There is nothing in the dark that isn’t there when the lights are on. – Rod Serling
Lots of people of both sexes have an inexplicable desire to have sex in the dark. Personally, I find this completely incomprehensible; I can’t imagine why anyone would prefer to perform any activity without being able to see what he’s doing. If an amateur wants to let a man fumble about and grope her in the dark I suppose it’s her business, but any professional who lets a client turn off the lights is a fool. There are too many things she needs to keep an eye on, and too much that a sneaky customer can attempt undetected in the dark. Usually, customers will comply with a request for light without protest; when they gave me trouble I would say, “What’s the point of paying for a pretty girl if you can’t see her? If you wanted to turn the lights off you could’ve saved yourself some money by hiring an ugly girl!” Usually this provoked a laugh and he would acquiesce, but once (and only once) a man adamantly refused to even remove his clothes until the lights were off. Obviously I could not accept those conditions, so I returned his money (less my $50 cancellation fee) and left; I shudder to think what he was so desperate to hide from me under concealment of darkness.
The most likely candidate is of course evidence of venereal disease; contrary to the popular stereotype so beloved by governments, bluenoses and misogynists, whores have no desire to contract or spread disease, and as I mentioned in my column of August 6th the incidence of all sexually transmitted disease is much higher among promiscuous amateurs than it is among professionals (some studies estimate as much as 5x higher). While self-proclaimed “good girls” believe they are safe from STDs because they only have sex with men they “care about”, whores labor under no such delusion and so we have to be careful. As I repeatedly told customers, “I have a life outside of work and have no desire to ruin it with a venereal disease.” Condoms do greatly reduce the risk of disease transmission, but they don’t eliminate it entirely; after all, they do occasionally break and venereal warts can be transmitted even when they don’t (through microscopic abrasions in the skin of the genital area). So it is extremely important for a whore to check her partner for signs of infection, and refuse contact if she detects any; obviously, good light makes this task much easier. Working girls have recognized this necessity since at least the 18th century, belying the “dirty whore” stereotype, as evidenced by the thorough examinations described by brothel-going diarists of the period. I examined each customer under the guise of stimulating his genitals with my hands, but if I noticed even the slightest nonconformity I asked him to explain it, and if he couldn’t do so both instantly and convincingly I proceeded on my own judgment with a strategy ranging from putting a condom on immediately (before I even touched him further) to breaking off the call and advising him to seek medical attention. I only had to do the latter once in my entire career, and the gentleman was so grateful that I had detected a problem he had not himself noticed that he told me to keep the whole fee.
Another reason for keeping the lights on is the one we talked about in the aforementioned August 6th column, namely the self-destructive male aversion to condoms. Since all reputable whores (and even most disreputable ones) are adamant about condoms and few can be budged on it for any reason, some men resort to trickery to get their way. One such trick which I heard about from older girls (though I never experienced it myself) involved using a pin to make a hole through the condom while still in its packet; a condom so doctored will appear intact when rolled onto the penis, but will break and roll down as soon as the man starts to thrust. Since the inside of a woman’s vagina isn’t sensitive enough to notice the difference, she cannot discover the deception until it’s too late. The obvious way to foil this is to insist on using one’s own condoms, but sometimes a client is very large or has some other physical problem (such as a penile deformity or latex allergy) which gives him the excuse of requiring his own. I always carried a few large-size condoms for well-endowed clients, but an inexperienced or less prudent girl might not think of that and it still leaves the possibility of mere personal preference for a certain brand or type (such as the expensive lambskin variety, which BTB does NOT prevent disease). With the lights on, however, even this does not present a problem; a wrapped condom is intact if it feels like an air pillow (i.e. presents resistance to pressure applied by the fingers). Even an invisible pinhole allows air to escape, resulting in a visible (and sometimes audible) deflation when the package is squeezed. I suppose the test could be performed in the dark, but it’s much easier in the light. And once the condom is on, what’s to stop a man from removing it in the dark? It didn’t take me long to get so deft at getting a condom on a man that I could do it in one smooth motion (or two if the roll-down was performed orally), and I know I’ve seen guys whip them off when we’re done just as quickly as I can get them on. So I have no doubt that with a bit of practice a sneak could get it off so quickly in the dark (especially when changing positions) that the girl wouldn’t even notice.
