work #9 sex with the boss

work #9 - sex with the boss - When I started to experience the work field, I had a friend because of whom I lost my job—because she slept with the boss. Many reproached me for not fighting back and for staying friends with her, especially since she ended up earning 2,000 euros per month, which was, for me, much more at that time. I had no reason to end the friendship, and there was no reason to be bothered that she earned 2,000 euros. It was okay that at least one of us earned well. When I needed money, she lent it to me. If I am to analyze our friendship, I am the one who was not a good friend. She helped me more than I could help her. All I could offer her was my judgment. When I could, I gave her my honest opinion and all kinds of advice. No one understood me.

Well, the fact that she slept with the boss and ended up with a salary she didn’t deserve—and I was fired—was, in a way, to my advantage. She protected me, because I wasn’t doing what she did. But by sleeping with the boss, they both did me a favor. It saved me from a lot of trouble later on, because the boss wanted someone to pay for sex. I was not an option, and she was. The boss wanted a prostitute he could use when he wanted and how he wanted. And in the depths of her soul, she knew this, even if she fell in love with him and had illusions that he would leave his wife and child and that they would be together.

Well, I knew when they started having a relationship, even if she told me later on. I knew even then how the end of her love affair would be—for example, that she would also lose her job and end up with a broken heart. I felt sorry for her; I couldn’t be jealous of her because I felt bad for her.

If you accept a job for sex, you risk becoming boring for the boss, and he will look for another employee to give him the diversity he needs. Such relationships in which the boss falls in love and leaves his wife and child for a cheap woman are one in a billion. But they do exist, I know—only I knew it wasn’t her case. The boss had built a business together with his wife, so clearly he wasn’t going to leave everything for her.

Regardless of the circumstances in which the boss sleeps with the employee, a few things are certain: this job will offer a satisfactory salary for a short period of time; the requirements of the job can only be partially covered by sex; and the needs of the company come first. Between employee and employer, there is only a contract—namely, he pays for sexual services. This, and nothing more. If the employee falls in love like a goose, that will be her problem and not the employer’s. If the employer is such a player, the job occupied by the prostitute will be vacant soon.

So, the fact that she chose to be the boss’s mistress did me a favor and showed me what the boss was really looking for. And no, I don’t disregard a woman because she chooses to be a whore, or because she chooses to be a housewife and raise children. My friend was that kind of incapable woman who needs a man. She always needed to be in a relationship. She didn’t get out of one relationship well before starting another. As a woman, she was—and still is—dependent on a man: never independent, never alone. She didn’t even know herself, and even less the man she was with.

She was a pleasant woman, but the types of men she was attracted to, and wanted to be with, wanted her only for sex. And she wanted them for safety, because she could not provide herself the protection she needed. For her, only a man with money could give her the security she needed. It took her many years to mature, to realize that her youth was passing and that her choices were wrong. It took her many years to be realistic and accept someone more suitable for her. From a gender sociology perspective, her dependence reflects a pattern of “economic romanticism,” where women align relationships with financial security rather than emotional compatibility—a dynamic that often perpetuates vulnerability and cycles of exploitation. Studies on workplace sexual dynamics confirm that transactional relationships with superiors are structurally unstable, as power imbalances and limited role security lead to eventual displacement once the novelty fades or organizational needs shift.