I’m a female member.

I’m Flag Maker, a column writer. Whatever you do, make your own decisions and take responsibility for them. Would it be wrong to explain the situation to the other men and negotiate a higher monthly allowance? Still, even if you think someone seems nice and decide to stick with just him, his less appealing side eventually comes out too. There’s a phrase that often appears in Hidekazu Mukai’s lyrics for ZAZEN BOYS: “The impermanence of all things repeats itself; sexual urges come back to life.” I feel like that’s exactly how it is. No matter how gentlemanly they seem, men in dating clubs are basically sexually driven. Sooner or later, there will naturally be times when they can’t hold themselves back.

I’m Basil, a male member. The men are certainly at fault in many ways, but I can’t bring myself to take the questioner’s side when she’s continuing her club activities despite promising to be exclusive. If you need the money and have the time, why not date two people behind their backs so they don’t find out?

I’m Rin, a female member. This monthly arrangement has clearly been set up entirely for the man’s convenience. Even if he invited you nearly twice as often, couldn’t you have limited it yourself to roughly the number of meetings you initially agreed on...? In any case, he sounds extremely self-centered and lacking in consideration. You must have felt that way too, which is why you kept yourself open to offers and met him in person, right? If so, I think you should move on to someone new. Or, if there’s a reason you can’t cut ties with this irresponsible, lowlife man, why not try to maintain arrangements with both of them smoothly...? Being careless about contraception is... no matter how you put it, undeniably the lowest kind of behavior.

I’m Joe, a columnist. This may technically be against the rules, especially for the man who came along later. However, you seem confident that you can continue seeing both men successfully, and that’s what you want, so I think you should do what feels right to you. You may not know this, but staff will sometimes describe a registered woman by saying, “She’s a woman who’s prepared.” Generally, this is understood to mean that she’s prepared to become intimate. In a situation like this, though, I think being prepared to maintain both relationships smoothly also counts as having that resolve. I hope you’ll review your reasons for needing the money once more before proceeding. Still, it would be best if no one found out, so you may want to be a little cautious.

Maezawa from the Corporate Planning Office here as well. From the male member’s perspective, he offered an allowance on the condition that he would be the only one, so technically, this would be a violation of the terms. However, the man you’re currently seeing has already been violating the terms by meeting you nearly twice as often each month as originally agreed and being careless about contraception. Since he was the one to break the rules first, I don’t think there’s any problem with you seeing other men as well. As for the man who has approached you now, ideally, you should focus exclusively on him and pursue an arrangement with him. That said, as things progress, he may well end up violating the terms on his own. In the first place, men often tell women to see only them while continuing to make offers to other women themselves. (Of course, some men do properly leave the service and commit to just one woman.) When you consider that the other person may not be honest even if you are, it may be best to tell him, “You’re the only one.” In most cases, even men who suspect that a woman is probably seeing other men will simply think, “That makes sense,” when she tells them they’re the only one. How you choose to live is up to you. But if you think about what benefits you while also making the other person happy, I believe the answer will become clear.

I’m Paper Airplane, a male member. The man saying something like that is the one breaking the rules. It’s not as though those are terms that would make you lose interest in meeting other men, nor is it the kind of arrangement a woman would want to keep meeting for. It’s more like meeting just to get your money’s worth. Whether she wants to be with only you is for the woman to decide. So unless there’s a possibility that the relationship could lead to marriage, regardless of where you met, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with making your decision based on what you yourself want. If a man says things like that, I think it’s perfectly fine to keep your options open or narrow it down to the person offering the better terms. Normally, those are words a woman says because she doesn’t want to lose a man and wants to continue seeing him. P.S. Even if two people sign divorce papers, the agreement is apparently invalid unless the other person truly consented—if they only signed because they didn’t want to be disliked. There’s even something called a non-acceptance request to ensure it’s upheld without having to go to court later. The key point is whether the woman was genuinely satisfied with it… If she truly consented, you could say the woman was breaking the rules too, but I don’t think that was really the case here.