with as few as 2 or 3 guys a year, because over 10 years, that comes out to 20 or 30 guys. Women don't have to deceive anybody to get laid; only men do that shit.
 

sinyalekf

Woof Woof
Messages: 2,107
Reviews: 37
Joined
I did see one for a while. A Russian UTR who reached out to me to come visit after our 1st session. I had her for an entire summer. Eventually she packed up & went back to Russia telling me, "I knew the rules and broke them." I spoke about her on another Forum. She won't come back according to some other providers I know because of this. Too bad, I miss her. It was definitely getting the milk without buying the cow.
 

Rover2020

Review Contributor
Messages: 74
Reviews: 4
Joined
Dating a provider kinda throws every normal rules of a relationship out the window. Its definitely a very grey area to be in.

I totally get what some of you guys are saying regarding looking at them as damaged goods and getting over the fact of what they have to do as a job, as well as who they have to do it with. We as mongers still get a choice regarding the girls we see and can even leave if we're not happy with the situation we're in, but the girls don't have that luxury.

Everyone's damaged in some ways...
"Everyone is damaged in some ways" is the only certain thing in life and in any relationship. The issue with providers is, the longer they've been in the business, the harder their hearts become until they reach the point that they can never form real a attachment to man they met as a customer. The same is true for customers, except in that case it's easier for men to mistake sex and affection for love. Both parties are damaged by the transactional nature of the relationship but I think the women suffer more just because of the volume and constant need to close themselves off from feeling emotions and forming relationships.
 

HeisenbergJohn1003

Registered Member
Messages: 13
Reviews: 2
Joined
OK, but consider this: Except for the relatively rare opportunties that most (regular) guys get to actually date the girls who really knock them out, almost every girl guys ever do get to fuck in their lives involves some level of deception, where the guy has to pretend he has more of a romantic potential interest in the girl than he really does. That's because if guys were totally honest and said something like "Listen, I'm probably not going to want to date you in a serious way, but you have a great ass and nice blowjob lips, I'm horny, and you're pretty fuckable; so I just want to fuck you a few dozen times before moving on" guys would never get laid. So, there's an element of genuine immorality involved almost every time any regular guy ever gets laid. Conversely, any halfway-decent-looking girl can get laid any time she wants by doing nothing more than putting on a pair of heels and just smiling back at any of the 100 guys who check her out on any given night out. No deception, no dishonesty, and nothing immoral involved, whatsoever. So, it's always struck me as totally backwards that guys get a moral pass for banging as many women as they can sort of dupe into a casual sexual relationship while women get tagged with bad reputations for going home with as few as 2 or 3 guys a year, because over 10 years, that comes out to 20 or 30 guys. Women don't have to deceive anybody to get laid; only men do that shit.

This is exactly why dating in the West is soo difficult, which I myself (a regular guy) have trouble with. Although I have never dated outside of the USA, i hear its a bit different if not completely different. There is nothing wrong with women who have casual sex, even women in other countries do but they make an effort to atleast be honest in their approach and work hard to keep a guy she really likes, if it doesn't work out then she moves on (same approach as men). But in the West its more about a dating "game" to see who has more value or who can out game the other. When you involve games in any aspect, deception is bound to occur. Look at sports or video games. The best athletes are crafty or experienced in faking oppenents out and in video games often deception is used to gain advantage.

The whole morality of men having sex and gets free pass or women who sleeps around are hoes is just propaganda, but it does raise a question of if a women sleeps around with 2-3 guys a year is she really doing this to guys she is genuinely interested in or using them as a game to boost her value. As a guy i would not have sex with a fat ugly girl if i wasn't attracted to her.

Another aspect to consider is sex is a biological need for human but for men its more physical and women its more emotional. As mongers we probably have a high notch count but we are generally just as stable as a non monger if not more stable due to having a clear mind. But a women who has been through many partners is not the same mentally stable.
 

Zippy17

Review Contributor
Messages: 979
Reviews: 25
Joined
This is exactly why dating in the West is soo difficult, which I myself (a regular guy) have trouble with. Although I have never dated outside of the USA, i hear its a bit different if not completely different. There is nothing wrong with women who have casual sex, even women in other countries do but they make an effort to atleast be honest in their approach and work hard to keep a guy she really likes, if it doesn't work out then she moves on (same approach as men). But in the West its more about a dating "game" to see who has more value or who can out game the other. When you involve games in any aspect, deception is bound to occur. Look at sports or video games. The best athletes are crafty or experienced in faking oppenents out and in video games often deception is used to gain advantage.
Agreed. The problem is directly proportional to whatever degree the two genders are socialized to believe and accept different moral values and rules for each gender for the same behavior.

The whole morality of men having sex and gets free pass or women who sleeps around are hoes is just propaganda...
Agreed.

