"Bangkok Option" being offered

Unprotected sex is, indeed, pretty common. Some strippers seem to just not like condoms. Have had them take it off proactively when it should have been clear to them that I had no problem having one on. They never ask about STD test results, and neither do I. What's the point? Do you think the other side would tell the truth if they did?

Scientific studies bear out that as the "relationship" between customer and sex worker progresses condom use becomes less frequent.

"Scientific studies bear out that as the "relationship" between customer and sex worker progresses condom use becomes less frequent."

Not surprising

With AIDs at least, it obviously the female (in relative terms) is taking the huge chance, as I believe the transmission rate from infected female back to the male is very very low

Note on the "hobbyist" site (The Erotic Review) in their discussion groups, anyone even mentioning unprotected sex basically will get their throats ripped out, its completely Non-PC

However I have to wonder whether even some of the established pros (The TER reviewed types) - are going unprotected with certain regs but just never admit it on any of these forums or anywhere else.

I have a friend who is a high end escort who on 3 occasions that I know of got pregnant from clients due to condom breakage. So even those who provide only covered full service will inadvertantly offer unprotected full service.

Obviously any "provider" who's running unprotected w/o requiring tests from clients -is playing russian roulette, however note the big news story out this morning that the United Nations AIDS numbers were grossly inflated apparently for political/funding reasons. Some might also recall that 10 to 15 years ago in the United States "experts" were insisting the AIDs epidemic was certain to spread in a massive way beyond the gay community and IV drug users - yet when they were proven completely wrong, the media barely would acknowledge it lest if offend the politically correct party line

Meanwhile I cannot understand why the supposedly super-transmissible HERPES virus (which per media accounts is prevalent in the general population) is not a big issue in the provider community, since (while not a serious disease per se) - would be of particular signficance to any married customer. Are we even getting the facts straight in regard to that issue?

Herpes is actually not that transmissible (at least in the absence of outbreaks). 10% male to female per year, and 5% female to male. (I am not sure if that is w/ condom usage and/or anti-virals or not: I believe it was no condoms, taking anti-virals, and no sex during outbreaks.)

On the local stripper boards, a number of customers are, in fact, fessing up to having caught herpes, and some strippers w/ it are being outed (along w/ a plethora of phony outings, of course).

I think the big reason it is not an issue, is that the symptoms are so minor that 90% of people don't even know they have it. And unless you specifically ask for it, or complain about symptoms, it will probably not be tested for in your STD screening.

However, as number of partners increases, so does the chance of having herpes. I believe it peaks around 80% of people who have had 60 or more partners. (Which would, of course, include the most 'profilic' strippers and mongers.)

Really though, other than the social stigma of having a permanent STD, herpes is not big deal for the vast majority of people.

I had understood herpes was transmissible regardless of outbreak. Correct me if I'm wrong. It IS difficult to transmit, but the rate of transmission, I thought, depended less on whether there was an outbreak, and more on whether the partners had certain immune system compatibilities / incompatibilities, etc.

"herpes is not big deal for the vast majority of people.":

In terms of the virus, true, however for married people where both parties are certain they didn't previously have it, yes its a huge deal. Now that said, there's something very strange about the supposed facts about Herpes, either huge amounts (more than previously estimated) of people pick it up and never show signs of the virus or the its only transmittable during outbreaks. The supposed public info bullitin type of sources claims its easily transmittable during an outbreak or no outbreak, but if that's true how are all these married guys getting away with their "hobbyist" activities, unless they and their wives already have it. Remember women who go through pregnancy would generally have to know one way or the other.

The late great NBA baskeball player Wilt Chamberlain supposedly died of a heart attack after having sex with 20,000 different women, however one has to wonder whether some kind of super-Herpes virus may have actually done in him

Note in regard to the full service AMPs (asian massage parlours) in effect use the standard sauna/table shower/body rub not only as a general decoy to some degree, but also to closely examine customers for any STD type outbreaks. It would be interesting to know what percent of these AMP girls end up getting herpes from their jobs. I believe its probably very very low, which suggests the outbreak/non-outbreak issue could be very relevant to avoiding transmission

per an internet medical souce genital herpes or "type 2 is usually mild-so mild that two- thirds of infected people don't even know they have it." Now combine this with a supposed "5% female to male per year" transmission rate (apparently) assuming the female has no explicit outbreaks - its makes some sense why this might not be that big a deal in the "hobbyist" community, although many of those customers would be over the 60 partner threashold, although its possible that "providers" are cleaner than the general population - if that makes any sense

In my experience, most providers are willing to go without a condom. No, they don't admit it, and most won't on the first "date," but if you look clean, don't seem like a carrier, most will go without, quite willingly.

