Not that sort of taxing, thank goodness – paid-for sex is expensive enough without VAT on top.
No, it’s the other kind of taxing I’m referring to.
In an article in this week’s Sunday Times, a sex therapist is quoted as saying, “If you’re the one being penetrated, sex is more taxing.”
On a purely physical level sex is surely more taxing for the man, who has to make most of the effort, whereas the girl – to take a somewhat superficial view – can lie back and think of England / Romania / Brazil (as applicable). For a woman, however, sex is probably more likely to be taxing for psychological rather than physiological reasons.
The therapist was referring to sexual penetration within a relationship – and specifically in the context of occasions when the woman agrees to sex when she’s not really in the mood. But the expression she used made me wonder how “taxing” escorts – who, by definition, are not fucking in the context of a proper relationship – find sexual intercourse?
I suppose I tend to assume that, for most escorts, the experience of being penetrated generally comes in the “boring to OK” range. But perhaps I'm wrong? Either way, presumably the nature of the experience will partly depend on how attractive / unattractive she finds the man; her own mood; the number of men she’s seen that day; and so on.
The most valuable responses to these ruminations would probably come from escorts – but it may be that there are some punters here who also have particular insights into the matter!
