should I or shouldn't I?

[Misha]

Misha,

Perhaps you can enlighten me about how a mistress is "understood in the West." I have known several over the years one way or another, and it seemed completely similar to what I have seen and have been led to believe, at least in the U.S. It's also similar to what I observed in Mexico in many ways, although there it is generally much more open.

David

You are right, I was wrong in that last line. What I meant to say that it is different than the case of a man having an affair with a woman where there isn't an agreement as to how much must be paid per month to the woman. Mea culpa.

[Partizan]

phew! the marauding army of grannies seem to have gone.

The coast is clear  

[mies]

You do understand you are being scammed. Don't you?

This isn't a scam. Woman says she is looking for sponsor, Partizan willingly gives her money. Where is scam?
Now, if she took his money "for trip to Ukraine" and did not show up - that would be a scam. Until then - both people are willingly involved in the relationship where a man is a sponsor and woman is recipient of "sponsor donations".

[Muzh]

This isn't a scam. Woman says she is looking for sponsor, Partizan willingly gives her money. Where is scam?
Now, if she took his money "for trip to Ukraine" and did not show up - that would be a scam. Until then - both people are willingly involved in the relationship where a man is a sponsor and woman is recipient of "sponsor donations".

Actually, who was sending money on false pretenses?

[mies]

Come on...  get real!  She's a prostitute!

She's advertising for someone to pay her money and a man responding is expecting sexual favors,  it's prostitution.

Kuna, it is quite hard to exchange sexual favors for money while she is in Ural and Partizan is in Ireland. In all technicality - there is no difference between expectations of this woman (that a man will sponsor her) and expectations of any RW who is seeking marriage with a foreigner. Because WM will be a sponsor for his russian wife at least for few months, or years, or possibly - always.
The only difference between Partizan's penpal and random RW on dating sites is that random RW will demand marriage and will drop you if you don't marry her, and Ural girl will not demand marriage but quite likely will not oppose to it either - if Partizan has sufficient funds and will offer her marriage option.

So I understand that the only difference between "prostitute" in your definition and the "russian wife" is that WM is married to the latter and not married to the former. Didn't immigration documents for your wife somewhere contained the word "sponsor" or similar to that?

From the practical point of view - I would not send money to a girl from Ural. If you are traveling to Ukraine - meet girls there. Many gals to choose from, cheaper to fly there and no need to pay for their airfare, easier to communicate and meet more often.

And I thought I was a sucker when I lent my ex GF $300 for rent money and she avoids paying it back. Well, thanks for making me feel better!

"04/13/2011. Dear Little Black Diary. Today I have made a revealing observation: Mike78 is cheap and stingy. " 

[mies]

Actually, who was sending money on false pretenses?

could you elaborate, please?

[Muzh]

could you elaborate, please?

The man sends her a gift but with strings attached.

"Is she a scammer if I send her 400 Euros and she doesn't show up?" Now it is not a gift but a business transaction. If he is so concerned about "losing" 400 Euros, then don't send any money.

Ah, but she's pretty and so willing.

I just wish these guys would apply the same common sense with these FSU ladies as they are supposed to have in their own town.

One more time; do you give any beautiful girl you just met 400 Euros just because she asked you? The only time I can think of is when he is expecting "services" in return. "Is a BJ included in the price or is she scamming me?"

This is why kuna is throwing a fit and I can understand where he is coming from.

I should clarify that I am not saying by any means she is a prostitute. Problem is that in the west many would consider this an act of prostitution. Not many people here are familiar with women of the former Soyuz soliciting for sponsors. To tell you the truth, this is not the first time I've seen this from an FSU site. The other site I saw was extremely graphic and very distant from what you described earlier.

[Gator]

phew! the marauding army of grannies seem to have gone.

The coast is clear 

Returning to your thread title - Did you or didn't you?  (us babushkas want to know)

[mies]

The man sends her a gift but with strings attached.

"Is she a scammer if I send her 400 Euros and she doesn't show up?" Now it is not a gift but a business transaction. If he is so concerned about "losing" 400 Euros, then don't send any money.

Ah, but she's pretty and so willing.