I realize that "looking" clean is stupid, but take it for what it is worth - that seems to be the mentality.


JC (seems as though I look clean - PC or not, I like it)

A lady friend, platonic, says that she fills a good number of perscriptions to treat herpes especially as well as other STDs. She says she doesn't think people take STDs seriously at least in this area. She is older, but says she would love to get more action, but it is just too risky given all the diseases.

The line is that herpes is much more transmissible during outbreaks than otherwise (so much so that you are not supposed to have sex even w/ condoms, but my guess is that many sex workers will ignore this recommendation and go ahead anyways, maybe adjust the lighting or angle themselves strategically or whatever).

They also say HSV is transmissible even in the absence of outbreaks. Genetic factors surely play a factor in how likely a given person is to spread it spread. How important are genes much? Not well known from what I've read. Transmissibility, however, widely believed to go down with the amount of time the person has had the virus (in contrast to HIV which becomes more transmissible in the absence of ARVs (and death)).

New stuff is being learned all the time about the HSV's transmissibility, and it doesn't seem to me it's a very well understood problem. (Same situation w/ HIV, although that one is probably a bit better understood.)

As for the seeming "paradox" with "hobbyists" not passing it onto their wives more often:

I don't really see a paradox here. Maybe a hobbyist has about a 10% chance of getting it. But then he may only have a 10% chance of having symptoms severe enough for him or his wife to notice. After that he would have about a 5% chance per year to pass it onto her (more in the first year), and then she would only have a 10% chance of noticing.

My guess is that many hobbyist have got it, passed it onto their wives, but neither one knows. Again a testament to how minor a problem it is for most.

But it does happen. We see messages from local hobbyists saying they got it and their wife found out it and now they have to retire...

"In my experience, most providers are willing to go without a condom."

If the provider sample includes streetwalkers, that makes some sense, however I cannot fathom how many upscale providers (particularly w/o testing) would let random clients go w/o protection, because what's really in it for them? Of course for males the advantages are well known, a huge increase in sensation etc. however for providers, other than some extras fees perhaps, I cannot understand how the HIV/AIDs risk cost vs benefit of protection type equation would work in their favor

Even testing has some accuracy problems if the parties picked up the infection during a certain window period

Other than strippers, I am not a huge monger myself. But from the escort boards I study, I get the feeling that is is actually the higher end girls who will be more willing to go w/o condoms than SWs. Of course, the former are far more descriminant about clients than the latter.

"If the provider sample includes streetwalkers, that makes some sense, however I cannot fathom how many upscale providers (particularly w/o testing) would let random clients go w/o protection, because what's really in it for them?"

Great question. FWIW, my sample does not include streetwalkers, never have, never will. All are either strippers or escorts.

I've never been one to _ask_ to go without - seems as though that gets the PC "no way" answer. Don't ask, don't tell? Repeat business as a motivation? No idea, but my sample is fairly large (30-40), and 75+% will go without.

In fact, of the remaining 25%, I'm of the opinion that only one or two will truly never go without. Can't substantiate that, but I believe it.


JC

" I cannot fathom how many upscale providers (particularly w/o testing) would let random clients go w/o protection, because what's really in it for them?"

Well there is the obvious thing about it being a competitive advantage.

But I think it goes even beyond that. As JC and I have observed, some of them will just go and pull the condom, even when it's clear that you are fine w. it on or don't care yourself.

My conjecture (get this!) is that it actually FEELS BETTER FROM THEM too, and they actually ENJOY fucking a good number of their customers!

I know this blows the whole "just for money" model out of the water, but seems to be consistent w/ observation!

Well, I know at least 1 stripper/prostitute who went ape shit at the idea a prostitute could enjoy sex with a customer. Turned out she was a very sweet person, but I wouldn't have known that at all based on her angry hyper reaction to the statement some prostitutes can get off with their clients.

Apparently there is some rule that it has to only be about the money. We had a big news case here in Miami where this prostitute had a sliding fee scale that included FREE. Someone forgot to inform her of the has to be about the money rule. I think her name was Willets. Kathy? There is another rule the government is educating johns about: Buying sex has nothing to do with sexual pleasure. It is all about demeaning women. John after john "admitted" that sexual pleasure was never a reason for seeing a prostitute and the johns were thankful that they'd been "educated" by the all-loving government.