There are plenty of other things a client might attempt besides condom hijinks, all of which are easier to foil in the light. One never knows what sort of props, instruments or tools could be hidden within easy reach, and I’ve even heard of cases where a second guy hides in the room either to listen or to change places when the lights are off (neither of these has ever happened to me, but I’ve seen weirder scams so I totally believe that men have tried it). It’s also reassuring to be able to see one’s purse (containing one’s mace and stun gun) so in extremity one might potentially be able to go for them, and furthermore I suspect that being able to see a woman’s face helps the client to remember that she is a human being; for a man to slip into thinking of her as just a thing for his pleasure can have very unfortunate results (as discussed in my column of July 26th). Obviously, none of these possibilities are remotely as common as condom issues, but the Law of Very Big Numbers guarantees that at least some of them will happen in the course of thousands of calls.
One final and extremely important reason for keeping the lights on is time management; since we charge by the hour and our progress is monitored by the agency (independents are often monitored by a friend, driver, husband or boyfriend) it is important to keep track of time not only to avoid going over, but also to make sure the customer achieves what he wants to achieve within that allotted time. “Hobbyists” who see escorts often complain about “clock-watchers”, but the truth is that we are all clock-watchers because we have to be, not only for commercial reasons but for reasons of safety. The difference between a girl who is branded a “clock-watcher” and one who isn’t is subtlety; I stole glances at my watch while doing other things, such as wrapping my arm around the client’s neck during intercourse. And there’s a huge difference between rudely telling a man what time it is and gently guiding him so that his pleasure isn’t interrupted by the call-out. Proper time management allowed me to lie beside my client afterward (if he wanted that), clean him off with a warm washcloth, chat for a little while and get dressed in a natural manner rather than a rushed one, thus making the experience seem far less artificial. And none of that is possible if it’s too dark to see one’s watch!
The widespread obsession with having sex in the dark derives from the perverse but persistent notion that sex is somehow dirty, bad, naughty, vulgar or otherwise shameful; it is therefore performed furtively in the dark like a crime rather than being celebrated in the light like the natural, wholesome pleasure it truly is. Amateurs who have sex in the dark are only cheating themselves, but a professional girl who lets her customer turn off the lights not only endangers herself, but also allows her client to rob himself of the full experience of her company. Nobody would expect a lawyer or a surgeon to perform his professional duties in the dark, and asking a whore to do so is just as ridiculous.
“Nobody would expect a lawyer or a surgeon to perform his professional duties in the dark, and asking a whore to do so is just as ridiculous.”
Well, that made me LOL. ^__^ And when you’re paying for sex (something I’ll still never quite be able to wrap my mind around) it sure does make sense to want the full monty, as it were.
But even though I’m a lights-on type myself, I think there’s a case to be made for romantic love that takes place in the dark, Not all the time, maybe, but aside being something in which to hide something shameful, The Dark is also that place where we can let go of out Daylight Civilized Selves, and — in the proper context — give free reign to something more primal.
Just a thought, that there are dual and opposite impulses that have so many people turning off the lights before getting it on…
~~
You can’t understand it because you’re a woman, and we don’t have to pay for it. I have tried to put myself in the client’s place and conceive of something which might induce me to do so, but I simply can’t; it’s out of my grasp on the other side of that Mars-Venus divide. Young men often have an aversion to paying, but older, more sensible men realize that a man always pays for it, and that “free” pussy is the most expensive kind.
You may be right; there must be some reason. But then, I’m sure there are valid reasons why many people enjoy professional wrestling despite the fact that I find it idiotic. Perhaps my prejudice against sex in the dark derives from the fact that most of my good early experiences were in the afternoon.
“You can’t understand it because you’re a woman, and we don’t have to pay for it. I have tried to put myself in the client’s place and conceive of something which might induce me to do so, but I simply can’t; it’s out of my grasp on the other side of that Mars-Venus divide.”
I also have (I know this thanks to my partner the astrologer) a Venus-Moon conjunction in Cancer trined by Mars. Among other things, it means I tend to equate Love and Sex: I’m attracted to those I love and I fall in love with those I enjoy sex with. So it’s part of my psychic makeup to be uninterested in purely physical sexual encounters: the emotional aspect is an integral part of the experience for me. I’ve had precious few one-night stands in my life.
This tends to be true for women in general, LilyRose (and Maggie…). But you see, the reason why you and Maggie can’t imagine paying for sex is, as she says, that she doesn’t have to, because willing men aren’t hard to find. If they were… say, if a plague killed off 99% of all men… then suddenly you’d see women paying for a chance with the few survivors.
Women do tend to need to sorta fall in love to have sex. And I’m sure they would choose, among those few surivovrs, the ones they can more or less ‘fall in love’ with. But given the number of other women also trying to ‘fall in love’ with one of them… some of these women would end up having to pay.
