Regarding Avoiding the Risk of Married Supporters

>Considering the risks of married men, I’m wondering if it would be better to choose Type B2. Even with Relationship Type C, both men and women have the right to decline. (The fact that you met through this service is all it means; what happens afterward is up to you.) Since the first date will be a dinner date regardless of the relationship type: Relationship Type C → You can confirm things during dinner Relationship Type B2 → You can confirm things during dinner So I don’t think the risk is any different. Perhaps you feel bad because the man may show up that day fully expecting things to happen, but that would only be an issue with Type D. With Type C, men should understand that there’s roughly a 50% chance the woman may decline after dinner. If he didn’t understand that, then either the staff failed to explain it properly or he wasn’t paying attention. Men often say they don’t like women who choose Type D—not all men, of course, but many do, while some still make offers to Type D women. Yet when a Type C woman turns them down, they somehow think, “Isn’t Type C supposed to mean she’s okay from the very first day?” If they dislike Type D, I find it strange that they don’t realize Type C women may also turn them down. More importantly, this isn’t a sex service, so even a Type D woman has the right to decline, doesn’t she? >Would writing the reason above in my profile cause problems later because of the risks associated with married men? With this wording, I think it would be understood as, “I decline married men,” so I don’t think it would cause any problems. However, it may reduce the number of offers you receive. Some men may think, “She doesn’t accept married men, so I won’t make an offer.” >That isn’t what I want, so I’m conflicted. In that case, I think it would be better not to write it. >Regarding avoiding the risks associated with married men This is a very difficult issue. When a man is married, he often doesn’t seem to consider the risk that the woman could be sued for damages by his wife. (Maybe it’s natural not to think about something that doesn’t disadvantage you personally, but that still feels wrong to me.) However, if both people are married, they each have leverage over the other. If one person gets caught and sued, the other could file a claim as well, so the damages might ultimately cancel each other out. In that sense, I can see how both parties being married could reduce the risk. (This is only from the standpoint of liability for damages, separate from the possibility of either person’s family falling apart.) Also, if you genuinely didn’t know the other person was married—and weren’t negligent in failing to know—you may have a better chance of avoiding liability even if you’re sued for damages. So I think it might be a good idea to deliberately ask them to discuss such matters through KakaoTalk, for example, and save screenshots as well, since the messages could otherwise disappear. >Even if I asked Universe to tell me, I don’t think they would disclose it because this is a civil matter. I would think they might disclose it if there were a request from the court, even in a civil case. However, I’m not really sure under what circumstances a court would order someone to disclose the other party’s information in a civil matter. >I feel they need to inform people about this before making future offers, unlike before, when they didn’t. In the past, perhaps they didn’t confirm whether members were married when they joined because they wanted to avoid being told things like: “Is Universe encouraging adultery?” “Is it really okay to do that?” Their position was probably that they weren’t promoting adultery and operated in accordance with the law. But they started receiving more and more complaints from men saying things like: “Tell me whether the woman is married.” “Why don’t you ask?” “I don’t want to make offers to married women.” So perhaps their policy gradually changed. Yet some of the men making those complaints are married themselves. Don’t they think women might feel the same way? Sometimes I think, “Wouldn’t it be better for them to leave first, so they don’t cause trouble for women?” Wanting to avoid your own risks while leaving the other person exposed to theirs also seems very self-centered to me. If a man is single and says he doesn’t want to proceed unless the other person is single too because of the risks, I can understand that. And if things really have been changing recently, perhaps they’ve decided that being asked individually every time is inconvenient (though I’m not sure that’s ideal either), and that if people are going to ask anyway, the information should simply be disclosed in advance. If that’s the case, I feel the company may be becoming increasingly biased toward men.