Virtually all the working girls I've talked to enjoy their work - sometimes.

Sure, there are the generally unpleasant fellows they have to work with (once?), and it probably is not _all_ that fun getting schtoinked by a bunch of strangers day in and day out.

I don't know why some go without. Ehh. I think it is kinda like OTC - if you -ask- for OTC (with an implication of "I want to get laid"), many/most will flatly deny their involvement in such hijinks. If you lead that direction, those that do go OTC let you know, if they're comfortable with it. I think the condom thing is kinda the same.


JC

My experience pretty much mirrors the last poster as far as how the ladies feel about their work. As far as the condom issue goes, honestly, I haven't met an escort yet that would go bareback and most street walkers are stricter than GFE escorts when it comes to BBBJ or DATY. There isn't a test report in the world that would get me to sleep with an escort, any escort, without a condom. Heck, I wouldn't boink Selma Hayak without a rubber!

My take on the whole "why do women dislike sex" thing is different than most. But I think it fits in with this discussion.

First, realize, I know darn well that women like sex. I'm just using that silly expression to get the ball rolling.

Second, realize, I am clear on the fact that it's not central to the issue of whether a given stripper will or won't change over to stripper-plus-prostitute. It's only tangential.

Third, I'm talking about this simply because it's come to mind. But what brought it up was basically the idea, that many girls who have sex for money DO enjoy parts of their work. The sex "isn't all that bad." It's probably, for them, hit-or-miss, as to whether a given one dude is appealing to them or not. I personally try to be as unoffensive as possible, staying fit, grooming myself, wearing proper fashionable clothing, being clean and smelling nice, not being gropey-grabby, etc. etc., using my body parts sensitively. I think they tend to appreciate this treatment, at least in so far as they might be comparing to other customers. I'm sure it's not like getting banged by their outlaw-biker boyfriends, or by the rich investment banker whom they marry when they're 43 ("still dancing at 28 years old!") in order to divorce and get a settlement. But it beats the heck out of them having to do the ol' wiggly-wiggly with a 300-pound guy with snot on his moustache, right?

So, DO girls actually "enjoy" certain aspects of having sex with customers for money? And, if so, then why isn't there more incentive for a given stripper to move over from stripping to stripping-plus-prostituting more readily?

Well, I view this in light of the whole real-world sex phenomenon. Women love to have sex. Women love good sex, and like average sex. They want to get fucked. In fact, among younger adults, most women probably have more sex than most men do, simply because the women have access to it because socially it's currently more difficult for a horny guy, than a horny girl, to get laid.

(But wait? How is that mathematically possible? If one presumes ((mildly falsely)) that among all heterosexual couplings, there is one male having sex during every instance that one female is having sex, then how could it be that most women get more sex than most men? Hmm? Think about it ... it IS possible. There are just a few lucky men out there servicing most women. Get it?)

Anyway, what happens, as far as I can tell, isn't that women dislike sex and therefore are reticent about engaging in it. Nor is it, as far as I can tell, that women like sex but feel like they have to "hide it" in order that people won't think of them as "too dirty" to want to date them. There is some of that -- especially among more conservative families, recent immigrants, that sort of thing, the old madonna-whore complex is assumed to be prevalent among most young males (frankly, I find this preposterous -- any guy I know, who FINALLY gets a hot chick to fuck him, is HIGHLY unlikely to stop dating her because of the fact that she fucked him; rather, he'll be goin' back for more right away!). And since that presumption is there, yes yes, a certain segment of society does expect that a man "won't respect her" if she has sex too soon. So they wait, and make him wait. There's a bit of that.

But I don't think that's central. Rather, I think there's a rather more central phenomenon going on.

I think women don't know themselves. They FORGET that they like sex. They don't act on the basis of wanting to interact with cool people, bond, have meaningful connections, get the ol' rumpy-shakey on, get a good orgasm. They go out in order to impress their girlfriends, compete with the skinny blonde girl in their group, see if they can make Mikey buy them a drink. And in all that machination, they FORGET to bother to have a good life.

As they get older, they figure this out, and realize that it's OK to balance desires with tactics geared toward fulfilling some of those desires. Of course, they might still have to work out how to navigate the madonna-whore thing, and whether or not she should make a guy wait so he'll respect her, or whether doing so might run him off because he figures she's frigid. That's an ancillary issue. But the central one, is failure to recognize, within themselves, the CAPACITY for enjoyment. They just ... miss it. Somehow it eludes them. They tend to grow out of this, but all those other things -- nails, heels, puppies, children -- take over their attention.

