Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Tired and Tremulous

I feel like Madeline Kahn.

My last full day off was Easter (I used it to clear my desk). My next full day off is Tuesday the 24th. I went into work today with a terrible attitude and was horrible to my co-workers, one of whom is in charge of a large project that she's feeling overwhelmed by. If I tell her it's just not that big a deal, it demeans the project, which is a first for her on a few levels. If I agree that yes, it's a huge deal, it just puts more weight on her shoulders.

But back on topic.

I've been corresponding with Be-My-Real-Friend, by which I mean he writes me long emails, I answer one out of ten and call him when I have time. He doesn't nag, or phone at bad times. So far, this is working great, as far as I'm concerned. I like reading what he has to say, and I'm glad he is OK with my getting back when I can. The battle is to make sure I keep my head aligned on, "I've talked to him about as much as I've talked to Beautiful Girl this month, and she's my best friend. I am not short-changing him as a friend, and he has expressly said he doesn't want my paid attention, he just happens to be giving me money so I can carve out the time to see him."

We've set a date for me to fly to see him. He's sent a deposit for the plane ticket and hotel. It's a city I enjoy visiting, and we're going to look at buildings and stroll through neighborhoods. Battle #2 is to stay me, to not defer past politeness into customer service, to act like the superior bitch I am instead of the "woman who can't wait to have sex with you" that I act like with clients. To truly take him at his word, make him work for it the way I would with any non-client, be the tease I am, make it feel edgy and slippery and doubtful.

It's still a sure thing.

I'd feel like a very, very bad person accepting the plane and hotel, let alone the cash, and not follow through at the moment of truth. The Victorians had a point when they restricted what presents a lady could safely accept without compromising herself. But we've had enough chat that I find him likeable, and he's cute in a craggy sort of way.

I'm very curious to see if I can pull this off. If so, it's the first step into courtesan-ship. If not, at least I'll learn something. And I do think he's the kind of guy who can laugh and say, "That sucked, let's do something else." Hopefully, even (if necessary), "someone else."


Rizzo said...

well, good luck! i'm sure that this will be a learning experience no matter what the outcome. who knows, maybe this will be right for you, or maybe it won't. either way, keep us updated cause we're coming along for the ride! best, R

dexplorer said...

Yeah this does seem like the first step into exploring courtesan-ship.

The dance you’re playing / wrestling with here is interesting. It also seems Mandy unique, despite having some commonalities with others I’ve seen.

Maybe try to make it work back, while yes he's in chasing making it work for you mode, but don’t try too falsely much?

Other fish.

The Man With Secrets said...

I was wondering how much it would cost to (virtually) fly you over to London so you could join La Fille and me ...

Tom Paine said...

C. asked me today if I ever "turn it off" and stop over-thinking things.


I wonder if we were in bed if you'd be thinking "hmmm, does this beat what I could be making if I was with a client?"

Sometimes the un-examined life is actually better....

la fille mariƩe said...

Mandy... good luck with this. I think it's something you definitely need to explore, and I admire the conscious way you are doing that exploring.

You really must excuse the man with secrets (see previous comment)... he really is a big old bundle of horniness (although you're more than welcome to join me on my virtual adventure in London). ;)

Anonymous said...

i would think that courtesan-ship (is it so different than sugar-daddy-ship, albeit with a slightly more palatable title?!) as you've described it would be astonishingly better than standard whore-dom (i DO have a difficult time using that word with you) on many levels, not the least of which being the deeper levels of intimacy made possible by having a choice in the relationship. don't get me wrong, of course you always have a choice. but the freedom to be your deepest, most honest and perfectly imperfect self in the context of any of your relationships seems to be the goal. you want people in your life to love you no matter what, despite (because of?) all perceived strengths and weaknesses. the trick is being brave enough to take the chance, and that bravery comes only with being willing to accept the risk involved in allowing your partner to know you well enough to possibly reject you with honesty. difficult. not easy.

not to get all buddhistic (yeah yeah, i know i made it up. humor me!) on you, but i say lose your attachment and relinquish your preference regarding the outcome. when you seemed clearest was when you made the decision that you weren't going to do this any more. you were (seemed) perfectly detached and ready to walk on it. it didn't own you in any way, you owned it. keeping that engaged detachment will, i think, keep your head wrapped around it all in healthy ways. make sense? bg

Denis Connor said...

"... cute in a craggy sort of way." I'm not sure whether to say "Awww!" or "Ouch!"

I love the way you're always "maybe I'll learn something" about every new encounter in life.

anonymous (comment above me) ... I'm sure you meant "buddhish." N'est-ce pas?

Anonymous said...

nah, neologisms are us. i mean me. chock-full-o-buddhitudity. you know. *grin*