If I were in Yozakura’s position, I wouldn’t change my type. On the first date, I wouldn’t ask complicated questions beforehand, like whether he was married. I’d just have sex as usual, and if I felt satisfied and wanted to continue, I’d ask afterward during pillow talk—or when arranging our next date: “I’ve heard about a woman who did papa-katsu (compensated dating in Japan) with a married man and was sued by his wife for damages. I want to have proof that I believed you were single. So could you reply ‘No, I’m not married’ to the LINE message where I asked, ‘Are you married?’” If a papa (a male supporter) brushed me off by saying, “You don’t need to worry about that,” I’d cut him off. The reason I’d do it afterward rather than beforehand is to avoid making him think, “What a hassle.” Also, after sex, he’d probably be in a good mood and feeling satisfied. There is the risk of having sex once first, but I’d judge that the chances of his wife showing up at that point were low. Even if you consult the club, they’d effectively be helping someone conduct an affair, so I don’t think you can expect much from them. Maezawa probably isn’t in a position to say anything definitive either, right? That’s why I think issues like this are exactly where male and female members should put their heads together and come up with ideas. > Regarding the part about receiving offers from married papas I can understand it. 1. You won’t fall genuinely in love. 2. Men with pent-up SM desires that aren’t being fulfilled by their wives are appealing. 3. The thrill and excitement of cuckolding—you don’t seem to get much of that, Yozakura. 4. You don’t want to reduce the number of offers. Also, I just realized that Yozakura herself is married. So men who are concerned about the risks of married partners may not make offers to women around Yozakura’s age in the first place, since they’re more likely to be married. That makes things difficult. Even if Yozakura says, “I’ll send you a message saying I’m not married too,” he might still reply, “I don’t mind.” And even if he does send it, there’s always the possibility that he’ll carelessly leave the screenshot in his photo app and his wife will see it. For now, why not discuss it with your current patrons? Since it depends on the other person, it seems you can only do as much as possible on an individual basis. Update The more I think about it, the more I feel that even if you keep the LINE exchange with a married man, if his wife finds out and presses him about it, he might confess that he only replied because Yozakura asked him to, and that he wasn’t the one who lied. That could end up adding fuel to her anger. One more thing: if I were the wife, I’d attack Yozakura’s own vulnerability—that she’s married. I’d say, “I hear you have a husband. I could always speak to him about this,” and use that in settlement negotiations. To avoid it becoming blackmail, you’d have a lawyer handle it. This is exactly the kind of situation lawyers are for. As countermeasures for Yozakura, I’m starting to think there are two things: 1. Hide the fact that you’re married, so that your marital status can’t be used against you if you’re found out. 2. Be prepared for the worst-case scenario of paying a settlement of three million yen. Regarding the second point, if your priorities are 1) satisfying your own sexual desires rather than making money, and 2) protecting your family, then it may be unavoidable. You might even be better off changing your mindset and thinking, “I’m receiving my papa-katsu allowance so I can save up that three million yen.” The screenshot strategy I mentioned earlier—keeping a record of “I’m not married”—is probably more suitable for young papa-katsu women in their twenties. Also, related to point one, thoroughly hide personal information such as your real name and address. You could even provide fake details. If all the other person has is your LINE account, they may not be able to sue you in the first place. Even if they asked Universal Studios to disclose your information, I don’t think they would do so in this case, since it’s a civil matter. SM discussion I’m not sure whether going without underwear or choking really counts as SM. As far as I know, SM places more emphasis on emotional connection than simply playing. The relationship between a dominant and a submissive is genuinely codependent—almost like branding each other’s hearts. Males who are simply submissive aside, a truly dominant man could seriously be sued for non-consensual sex or assault if he openly acted on his preferences. So there probably is a demand for women who openly identify themselves as submissive. I believe there’s a club participating in Patro that specializes in submissive women. I can’t do SM emotionally, but I’m confident when it comes to choking. I’m probably better at it than Make-Otoko. I take them to the point where they lose consciousness and convulse. Someone who’s genuinely into choking won’t be satisfied unless you squeeze as if you intend to kill them. I’m only good at it; I don’t actually like it, so I don’t do it proactively. I only do it when asked, or