Maybe I'm just hanging out with frivolous chicks. Maybe I need to get laid. Haven't yet figured out how to make that happen, not without paying for it with a stripper-plus-prostitute. Or at least with a prostitute. Maybe some day I'll get better at it. I'm pretty sure that pontifications like this one aren't going to be helping me much in that endeavor ... :P

As other have mentioned, the value of test reports is pretty limited, although I won't say they are completely useless. HIV has a six week window, and HSV 16 weeks. I also think asking about status is pretty useless too. It's a big dice roll for me. Hopefully I smarten up before I lose!

"As other have mentioned, the value of test reports is pretty limited"

The parties of course would have to refrain from having sex with others for the window periods for these tests to be near foolproof, a near impossibility for many.

Consider that the escort I referenced in the first post at http://bkkescorts.com/dar/index.htm - will (instead of having you both tested together in-person) also apparently lets YOU bring your own test which she would then rely upon for her health and safety. That also sounds pretty risky from her standpoint, but obviously its a higher risk culture. Look at the price structure for a top shelf type girl in that part of the world: using latest dollar conversion approx $1900 regular service(or negotiated lower)for 3 days and approx $1300 extra (fixed charge)for "special service" option. Not exactly cheap, but probably a good deal for a guy in his 30's that can handle round-the-clock screwing and probably not a bad deal in any case for someone with lots of money for a girl like that (assuming she's your type)

Note similar supposed top shelf escorts, maybe one or 2 notches below the one cited, would be offered at around $150 for 2 hours or $400 for all night (both protected), also with "special service" available after testing at higher prices

Of course everything else in that locale from what I've heard is way way lower in most cases

"Maybe I'm just hanging out with frivolous chicks. Maybe I need to get laid. Haven't yet figured out how to make that happen, not without paying for it with a stripper-plus-prostitute."

Keep in mind many strippers are borderline crazy and hot chicks per se are not the only game in town, and there are some very nice regular girls, some actually quite attractive in many ways, however if you insist:

Aside for the usual things like the (hugely important) money and power, and maybe other things not necessarily easy to modify, you've got to become the gentlemen/horndog these women love: if the woman has a sister hint that you might want to meet her, of if possible meet her yourself. When the woman's period starts, note down the date and make sure you are all over her around day 14 during ovulation when she's in heat like a dog. Some chicks will attribute all that increased wetness to some kind of romance thing. Hot chicks need constant drama, so you always have to keep them off balance, (they love this stuff) and part of that is the man has to always be in the horndog mode, always mentioning his need for lots of different women. For a guy becoming involved with a hot chick, you can say something like "I am glad you understand my need to be with other women" or "my being with other ladies makes our relationship stronger and our relationship can last longer" "It takes the pressure off you" etc. Always remember that being a "nice guy" is not doing a hot chick any favor, she will be bored to death and you soon be dropped. If you are actually faithful, keep quiet about it, its a huge turnoff for the reasons I've alluded to in other posts a few weeks back.

Agreed. Sadly, but truly, the way of women. Yea and verily forsooth.

"They want to get fucked. In fact, among younger adults, most women probably have more sex than most men do, simply because the women have access to it because socially it's currently more difficult for a horny guy, than a horny girl, to get laid.

(But wait? How is that mathematically possible? If one presumes ((mildly falsely)) that among all heterosexual couplings, there is one male having sex during every instance that one female is having sex, then how could it be that most women get more sex than most men? Hmm? Think about it ... it IS possible. There are just a few lucky men out there servicing most women. Get it?)"

Well, I think there are a lot more men i.e. old farts + youngsters chasing the younger women. Also, among young white women who are blubber butts I think the sex advantage dissipates to a large extent. I've known more than a few blubber butts desperate for a real relationship including lots sex, but will settle for sex with a man that thinks they're attractive. Like an old pro old fart told me years and years ago go for the ugly women if you want to get laid. Sorry, but doesn't sound like any fun--maybe for a strong he-man type that is appealing.

Among young blacks from what I can see, it doesn't seem like there is a problem getting sex. If that is correct, then why? Maybe black women are more into it? Just based on my own experience I would say damn straight! :) Maybe black men are generally more open minded when it comes to accepting less attractive women? Every time I see a blubber butt raking in the money it is just astonishing. And, the hot women although not ignored aren't treated too special. With a choice between blubber butt or hottie, I can see the typical black man saying I don't know got to give each a try before making my decision. :)

"There are just a few lucky men out there servicing most women. Get it?"