A bit like those teenagers who ‘fall in love’ with the latest rock star. The women with a terrible passion for Elvis might very well pay to spend one night with their idol.
It’s like air. It’s difficult to imagine paying for air, because it’s so plentiful. But if suddenly breathable air became a rare commodity (as in a space station, or on the moon)… we’d all pay for it.
Not me, not even with the last man on Earth. If a man doesn’t want me enough to pay for me there is zero point in getting in bed with him. 🙁
Maybe, Maggie, maybe. But as they say in Brazil you’re speaking with a full belly…
Besides, what you say suggests that paying in cash is the only way a man could show he desires you. Is that so? Does your husband still pay in cash every time he wants to have sex with you? If he doesn’t, does that mean he can’t make you see he desires you in some other way? And if so, is his way of showing it really less good than cash payments?
There’s always a market for anything that pleases our bodies, as long as this thing is not easy to get for free. Which is why even “refined” things like symphonies or paintings are bought and sold. While other things that we desperately need — like air for breathing — could never be, since air is everywhere for free.
Hell, no, not friggin’ maybe! NEVER. I have never needed sex in my life, no matter how much I might like it, and even if I did “need” it I would have sex with other women before I would give any man one penny for it. If he doesn’t want me I’m not interested, period. 🙁
But that’s not what I mean, Maggie. We don’t “need” paintings or symphonies, and we certainly could live without them, still there’s a market for them — they are sold and bought. People can — and do — make money on them. We don’t buy only the things we desperately need, Maggie.
And saying there would be a market doesn’t imply saying you would necessarily be one of the buyers, Maggie. (There’s a market for cigarettes out there, for instance, even though I personally don’t buy cigarettes, and never will.) But do I think that the last man on an earth still inhabited by millions of women would die of starvation if his only career possibility were selling sex (and the ‘illusion of being desired’ that goes with it) to women? No; I don’t think he would. I’m pretty sure he’d be able to find enough clients to prosper. 😉
I’m sure SOME women would, absolutely. But I would not be among them.
OK, OK, I’ll grant you that if you will… But why do you react like that if just the mere possibility that, in some bizarre parallel universe, for some bizarre reason, you might even consider buying sex (from men, or from women, doesn’t matter, since it’s the buying that you object to) is mentioned? It’s almost as if you despised your client’s need for your services, or felt superior to them.
On second thoughts — it’s probably the “I’ve-had-to-talk-to-idiots-about-this-topic-so-I’m-tired-of-it” thing again. OK, I get that. You’re reacting to implications I’m not making here, but others have made elsewhere, and which were indeed foolish and stupid. Let’s drop it then.
No problem — you wouldn’t buy it then. But my only point is: there would be a market, if the necessary conditions arose. A desire (not a ‘need’; just a desire, even a slight one) + no ‘free’ way to satisfy it => money can be made. Maybe not millions, but some money. Where there’s a difference of potential, work can be done. That’s all. This doesn’t necessarily imply anything about you personally.
I don’t feel superior to people who like sports, but I guarantee you that I will never buy a ticket to a sporting event for myself. This is no different.
I can’t understand a desire to have sex in the dark. It seems like a rather pointless exercise to me. None of my girls have ever reported an expressed desire by a client to have sex in the dark. Given the fact that they report anomalies to me and my partner for obvious self-protection, I imagine none of them has had such a request yet. If I ever hear of any of them doing it, I’m going to refer them to this column. As for paying for sex, Lily, it’s often a way to avoid spending a lot of time romancing a girl and achieving the desired goal as quickly as possible. I have a beautiful, intelligent wife I adore deeply. I have no qualms admitting I’ve often patronized escorts during our marriage–with her full knowledge. She knows I have a very strong libido and is willing to indulge that side of me so long as I don’t bring any diseases home to her. (We’re the proud parents of a year-old girl, so obviously STDs would be worse in our household than in childless ones.) My wife even gets sexual satisfation herself out of participation in some of my encounters with escots since she is bisexual. Thus, I get the best of all worlds: sex with my beautiful wife, sex with a beautfiul escort, and voyeuristic participation as two beautiful woman are pleasuring each other and me simultaneously. It costs me money, but it’s worth it. The escort knows I’m married and expects nothing but money for the time we spend together. Thus, there’s little chance of feelings developing and complicating the idllic home life my wife and I have built. It’s much simpler and more worthwhile than spending time seducing a girl and maybe having the perception develop that here’s anything more there than a desire for sexual release.