when people demonstrate their specialties to each other at a fetish club. > I always keep my distance from women, so genuine SM probably isn’t possible for me. I’m similar in that respect. I also don’t find choking enjoyable at all. We have some things in common, haha. The women who work at SM bars are often so skilled at the technical aspects of play that they make your eyes widen. But it seems their skills evolved that way because they had to get inside their partners’ minds and make them unable to leave them. It’s probably like a carnivorous plant luring its prey with sweet nectar. The dominant men I know also tend to appear genuinely kind in public, then reveal a completely different, Jekyll-and-Hyde side at night. Maybe women feel a sense of satisfaction and unity from being the only person who can accept such an appealing yet extreme gap in someone’s preferences. But I wonder whether submissive women really fall into the trap of a mischievous dominant who simply wants to swing a whip. > If they’re merely play partners, perhaps you don’t need that much emotional connection to do SM. I see. Is that how it works? Certainly, with rope artists, there are women who simply want someone to tie them up skillfully and suspend them, then reach climax on their own mentally. The first time I saw a woman climax just from being tied up, twitching as she did so, I was impressed. The same goes for women who climax from choking, and women who climax from face-sitting. Women really do have switches all over their bodies. > I think choking would be classified as hardcore SM. According to someone who enjoys choking, there are two types, with different points of pressure. I assume one involves gently triggering a vagal reflex, while the other completely cuts off blood flow to the brain. Maybe the first is soft SM and cutting off blood flow is hardcore? The most hardcore thing I’ve ever heard about involved an SM couple. Apparently, the submissive man gouged out his own eyeball and proposed to the dominant woman, saying, “This is how I feel about you. Will you marry me?” It’s a true story. They’re still happily living together, and apparently they keep the eyeball in a jar of formalin as a memento. Hearing that, I realized there was no way I could enter their world. The depths of human nature are unfathomable, like staring into a bottomless well. As for going without underwear, when I was a little younger, before I started papa-katsu, I once told a woman I was dating normally, “If you want me to have sex with you, take off all your clothes right now and drive naked to the hotel,” and made her drive that way. Of course, she also walked from the car to the room completely naked. I can be that kind of dominant man, but only to that extent. > Kamihikoki > I’m submissive. I’m starting to feel like choking you just a little and making you pass out, Kamihikoki, haha. No, seriously, sometimes young men at fetish clubs ask me to teach them how to choke, and I do it. When they lose consciousness, convulse, and come around again, they sometimes look at me with warm, glazed-over eyes and say, “So this is what it’s supposed to feel like. I understand now.” At moments like that, I get to experience a little of the pleasure of being in control. Just kidding. Sorry for teasing you, haha. > My older brother is an intimidating, powerfully built guy, so he tends to clash with people over everything. His preferences must be submissive, haha. He might even be into age-play and pretending to be a baby.

My most important monthly partner is married with children. Since giving birth, she has had zero sex drive, and because she always brings her child on our dates, we’ve ended our adult relationship (intimate). Now the three of us just lounge around in my apartment. But I know that once she enters my place, having photos taken of her coming and going could legally get us in trouble. Is there some kind of exception if she has her child with her? Probably not, lol. As for SM, I’m a Dom, so I absolutely love submissive women. I still occasionally have someone come to the meeting place without wearing panties from the moment she leaves home, but compared with when I was younger, I don’t do anything quite as extreme anymore. Especially when the other person is a papa-katsu girl, I can’t really engage in all-out play. At most, it’s things like light choking, mild spanking, light oral stuff, or simple restraints. > “With SM, emotional connection is more important than the play itself.” I see. That’s very enlightening. So that’s what it was about. I always keep women at a certain distance, so true SM probably isn’t for me. I even maintain a certain distance from my top monthly partner. I’m happy for women to get as close to me as they want, but I don’t approach them myself. So women become extremely dependent on me, but there’s absolutely no chance of me becoming dependent on them. I’m not particularly good at choking. I have a fair amount of experience, but I always do it nervously. I only do it because they ask me to. Why is choking in such high demand, anyway? Quite a lot of women ask for it. I don’t enjoy it at all.