Actually that's not far from the truth, because once a guy becomes the (horndog/doesn't give a shi.t about "relationships") PRICK that women love, opportunities will be presented at every corner, and some of them will use the opportunities to score with many many women, and this is particuarly true with so-called "hot" women, and most will repeat the same behavior patterns over and over again. They want that "chemistry" high and they will do anything to get their fix, just like a crack-cocaine addict.

David9999: I'm sorry to say, I pretty much agree with your assessment. Now the next trick in my life, is to BECOME one of those men ... :).

David9999: I understand your comment but in my experience I just don't see becoming a prick being the key to success with women. I have tried it myself and failed. Maybe you can enlighten us on some experience of being a prick that has worked consistently for you? I typically see women attracted to men for 3 other reasons other than bad attitude, such as great looks, a lot of money, or sense of humor. Next, if a man has outstanding qualities in any of these 3 areas, he can also afford to have a poor attitude or be a prick and get away with it, because the women will tolerate it to get the other quality they want. I do not have outstanding qualities in 2 out of 3, thus I feel I am always viewed by beautiful women as below average, except of course when I go to a club with my $'s, now I notice I can buy almost anything I want.

But concerning the question about strippers or escorts enjoying their customers, isn't this where the term YMMV evolves from? Her enjoyment can be directly measured by the mileage you receive in return. By the way, that's exactly how my relationships with my ex-girlfriends and my wife goes also, so it makes sense that this applies to strippers and escorts also.

I believe the exception are the strippers and escorts that do not belong in the business because they are only in it for the money. To be successful in these businesses for a reasonable period of time (stripping and escorting) you should enjoy the task of pleasing other people. A parallel example are people that work in medical care, these people must enjoy and receive pleasure from the task of taking care of and pleasing other people. If they didn't, they would eventually be very unhappy and not last long in their profession. I am not one of these people, I do not enjoy taking care of others, so I could never be a doctor, nurse, etc. Another example is Asian women, who are taught/conditioned from the time they are young that their role in life is to please men (ie, Geisha).

When I select women to do business with, I specifically look for women that have this quality of receiving enjoyment from pleasing people. It is also a good quality to look for in a wife. I notice young women in nursing school seem to adjust very well and quickly into stripping because it fits their personality. The women you are usually quoting on the pink site are the opposite, and in general have no natural qualities in their personality to make them be good strippers or escorts other than good looks. If you read escort ads you will find many woman advertise this quality of seeking the enjoyment of pleasing men, and it is not all BS (or SS or ES) because they know having this quality makes them unique and breaks them apart from the competition.

I am confused about the posts concerning herpes. I know herpes 1 is a sore on the mouth. I know Herpes 2 is a sore on the genital. So if a provider has a herpes 2 genital sore and a customer makes contact with it with their mouth, what is at risk? Is the customer in risk of herpes 1 or 2 on the mouth, or, possibly is their no risk since herpes 2 does not spread from a genital to the mouth?

I wonder because I notice on the escort sites (TER) the providers usually require condoms during oral on customers, implying they are concerned about pick-up of herpes 2 to their mouth, but I almost NEVER read about any customers being concerned about DATY, implying that customers see no risk of picking up herpes 2 from a provider into their mouth as either herpes 1 or 2 in their mouth.

HSV-2 almost always affects the genitals.

HSV-1 can affect the mouth or genitals (or, rarely, the eyes, brain, or other body parts).

70% of genital herpes are HSV-2, 30% HSV-1. Almost all oral infections are HSV-1.

You could get HSV-1 by either performing or receiving oral sex.

It is possible to have both gential HSV-1 and HSV-2! But if you get genital HSV-2 first, you have almost no chance of getting genital HSV-1. Getting HSV-1, even orally, before HSV-2 will lessen the severity of the inital HSV-2 outbreak since the antibodies are partially effective.

Around here it is about 50/50 whether an escort will publically offer BBBJ vs CBJs.

Oh, forgot to mention if you already have orally HSV-1 (most people do) it will be almost impossible to get oral HSV-2 from performing oral sex.

Wait ... HSV versus HPV ... now I'm confused again.

HPV is genital warts. 70%+ of people will have some strain of them at some in their life.

Like HSV, condoms slows HPV transmission down somewhat, but not as completely as other STDs. Unlike HSV, HPV increases the chance of cervical cancer in woman.

