Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Sex and Relationships

What a Choice! Sex With a Sleaze for $100,000 or Writing for Peanuts

By Nicole McClelland, Mother Jones. Posted February 28, 2008.


Sites like SugarDaddy.com lure young women by offering them far more money than they could get in most professions. What's wrong with this picture?
Advertisement

Few things are less appetizing than a man four years my father's junior, a dumpy, pasty, greedy-eyed man in a gray suit who says he doesn't care to screw fat women because they're harder to overpower, asking me over a big bowl of warm apple crisp if I like anal sex. But since he's just offered me $3,000 a month plus perks -- gifts, dinners, shopping sprees -- to get naked with him once a week, I keep my tight young ass in its place, laugh politely, and pick up my fork.

I learned about SugarDaddy.com when an acquaintance I'll call "Kim" recommended it to my friend, who's had trouble finding a job despite (or because of) earning her master's in media arts several months ago. Kim collected $900 every time she went on a date with one of her sugar daddies; another gave her $3,500 in less than a week before announcing that he had to quit her because his wife had found out. Kim's best friend "Jill" had two sugar daddies giving her a combined $8,000 a month until one got jealous of the other. Jill has blond hair, amazing lips, and is 19.

All I had to do to gain access to the "meeting grounds of the rich and the beautiful" was enter a user name ("Nextdoor_Nicole"); some vitals like age (I lied and said 23, afraid 27 is overripe), marital status ("Do You Care?" is kind of an exciting choice), and body type (slim); and "Expectation: Select Financial Assistance You Desire," which ranges up to "more than $10,000 per month." I chose "negotiable," so as not to seem like a gold digger, I guess, and slapped up a picture my mom took of me last Christmas.

By the next day, I'd received 13 emails and 6 kisses, whatever that means, and been checked out by 36 older, wealthy men, two of whom added me to their "favorite list." Which brings me to my place across the table from Do You Like Anal, who puts proprietary hands on my shoulders and hips before we even get our cocktails and starts bartering for carnal treasure by the time dessert comes by asking me if I'd want to "hang out" once a week. I ask if "hang out" is a euphemism for "screw"; he says yes; I say that I wouldn't consider it for less than $5,000 a month. He counters with $3,000.

There is actually no stack of cash large enough to persuade me to have sex with this guy, but as his income is listed as "more than $1,000,000," I feel slighted. I ask why he uses this website if he's not prepared to dole it out, and he says regular dating sites don't cater to his preferences regarding age or "sensuality," and that the young girls on Craigslist are all unclassy whores. This statement is followed by an offer of $500 to "get into" my "cooch."

My double vodka doesn't do nearly enough to muffle his egotistical blather ("Enough about me," he says 20 minutes in. "Tell me about you. What do you think about me?") or the commentary he provides about his, um, girth. My roommate -- charged with checking in on me -- texts, "If he gets you the guacamole egg rolls you owe him a BJ. Also, ask him if I can have a pony."

When I arrive home to a houseful of twentysomethings, we rail against the lowball. The lone male in the group asks, "Would it have made a difference if he'd been attractive?" Nobody answers for a second. "Probably," I concede, and everyone reluctantly agrees; we are all sex-positive feminists here, offended not that he offered me money for sex, but that he offered so little and was so gross, and if the idea of doing him were palatable, and I were single, it's possible he'd be doing double duty as my boyfriend and payroll officer.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: sex-positive, gender, employment, sugar daddies, prostitution, sex

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Sounds like prostitution to me.
Posted by: Obijuan on Feb 28, 2008 12:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not that I feel that concept to be wrong. Just that playing semantics with something that is sex for money seems pretty pointless.

It also sounds like there are way too many older men with too much money on their hands. I wonder how much gets put under 'expenses' in the accounting.

Also very curious how many of these 'men' masquerade as Christian Conservatives in real life.

And the tidbit involving a 19 year old is a bit scary to me.

obi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ducky Doolittle Posted by: o
Decisions, Decisions...
Posted by: gazooks on Feb 28, 2008 1:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... yawn, nice graphic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's that punchline again?
Posted by: ahmlco on Feb 28, 2008 2:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like the punchline to the old joke, "We've already established what you are, now we're simply arguing over price."