I don’t think you need to worry too much about evidence like those LINE messages. Certainly, a single piece of evidence—even one line in a written document—can overturn hours of arguments and dozens of pages of rebuttals and determine a judgment. But I think that only happens when the evidence is conclusive. That LINE message could be interpreted that way, but it could also simply have been something you worked out between yourselves, as you’ve described. I don’t think it would necessarily carry that much weight as evidence, and at least, it doesn’t seem likely to be completely decisive. In reality, I think the level of risk varies greatly depending on the papa (male supporter). I don’t feel any particular risk from married men. Compared with women at a club who are involved in allowance arrangements—which actually feels safer to me—the relationship with a lover, who absolutely must not be found out by his wife, feels far riskier. Maezawa-san, Yozakura-san, > Hiding the fact that you’re married These days, I feel that people often state or answer in their profiles and videos whether they’re married, including whether they’re single mothers. So I think it’s necessary to disclose that in advance when making future offers. Things are different now from how they were before, when people didn’t disclose it. I’m an M. I’ve also met club women who liked restraints, slapping, and choking. They were fairly intense, which surprised me. When it comes to SM, I can’t do much beyond a little experimentation, so it’s only a very mild version. In my everyday dating life, I’m an M-type man, so dominant women treat me however they like and drag me around until they decide to “set me free.” I’m basically under their control. Because of my natural personality and behavior, SM compatibility works surprisingly well in papa-katsu (compensated dating in Japan). With an S-type woman, she can treat me however she likes, go wherever she wants for as long as she wants without spending anything, and still receive an allowance… Additional note: > M-types can get along, but when two S-types are together, they apparently end up fighting and it becomes difficult. That’s probably true. Even if the woman is an M, if she’s beautiful, I’m fine with anything. I don’t have a strong desire to satisfy myself, so I can adapt to her, sense how she feels, and switch gears accordingly. I’m extremely well suited to clubs and papa-katsu (compensated dating in Japan). With an S-type, you may get more personal satisfaction or pleasure, but you also have to be considerably more considerate. The other person may not be able to say what they really think and may feel forced to constantly accommodate you. When the man is an M, women seem to show their true selves from the very first day, almost frighteningly so. With an S-type man, would that mean an immediate clash, fight, and breakup? No, of course not—they would hide it and never show that side of themselves… Since I’m an M, the woman can make the date and her behavior as intense as she likes, even more than usual, so I don’t have to worry much about my own behavior. I only need to make sure I don’t look like I want to leave or that I’m bored, which makes things relatively easy. Maybe M-types are generally patient? I previously wrote that I don’t feel any risk from married men, but there’s another characteristic of M-type men. People often say that any dispute is bound to turn into a major conflict, but whenever I talk to the parties involved or mediate between them, things become calm and settle down as if nothing ever happened. Maybe it’s because I’m a gentle, kind-hearted M-type man who seems calm, composed, and serious—but is also unattractive? My older brother is an intimidating, forceful type, so he tends to clash with people over everything. We’re complete opposites. Since he’s my brother, I don’t know whether he’s an S-type or not. Perhaps seeing him made me react defensively and decide to use him as a negative example… I just realized this while writing: maybe I’ve benefited in many ways thanks to my brother… We’ve been estranged for life. I’m too afraid to go near him. When the papa is an M-type… I often write that the allowance is an unfair advantage, but being an M-type may be an even bigger one. If the papa is an M-type, the club woman becomes the mistress. She can go wherever she wants, do whatever she wants, eat whatever she wants, complain, act spoiled and uninhibited, and have her every wish fulfilled. She can pull her “servant” (or butler—or papa) wherever she pleases, change plans on the spur of the moment, and go home whenever she wants, setting him free. And the women who would play with me that freely and uninhibitedly were, without exception, women whom I—and of course everyone around them—considered exceptionally beautiful. I also have a personal weakness for ordinary-looking women… In the past, I had a lover who once said of her appearance, “I’m worth 100 million yen.” We’re still together, and she has since become a proper homemaker and a mother of two.

Since I’m married myself, I automatically rule out married men, so I’m in favor of clearly stating that in the profile. The only thing I’ve ever contacted the staff about because it was unclear in the staff comments or profile was whether someone was single or married. What caught my attention in Yozakura’s question was the last part about receiving an offer from a married papa (a male supporter). Since it didn’t seem to be something they were originally looking for, I thought it would be better to leave that out—but perhaps I’m missing something? Sorry, I didn’t quite understand. Please take this only as a reference.

I can’t really say without knowing what kind of arrangement you have with Yozakura, and it depends on the person, but Fuu’s regulars tend to fall into two patterns when it comes to whether they disclose that they’re married: Friendly, girlfriend-like in private, 30s and up → It usually comes up naturally in conversation, so they tell you. Detached, just there for the physical side in private, 20s → They don’t tell you or talk about it. Assuming Yozakura isn’t married, the risk of seeing a married papa (a male supporter) is pretty much limited to his wife demanding compensation. Either way, it’s a civil matter, so it would only be a claim for compensation. A lot of the papas who are members are married, so realistically, turning down all married men will probably mean fewer offers. Personally, I think the best situation is honestly: “I didn’t know.” “I’d never heard anything about it.” “I don’t know anything about his private life.” If you don’t know, it doesn’t count as adultery, so you can avoid a compensation claim. “I didn’t know” might be the strongest defense. It’s really difficult, but if he tells you he’s married and Yozakura ends up knowing, then: Since the wife can demand compensation from both the other woman and the papa, get the papa to explicitly promise that he’ll pay it himself, lol. Is that impossible? Just an idea. A papa actually putting that in writing would probably be impossible unless you were extremely close, though, lol.