The good news (unlike HSV) is that there is a vaccine for the most dangerous strains: but only approved for women under 26.

Interesting (and somewhat frightening) post on HSV on another board:

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/show/357270

Chipitin states "I understand your comment but in my experience I just don't see becoming a prick being the key to success with women. I have tried it myself and failed. Maybe you can enlighten us on some experience of being a prick that has worked consistently for you? I typically see women attracted to men for 3 other reasons other than bad attitude, such as great looks, a lot of money, or sense of humor. Next, if a man has outstanding qualities in any of these 3 areas, he can also afford to have a poor attitude or be a prick and get away with it, because the women will tolerate it to get the other quality they want."

The next 2 paragraphs contain a summary of the two levels (IMHO) of what females find attractive in males that I wrote a few months back: Twenty or so years back (before I got married) I did have alot of the "benign" things going for me (I'm no Tom Brady but neither am I probably Peyton Manning) and I would get dates with 7 or 8 level women and be happy they would go out with me, some 6's and once in awhile a 9 level, but I treated women extraordinarily decently (and not in a fawning way) just in a respectful way, because that was the way I was brought up, yet it wasn't until law school and severe time contraints basically forced me just to basically develop a "don't give a shi..t about relatoinships" attitude - that I noticed by accident that women for some reason liked and were attracted to that kind of thing, as counterintuitive as that sounds, its actually true. Many years later I noticed the evolutionary connection, and its not so much about being a "prick" but instead having this ongoing "wanna screw every available chick" attitude or a constant tinge of nonmonogamy that I noticed was a key factor that most women seemed to be attracted to.

Here's how I explained it before:

quote

Males are attractive for females at two levels. One might think of the first level as "benign" characteristics that don't conflict with the generally accepted modern civilized rules of behavior and etiquette, such things (depending upon each woman's likes and dislikes) as appearance, height, strength, intelligence, earning power etc. Since women freely admit this, there is not much controversy here at all.

However success for the Alpha seed spreading male over the millions of years of man's development also required a certain set of characteristics that in a modern civilized context might be labeled (as mentioned above) as malignant, yet women via their evolutionary baggage carried forward and now operating at the subconscious level can find many (if not all) of these characteristics very attractive in males 1. a high degree of either perceived or actual nonmonogamy 2. patterns of deceptive behavior. 3. controlling behavior particularly as it concerns women. 4. a generalized disrepect for women 5. some element of insincerity 6. and for some significant minority of women a male presenting a personality suggesting a predisposition toward violence, either in substance or more typically held in restraint at most times.

end quote

Now that said, I feel bad for many younger guys in america today, because if anything american women have gotten more difficult and demanding than they were 20 to 25 years back, so they want everything in a guy PLUS that big "chemistry" thing plus money - so while being JUST a prick and offering not too much else, or a nice guy with lots of other benign things offered - neither one might work.

The best description I can think of is being a gentlemen/horndog, where you are nominally respecful, but the woman still is always very very suspicious of your motives and suspects you about everything, particularly your need and desire to be with other women.

"Maybe you can enlighten us on some experience of being a prick that has worked consistently for you?"

In one particular case (and there are several currently) which I had earlier attributed to just another variation of super stripper sh.it, as it has developed there are apparently other difficult things to explain, things going on that are 1. either a product of having large amounts of money or 2. presenting myself as a gentlemen/horndog - the 2 factors get overlapped a bit. I suspect its mostly number 2 because while I do spend money, the attention and time wasted on me and so forth goes way way beyond anything justified just by someone spending cash and having a bit of wealth, such wealth not being that uncommon in america today. She has the constant impression I'm either screwing or trying to screw everything in town, which is only about 1/10th true at the moment, but it just seems to make the "relationship" (her words) stronger. When she questions any of this I've told her (among other things) I'm doing it as part of an effort keep it all "balanced" which I also suggest is good "for her" also. Like most ultra top shelf girls, even though feminine and passive, her history is loaded with bad guys and/or abusive types - including the proverbial drug dealer at one point. A pure "nice guy" wouldn't last 3 minutes with a woman like this - even though she has claimed repeatedly that is exactly what she wants.

One other thing very important: nearly all hot chicks are super drama junkies, which basically means keeping them off balance, worried (usually over your "cheating"), and 1/2 the time mad at you. It would be wonderful if this wasn't true, but it is true, so any guy hanging around with women like this needs to constantly be coming up with things that will produce the drama these women need. "Nice guys" of course offer predictability and eventually boredom, and almost none of the drama