...but it does raise a question of if a women sleeps around with 2-3 guys a year is she really doing this to guys she is genuinely interested in or using them as a game to boost her value.
Negative. My whole point is that women never need to lie to or deceive men to get sex if they just want sex; so it's not a moral issue for unattached women to be promiscuous. Think about it: If a hot girl said to you that she doesn't want any kind of relationship right now, but she's horny and she's sexually attracted to you; so if you'd like to take her home just to fuck, you (and most guys) would be all in. Conversely, with only very rare exceptions, if a guy said anything remotely like that to any woman, there would be no hookup. Women who just want casual sex never have to pretend they might want "more" to get it from guys. Men -- at least those who aren't George Clooney or Brad Pitt -- know that pretty girls will only fuck them if guys have a more sincere interest in them beyond just sex. Since most regular guys get very few opportunities to go out with the girls in whom we might have a sincere romantic interest, guys have learned to communicate in various ways that they have "more" of an interest than sex in any girl they hope to fuck. I'm sorry, but that's extremely immoral, precisely because you're using someone for sex under deliberately false pretenses without which guys know they'd almost never get laid. So, casual sex almost never raises even the slightest moral issue for women and it almost always involves immoral lies and deception for men. That's why it's so backwards that guys get a moral pass while women get harshly judged for being promiscuous. Obviously, none of those moral issues come up in transactional sex; but the reason we're discussing this here is because so many guys apply that backwards moral standard in the way they talk about and presume to judge providers.

As a guy i would not have sex with a fat ugly girl if i wasn't attracted to her.
Me neither; but I already made the point that there are people of both genders who care more about living in luxury and not having to work (or whatever) than physical attraction. To your other point about using someone for status: (1) That only applies to these types of tradeoffs and not more generally to every sexual hookup; and (2) Typically, the ugly person offering the lifestyle benefits to the more attractive person isn't being deceived or used, because he/she knows what each person is bringing to the table and isn't under any misconception that the other person would be with them, otherwise.

Another aspect to consider is sex is a biological need for human but for men its more physical and women its more emotional.
To a certain extent, that's true; but: (1) The source of the sexual impulse has nothing to do with the morality of lying to or tricking someone into giving it up; and (2) Even much of that gender difference is learned through socialization about sexual mores, which, as you pointed out, explains why men and women in other countries are less out of synch. I strongly suspect that women in those countries who have the freedom to enjoy casual sex without anything more exhibit behavioral pattenrs about sex that are much less different from the way men enjoy casual sex without anything "more" being involved.

As mongers we probably have a high notch count but we are generally just as stable as a non monger if not more stable due to having a clear mind. But a women who has been through many partners is not the same mentally stable.
I'm sorry, but this is pure conjecture and unsupported conclusion and doesn't even present any argument about why that might be the case. I'd argue that guys who pay women to do things that they'd never want to do with their own wives or significant others might have major issues about sex. In my opinion, there's nothing healthy or "stable" about that, at all; and most of that goes right back to presuming to judge women harshly for participating in exactly what YOU want to do sexually. If it's depraved or about being "damaged" for any women to do it with you, then it's equally depraved or abour being "damaged" if you want those things in the first place. In my opinion, mongers who are psychologically heathy and undamaged about sex seek out nothing more than fulfilling their natural urge for novelty in sexual partners and/or more sex than they're getting at home or through regular dating. I'm sorry, but some of the things I've read in reviews (and/or heard directly from providers) about what some guys need to do with or to providers sounds like the opposite of psychological "health" or "stability" to me.
 

HeisenbergJohn1003

Registered Member
Messages: 13
Reviews: 2
Joined
I'm sorry, but this is pure conjecture and unsupported conclusion and doesn't even present any argument about why that might be the case. I'd argue that guys who pay women to do things that they'd never want to do with their own wives or significant others might have major issues about sex. In my opinion, there's nothing healthy or "stable" about that, at all; and most of that goes right back to presuming to judge women harshly for participating in exactly what YOU want to do sexually. If it's depraved or about being "damaged" for any women to do it with you, then it's equally depraved or abour being "damaged" if you want those things in the first place. In my opinion, mongers who are psychologically heathy and undamaged about sex seek out nothing more than fulfilling their natural urge for novelty in sexual partners and/or more sex than they're getting at home or through regular dating. I'm sorry, but some of the things I've read in reviews (and/or heard directly from providers) about what some guys need to do with or to providers sounds like the opposite of psychological "health" or "stability" to me.[/QUOTE]

Ok so it looks like that we agree on dating culture but seem to disagree a bit on how women and men are judged on desire to have sex.

my point is women's desire to have sex stems from emotions while men from senses. This is why a girl will have sex with ugly guys ,fat guys, guys with terrible hygiene, etc you get my point. Men will not have sex with fat ugly girls etc. (there are exceptions but this is a generalization) . When a guy uses money, it invokes a feeling of security for the women, she see's the guy has resources to provide while a good looking guy who is broke has potential but does not show directly to her an emotional desire. you named some celebrities who can be honest (hey lets fuck), because they are celebrities (they have social proof and money), most good looking guys can not just walk up to a girl and directly ask for sex. They did a social experiment on this. (i think 2-3 girls said yes out of 100) whereas it was flipped 2-3 guys said no to a girl asking for sex out of 100.