Feel free to refer them to me any time; I would love to know I was helping younger girls. 🙂
Although i can see your point regarding safety and wanting to enjoy the beauty of a young lady, there is also the effect of losing one sense increasing the sensitivity of other senses. Like why some people enjoy being blindfolded, etc. But you are also right that a good part of it probably has to do with the whole sex is dirty stigma. 🙁
But being blindfolded wouldn’t be fun if the man was also blindfolded!
No? Then it’s not being done correctly! 😉
Talk about the blind leading the blind… 🙁
🙂
Some things are really cool in the dark, or by candlelight, or moonlight. Ghost stories just aren’t the same with the lights on, and neither is a rave.
I’ve had sex in the dark and with the lights on, and I wouldn’t say that one is BETTER than the other, but they are different. Both better, in their own way.
Why a call girl wants the lights on is pretty obvious, especially after it’s pointed out. Perhaps once night vision contacts are perfected, customers who want the lights out will be able to have their way without compromising the prostitute’s safety.
If those made her eyes seem to glow in the dark like a cat’s, some customers might find it rather creepy! 🙂
Yes, but some would pay extra for it. 😉
I’m also firmly on the ‘lights on’ side of the discussion. Like Sailor Barsoom, I’ve also made love in the dark, and I can see what he means when he says that ‘it’s different’; but I have to admit I like it a lot more in with the lights on.
I think one factor in the preference for the dark is, as Maggie says, the old belief that sex is dirty (so people hide themselves in the dark to ‘forget’ they’re doing something ‘dirty’). Another factor, though — especially among women, but curiously enough, also among men — is the fear that one is somehow going to look ridiculous or ugly. Be it because one has body issues (‘I’m not good-looking enough’, ‘I’m too fat’, ‘I’m bald’, ‘my leg/hips/belly/breast/penis doesn’t look right’, ‘I have this big wart or old burn’), be it because they associate nakedness per se with ridiculousness of some kind or other (I remember a girl who thought I would laugh at her…), or with vulnerability, lack of protection, fear of being attacked…
Humans are indeed funny.
I recently saw a box of ribbed condoms, and was reminded about how you had said that a woman can’t tell, from the feel inside of her vagina, whether a man is wearing a condom or not. Does this mean that all of those ribbed, studded, and otherwise-enhanced condoms are bunk, or can you in fact tell if he is wearing that? I could see whores insisting on ribbed or whatever if you can tell, and it could always be played off as a wanton thing: “We have to use them anyway, and those studs make me SO HOT!”
If the woman can’t tell, I don’t see any reason to pay extra for what are, in effect, decorations. I sure can’t feel much difference.
I can’t answer that, because I’ve never in my life allowed one of those weird-looking things inside of me. Any other ladies care to take this one?
Since this is an older post, it’s possible nobody who knows will see it; if we don’t get an answer remind me in three weeks and I’ll put it into my January Q & A column.
Women can definitely tell a difference–and a positive one at that. However, only for the first 1-3 inches internally.
Thanks for fielding that one, Imogene; nobody ever tried one in private life and there was no way I was going to try something so goofy-looking (IMHO) with a customer!
Thanks. Drat, there goes my research project.
As a woman, I also concur about the body image issues as a reason to go with low or no lights
“older, more sensible men realize that a man always pays for it, and that “free” pussy is the most expensive kind”
I keep this in mind every time I’m tempted to do something that might cost me my marriage and much else that I hold dearer than a quick romp in the hay with some willing and shapely amateur. 🙂
As to the darkness thing, I figure if I’m paying that kind of money for sexual variety, and being a visually stimulated man like most males, I want to be able to see everything clearly. I don’t think I’m any great catch in the looks department, but I’m not hideous, either, and in any case (again, for that kind of cash) she’s going to at least fake being able to tolerate the sight of me.
In short, other than for the reasons you describe (extreme shyness or dishonest condom games) I can’t understand liking the dark. I’d far prefer to see the woman I’m with. That’s part of the turn-on. How her curves change as her position changes, how things stretch and tense and sag and move, the look on her face, all of those are important (in addition to the non-visuals such as sound and touch and smell). I guess I just like women.
Besides, a condom can kind of makes things last a little longer – not as much a concern now as it was in my randy 20s, but still . . . IMHO, men’s objections to wearing condoms are about 10% real loss of sensation and 90% macho bulls**t.
Oh I’ve had someone try to tell me they have a problem with condoms making them feel actual pain! I can’t imagine why unless the ones they have used were ill-fitting!
And what of the proliferation of men in the UK especially who want a BJ without a condom? I say no bloody chance to that either unless I know you really reaaly well and you’re always squeeky clean!