Fearful of going the betrayed-Sandra route, some women turn to a "professional honey-pot." Who, obviously, tells all to the tabloids!
There's a weird dichotomy going on right now, society-wise. On the one hand, we've got Sandra. Or rather, Sandra Bullock's husband, who apparently has a little black book full of tattoos. And, of course, we've got Tiger himself. It's a smorgasbord of betrayed wives, sheepish husbands, settlements and tabloids, leaving us with a general sense that all marriages — at least the public varietal — are doomed.
Then, on the other hand, there's what I will call Chloe. If you're not breathlessly following Amanda Seyfried's career, Chloe is a remake of the French film Nathalie..., in which a suspicious wife has a sexy young temptress engage her husband in an affair and give Penthouse Forum (or at least, Breaking the Waves) -style reports to the wife so she can find out what gets his motor running. It's a "psychological", "erotic" tale, you see, of jealousy, desire and possession. Chloe is a "honey-trapper," if you will.
Squarely in this camp I'll place a story from today's Sun, which details the career of 54-year-old Janette Jones, "a highly paid honey-trapper and spends her working life proving whether or not a husband or boyfriend will cheat. In the past 12 months she has honey-trapped more than 60 men and slept with 15 of them — all at the request of their wives."
Ok but...that's prostitution, right? She says no. In fact, she says "I may be paid to sleep with a man, but I am in no way a prostitute... I don't think of it as sex, but as a service to their wives and children." Indeed, a criminal lawyer in the piece confirms this, since this sort of thing "is not under the sexual offence act."
I am proud of what I do and feel good I am helping other women to catch out their cheating husbands. After seeing the evidence, the wives often send me letters of thanks. My success rate as a honey-trapper is 100 per cent. I have never failed to get a kiss at the very least. It is my responsibility to discover if a man would cheat. If it takes sleeping with him to do that, then that is merely part of my work. No woman ever deserves to be cheated on and it's my job to make sure wayward men don't get away with it.
If you're wondering why going all the way is necessary, well, get in line. If it's legal proof that's needed, doesn't the entrapment angle kind of complicate things? (Although Jones does say, "I am certainly not entrapping them." And I kind of like this policy of just asserting things to make a point.) She adds that this proof is necessary to the wives, as are any "rude" texts or pix the dudes send, but that going over this evidence is "agony" for the wives. Whether controlling the process — versus being subjected to a media blitz a la Sandra Bullock or Elin Nordegren — brings more closure is an open question. I'm going to go ahead and guess it's horrifying either way. There's also something of the service that reminds me of those low moments when some of us have tortured ourselves by demanding all the details of an illicit liaison, which is a self-inflicted orgy of mortification and masochism that's neither cathartic nor helpful. But the sentence that was perhaps most heartbreaking was this: "Many save for months, even years, to discover if their man is a cheat. If a job requires sex, it will cost the client around 8,000 pounds." So, really, everyone loses.
Related: Another Jesse James Mistress Comes Forward [Star]
[Image via Chloe]