Many women can go years without having sex and be mentally stable if she has a guy/girl friends who offers emotional support. Men can not go years with no sex and expect to be mentally stable. This is why men and women are judged differently by how many partners they have. If a women has 1 partner who she had in 5 years who she had sex every day thats like 365 x 5 = 1,825 times of sex. She is still more stable than a girl who has had 5 partners a year and only had sex once. (25 times) Its not about the number of times they have sex its the number of different partners. It raises the question out of those 25 guys, why are you not trying to connect more why are you not seeking a deeper relationship?

So if we know that women act on emotions and has high number of partners that means she is emotionally unstable, not because she has more sex, in fact she doesn't have more sex than a emotionally stable women with 1 partner but have sex thousand of times.
 

HeisenbergJohn1003

Registered Member
Messages: 13
Reviews: 2
Joined
I'm sorry, but this is pure conjecture and unsupported conclusion and doesn't even present any argument about why that might be the case. I'd argue that guys who pay women to do things that they'd never want to do with their own wives or significant others might have major issues about sex. In my opinion, there's nothing healthy or "stable" about that, at all; and most of that goes right back to presuming to judge women harshly for participating in exactly what YOU want to do sexually. If it's depraved or about being "damaged" for any women to do it with you, then it's equally depraved or abour being "damaged" if you want those things in the first place. In my opinion, mongers who are psychologically heathy and undamaged about sex seek out nothing more than fulfilling their natural urge for novelty in sexual partners and/or more sex than they're getting at home or through regular dating. I'm sorry, but some of the things I've read in reviews (and/or heard directly from providers) about what some guys need to do with or to providers sounds like the opposite of psychological "health" or "stability" to me.
Ok so it looks like that we agree on dating culture but seem to disagree a bit on how women and men are judged on desire to have sex.

my point is women's desire to have sex stems from emotions while men from senses. This is why a girl will have sex with ugly guys ,fat guys, guys with terrible hygiene, etc you get my point. Men will not have sex with fat ugly girls etc. (there are exceptions but this is a generalization) . When a guy uses money, it invokes a feeling of security for the women, she see's the guy has resources to provide while a good looking guy who is broke has potential but does not show directly to her an emotional desire. you named some celebrities who can be honest (hey lets fuck), because they are celebrities (they have social proof and money), most good looking guys can not just walk up to a girl and directly ask for sex. They did a social experiment on this. (i think 2-3 girls said yes out of 100) whereas it was flipped 2-3 guys said no to a girl asking for sex out of 100.

Many women can go years without having sex and be mentally stable if she has a guy/girl friends who offers emotional support. Men can not go years with no sex and expect to be mentally stable. This is why men and women are judged differently by how many partners they have. If a women has 1 partner who she had in 5 years who she had sex every day thats like 365 x 5 = 1,825 times of sex. She is still more stable than a girl who has had 5 partners a year and only had sex once. (25 times) Its not about the number of times they have sex its the number of different partners. It raises the question out of those 25 guys, why are you not trying to connect more why are you not seeking a deeper relationship?

So if we know that women act on emotions and has high number of partners that means she is emotionally unstable, not because she has more sex, in fact she doesn't have more sex than a emotionally stable women with 1 partner but have sex thousand of times.[/QUOTE]



TL:DR unstable women = promiscuous women many sexual partners, unstable men = young incels who shoot up places

its the opposite, women don't want to date unstable men , they want chad who has many partners it offers social proof and validation, (everygirl wants him so i want him).
 

Elf98

Review Contributor
Messages: 162
Reviews: 20
Joined
Are there any providers you would date? I have seen many different providers, but am unsure if I would date any of them. What about you?
Kylie and Arlene at DDY. Mia at SLA. Cherry/Tiger at everywhere. Vera & Emily for MMSs. And any provider that smiles at me while I'm sitting in the waiting room.
 

Zippy17

Review Contributor
Messages: 979
Reviews: 25
Joined
Kylie and Arlene at DDY. Mia at SLA. Cherry/Tiger at everywhere. Vera & Emily for MMSs. And any provider that smiles at me while I'm sitting in the waiting room.
Actually, based on my 2 or 3 conversations with her, Kylie is exactly the kind of girl I’m talking about. In fact, I bought her a book about the psychology of romantic love, because I thought there might be some stuff helpful for her to know, based on our conversations about having a relationship with a guy while she’s working. I gave it to her the next time I came in to see Vila. Kylie isn’t exactly my type physically because she’s too thin for me and I’m much more attracted to girls who look more like Aiai, Aya, Emily, and Stella Smith (Lear); but she seems like the kind of girl I’d definitely be open to really dating if I were single, half my age, and we were mutually interested. In my opinion, it’s just as much a mistake for providers to have a firm rule about never dating customers as it is for a guy to think it’s impossible to date a provider and have things work out. I think there are providers capable of having healthy relationships while they’re working and I think there are guys who could handle dating them and be good to them, despite having met them as customers. I dated quite a few strippers who said they’d never date a customer before I was married, and never encountered any job-specific issues...and I’m not even counting my wife, because I introduced her to dancing and didn’t meet her as a stripper.
 
Top