Seems legitimate.
But in all seriousness, people can sometimes reveal themselves readily if you let them. This involves asking questions, not just making assumptions which happens far too often. In some cases, you can prove yourself wrong, which is just as powerful.
Teo thought that went through my mind is, “maybe this person actually does want to surprise their husband” but after I processed the message further, to me, the tone of the email doesn’t seem to align with a person that hopes to surprise their husband but rather is seeking out more information for their own reasons (which may very well be with the intention of surprising him - I could be wrong). Even if I am wrong, I am still respectful of everyone’s discretion and, thus, this is the reason that I don’t offer “surprise visits” on behalf of other people.
I wanted to point out my logic breaking down the email step-by-step. Your feedback is always valued and welcomed.
(I use “them” instead of “her” in this blog because the email composer could be a wife, a husband or someone else)
Autumn’s Arguments
“I believe my husband used your service and I was wondering which service he received.”
To me, the word “believe” translates to suspicion and uncertainty. It sounds like they came up with this on their own and it wasn’t something that he shared with them. It seems like they don’t have enough proof or information which, from my experience, most sexually open couples would have already talked about it if they found this out through him. If they talked about it, they would be aware of which “service” he received. If they had talked about it, they should all already be aware.
“I'd love to book one as a surprise for him but I'm not sure which service he had with you”
In the statement, she repeated herself from her first sentence, which is suspicious to me.
I am a true crime fan, which is the only type of TV that I watch. The reason is because I am interested and learn so much about the human psychology through interrogation techniques and how they solve crimes. What I’ve learned through this (and other psychologically related content, such as schooling through my degrees) have also helped me profoundly with my screening.
When I was in LA on Sunday night, I was laying in bed and watching “Forenic Files” which is on repeat for the whole night. I really like the show because they break down different scientific ways that they find scientific evidence against their killers, but they also talk about psychological techniques used to profile and interrogate their suspects. Right before I received this email (weird - sometimes things happen for a reason which is not logical nor scientific but we cannot always ignore correlations), I was watching a case where they pointed out that the suspect was using a technique during an interrogation where they kept repeating the lies they were trying to make the detectives believe, which made the detects suspicious entirely outside of the killer’s awareness. Their arguement was that people who are lying use this technique as a way to convince the listener to believe them by reiterating their story, almost like trying to make the listener forget that there can be any other story.
Traditional deception detection techniques haven’t always been reliable but new research does support some accuracy in techniques for reliable behavioural deception detection (Zimmerman, 2016). It’s important to note that deception techniques aren’t always accordance and that context matters when considering applying knowledge, such as individual differences in personality, nervousness, culture differences, language barriers etc.
In this email, and if the investigators are right, I think the person used this technique to make her lie of wanting to surprise her husband more believable. I also think they may have thought that I might be more likely to respond if they made me feel like I had a chance of booking the husband. (Little do they know how terrible I am at responding sometimes 😉.)
“His name is (redacted)”
Since I don’t ask for ID and use more effective screening techniques based on character traits, people usually choose not to book under their real names or they use a nickname. Although a weaker argument point, and if he did use a fake name, logically they would have typed “he booked under the name X”. Perhaps they believed that because his name wasn’t a very common name, it may have lead me into admitting that I met him. What if I admitted to meeting him and it was another person with the same name and the husband was punished for something they didn’t do? After all, she only provided a first name. It wasn’t thoughtful on her part, if my assumptions are correct. Further, there was no sign off name from the author which, to me, is creating a distance between them and myself by not trying to build a connection with me instead of creating the best experience for him possible by connecting with me and sharing what he likes.
“Hoping you can help 🙏”
This sign off message could arguably be the most revealing of all.
I experience the praying emoji (🙏) to be a way to symbolize a kind gesture of help, which is also a symbol to reiterate her plea for confirmation of whether I’ve met him and in what capacity of “service”. It sounds like the person is asking for “help” to find out more information, which I believe to be a feeling of desperation instead of excitement to do something nice for him, which would have been a more convincing message if this was their true intentions.
What Was Missing:
They didn’t ask me a date and time to schedule this “surprise appointment”.
They didn’t take control to surprise him with a “service” of their choice (body scrub, manscape or T&A etc.) but only wanted to ask specific information, like if I’ve met him and what “service” he received.
Any opportunity to make a personal connection with me, as 100% of partners do when I talk to them directly. For example, many partners will introduce themselves, tell me about their partner and share a little bit about themselves and their relationship.
In summary…
Regardless of how the message would have been written, I still wouldn’t have allowed my oath of discretion to be broken. In this situation, perhaps this person is hurting and needs to find out information for their own reasons. I empathize with them because I am a truth seeker in all capacities. I’m always interested in knowing the truth (or multiple truths) from figuring out how the world works to understanding how each individual thinks and feels.
However, this is not my information to share and, on the other hand from my own perspective, I can accept not knowing everything in life which is part of being a mature and emotionally stable adult. We will never know everything in our short time on earth and we have to find a way to be comfortable with that - just like in the case of this blog and us never knowing the writer’s true intentions.
In this person’s case, perhaps the husband doesn’t want to tell them the truth, which is perhaps why they are messaging me and potentially other providers. To put people in the middle of their relationship by manipulating others isn’t fair nor respectful to the person they’re intending to involve and, if they believe the husband is not being honest with them, they have to make a decision that is right for them (ask them (again?), accept the dishonesty and find a way to move forward or leave).
Another reason for this email may be that they are phishing for information that can’t be found with me (but may be found with someone else or another provider) or it may not be found at all (insecurity). Perhaps it’s to gather data before confrontation and, if it is, this is the wrong way to go about it. Communication is imperative BOTH WAYS and is key for every relationship. BUT sometimes one partner don’t feel safe to communicate with the other partner based on the way that he/she has made them feel in the past (explosiveness, ignoring their (sexual) needs, rejection etc.). If you make your partner feel unsafe anytime you’ve brought up a topic, how can you expect them to feel comfortable communicating and showing vulnerability with you?
My point is that I will never truly know the reason for this email nor the sender’s intention, and I’m comfortable with that.
In any case, and if my assumption is correct, I think the attempt to reach out to me using manipulative tactics was not a great approach, and attempting me to involve me in something that is not my business is a betrayal to your husband and a overstepping of my personal boundaries.
What do you think?
P.S. My response email below was written for research purposes only.
My oath to your discretion will always, truly and consistently be in effect.
To be continued….?
Zimmerman, L. (2016). “Researchers have developed new strategies to help police and other investigators catch liars in the act.” Monitor on Psychology, 47, (3): (46).
Comments