I just wish these guys would apply the same common sense with these FSU ladies as they are supposed to have in their own town.

One more time; do you give any beautiful girl you just met 400 Euros just because she asked you? The only time I can think of is when he is expecting "services" in return. "Is a BJ included in the price or is she scamming me?"

This is why kuna is throwing a fit and I can understand where he is coming from.

I should clarify that I am not saying by any means she is a prostitute. Problem is that in the west many would consider this an act of prostitution. Not many people here are familiar with women of the former Soyuz soliciting for sponsors. To tell you the truth, this is not the first time I've seen this from an FSU site. The other site I saw was extremely graphic and very distant from what you described earlier.

playing a devil's advocate: when a man marries a woman he also expects that this happens with some strings attached. Otherwise Billy would not be posting here stories how some women refuse to have sex after wedding and his thoughts on the topic. So i'm just trying to see how this is different. Does the "married" sign somehow magically transform the situation? Or maybe the love (including physical) or money exchange are OK only in marriage and not OK outside of marriage? like "it's OK to give money to wifey but not to give money to girlfriend" or "it's OK to have sex with wife, but not OK to have sex with GF". Or "it's OK to have sex with wife and give her money, but with GF only FREE sex is allowed. If you give her money - you make her a prostitute." Right? And furthermore: if a man marries a prostitute, and continues an exclusive relationship with her in the same manner as before, she is no longer considered to be a prostitute? Because transaction happens inside the marriage.  

would you consider it to be prostitution when a woman does not work, is married, and regularly has sex with her husband while he regularly provides her with financial means?  

[Misha]

playing a devil's advocate: when a man marries a woman he also expects that this happens with some strings attached. Otherwise Billy would not be posting here stories how some women refuse to have sex after wedding and his thoughts on the topic.

In my definition of marriage, sex happens because two people are generally interested in having sex with each other. It is not a question of "If I have sex with him, he will give me 400 Euros" or "If I have sex with him, he will finally buy the $800 coat that I want" though I am sure there are some marriages where this does happen. However, this was not the ideal marriage that I longed for. I see marriage as a partnership whereby both give and receive and where the main motivation is not solely financial.

would you consider it to be prostitution when a woman does not work, is married, and regularly has sex with her husband while he regularly provides her with financial means? 

No, because as noted above she should be wanting to have sex with her husband. I doubt that many prostitutes have sex with a client because they want to have sex with him...

[SFandEE]

Sponsorship although it appears simple in its' asking is foreign to me, perhaps other WM.  When I was approached, I did entertain a back and forth to learn more about what exactly she thought she was requesting and offering.  I did not get much information from her, but this thread has been insightful.  What particularly seemed to trip her up was answering the question, why would I sponsor someone that lived half way around the world from me.

To be clear--I am not interested in being a sponsor, but do find it a curiosity.  Closest thing in West is probably a mistress, although the mistresses I have known also have careers or past times.  What is it like in the FSU?

As for flying a woman in from Urals to Kyiv--if it has been said earlier it will be said twice, "like taking sand to the beach".

[SFandEE]

From the practical point of view - I would not send money to a girl from Ural. If you are traveling to Ukraine - meet girls there. Many gals to choose from, cheaper to fly there and no need to pay for their airfare, easier to communicate and meet more often.
 "04/13/2011. Dear Little Black Diary. Today I have made a revealing observation: Mike78 is cheap and stingy. " 

Translated to FSU speak "greedy".  Don't know if I agree, but still the same.  Stingy is what I have come to believe "greedy" means to FSUW.

[Misha]

What is it like in the FSU?

Depends on the woman, but it is not that complicated. Man agrees to pay woman X rubles/dollars/euros and in return he gets a mistress  Some women will work and have a sponsor on the side to get more money, others will rely solely on the "allowance" given to them by their sponsor.

[Muzh]

playing a devil's advocate: when a man marries a woman he also expects that this happens with some strings attached. Otherwise Billy would not be posting here stories how some women refuse to have sex after wedding and his thoughts on the topic. So i'm just trying to see how this is different. Does the "married" sign somehow magically transform the situation? Or maybe the love (including physical) or money exchange are OK only in marriage and not OK outside of marriage? like "it's OK to give money to wifey but not to give money to girlfriend" or "it's OK to have sex with wife, but not OK to have sex with GF". Or "it's OK to have sex with wife and give her money, but with GF only FREE sex is allowed. If you give her money - you make her a prostitute." Right? And furthermore: if a man marries a prostitute, and continues an exclusive relationship with her in the same manner as before, she is no longer considered to be a prostitute? Because transaction happens inside the marriage.  

would you consider it to be prostitution when a woman does not work, is married, and regularly has sex with her husband while he regularly provides her with financial means?  

Mies, there is a big difference. You pay a prostitute to leave.

[Gator]

Mies, there is a big difference. You pay a prostitute to leave.

That is what the celebrities say, to leave after sex.  Understandable.

[mies]

Translated to FSU speak "greedy".  Don't know if I agree, but still the same.  Stingy is what I have come to believe "greedy" means to FSUW.

are you translating the word for me? because i do know both words. 

[mies]

Mies, there is a big difference. You pay a prostitute to leave.

so summing up what you and Misha said in recent posts, the difference between a prostitute and non-prostitute is the following:
if a man loves woman - he marries her, she is not a prostitute, and he spends money to have her.
if a man does not love a woman - he does not marry her, she is a prostitute, and he spends money to make her leave.

 

(for sensitive souls: please don't take my words seriously. i love applying reductionism to discussions like this one.)

[Gator]

What is it like in the FSU?

My understanding of a few scenarios.

1.  A young student can not afford her university tuition, etc. and a sponsor helps her.  After graduation she says poka and starts her career.

2.  A recently divorced mama has financial trouble (the implementation of  divorce laws in the FSU is not as child supportive as in the US).  She finds a man who will provide for her and her child.

IMO, "prostitute" is too harsh for the first two.  The third is another matter.

3.  A hot 20-yo beauty is discovered by a wealthy, flamboyant, interesting RM (e. g., the RM in the Direct TV ads) and he gives her a life of opulence until he tires of her.  She then finds another man who perhaps is not as interesting nor as wealthy as the first.  She may cycle through a number of such men.  At 29 she is no longer able to attract RM sponsors, so she signs up with a marriage agency.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22XqBLDDrU4[/youtube]

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vHT6b7u1_Y&feature=related[/youtube]

[mies]

 
http://www.petitelapgiraffe.com/

[Misha]

so summing up what you and Misha said in recent posts, the difference between a prostitute and non-prostitute is the following:
if a man loves woman - he marries her, she is not a prostitute, and he spends money to have her.
if a man does not love a woman - he does not marry her, she is a prostitute, and he spends money to make her leave.

 

(for sensitive souls: please don't take my words seriously. i love applying reductionism to discussions like this one.)

No, in my definition of marriage, you do not spend money to have your wife  :noidea:

[mies]

No, in my definition of marriage, you do not spend money to have your wife  :noidea:

do WM spends money for the process of courting an RW and bringing her to his country? Would he be able to marry this very same woman without investment? Why does he spend the money then?  :noidea:

you do understand that i'm not fully serious, right? just restating the obvious facts.

[Gator]

My definitions:

A prostitute is paid by the "trick."  

A woman being sponsored is paid a monthly stipend, and she has a continuing albeit not enduring and probably not fulltime relationship with the man (who may already be married).  

A wife is in an enviable power position:  she has 50% of the money in the marriage and 100% of the vagina.

[Misha]

My definitions:

A prostitute is paid by the "trick."  

A woman being sponsored is paid a monthly stipend, and she has a continuing albeit not enduring and probably not fulltime relationship with the man (who may already be married).  

Exactly! The prostitute is paid by the hour, the sponsored woman monthly 

[SMS60]

Labels are placed on people by people with small minds.

2 consenting adults engaged in a relationship is exactly that.

[Misha]

Labels are placed on people by people with small minds.

2 consenting adults engaged in a relationship is exactly that.

Nothing to do with labels, just calling a spade a spade. If a man wants to pay for sex, fine, but lets not confuse this with marriage