But is there any real difference between this and the housewife who simply sticks around for the house and car and credit cards, doing her "duty" as needed?

Why does a piece of paper make one situation morally correct and the other morally wrong?

I, for one, think prostitution should be legal anyway. Get it out in the open, out of the hands of pimps and organized crime, let its pratictioner's get heath care and benefits, form union's, pay taxes, and charge what the market will bear.

Much like my pro-choice position on abortion, who am I, or you, for that matter, to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their own bodies?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's that punchline again? Posted by: goeswithness
» RE: What's that punchline again? Posted by: lepidopteryx
» RE: What's that punchline again? Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: What's that punchline again? Posted by: sabrinamorgan
Souls for Sale
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Feb 28, 2008 2:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does the "historian" or author of this piece understand the "calculations"?

I doubt that very much.

To a multi-millionaire or billionaire such money is a trivial psychological commodity in relation to a host of others. Especially since most men at the higher end of the elite ruling class know the fiat scam attached to phony private bank (Federal Reserve Corp, etc) money creation in the west.

The core truth is sex for pay means trading human self-respect as the most anyone has to give for petty cash that means little indeed to the ultra-privileged.

That’s a fine bargain for the cozy elite and quite a bad one for female and male prostitutes unless they actually enjoy the lifestyle or far more likely delude themselves into believing they do.

In a sense, the “calculations” here are symbolic of the bargain that has sold the entire country down the river as Washington and the MSM are little more than brothels for a criminal corporate ruling class.

In other words, when the entire system is a broken sham, everything is for sale. Everything.


“The ability to deal with people is as purchasable a commodity as sugar or coffee and I will pay more for that ability than for any other under the sun.”
John D Rockefeller (Fascist monopoly robber baron and promoter of the U.S. “Federal Reserve” Act in alliance with the British chapter of the Rothschild bloc)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Souls for Sale Posted by: sanddollar
» RE: Souls for Sale Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
Feverish trading on the Pussydax
Posted by: Bobsays on Feb 28, 2008 2:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am afraid there is a serious demographic cause for this beyond all other factors: as the population heavily skews older (and the old have the money), then the Pussydax market value of young, healthy, pretty women goes up massively. And this will be reflected in a cash value.

Another factor is the disaster that is baby boomer family life. Many baby boomers are getting divorced or are already divorced. As the wife walks out the door, the guy will go elsewhere. And for older guys with the higher earning of a long career, it is cheaper to go to the Pussydax than to support a wife. A pure market decision.

And more and more young women will be drawn towards this option as tuition fees rise (think of the beardy professor making money off his students prostrate on their backs banging oldies), and all other costs go up.

Next time you are sitting on the board of some organisation and think it is okay to up the fees, or don't think young people deserve a break, remember you are serving up another pretty young woman as an initial public offering on the Pussydax.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» @gadzooks Posted by: rancespergl
» RE: @gazooks Posted by: rancespergl
And your point is?...
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Feb 28, 2008 3:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An attractive person can make big bucks exchanging sex for money?...More than someone with a masters degree? Stop the presses. We have a major breakthrough here.

I'm all for sociological experiments, but this one went nowhere and told us nothing. It's as if the author wanted an excuse to act snotty and superior, and tell us how attractive she is to dirty old men.

It could have been interesting and more objective, getting into the heads of the sugar babes and the sugar daddies, seeing what their lives are like, what they have to say, etc. Instead, we get this judgemental crap. Based on this article, Mother Jones is paying her way too much.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: And your point is?... Posted by: goeswithness
» RE: And your point is?... Posted by: Jackie Irish
» RE: And your point is?... Posted by: Quannah
» RE: And your point is?... Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: And your point is?... Posted by: armadillo17
» RE: And your point is?... Posted by: rickiey
» RE: And your point is?... Posted by: xenocyd
» Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Posted by: MartianBachelor
why not ask if capitalism is the way that men who might otherwise be rejected get sex
Posted by: Suzon on Feb 28, 2008 4:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
or the way that physically attractive men get lots of sex.

If so, that would explain why any threat to corporate greed is so vehemently opposed by corporate lawyers and corporate media. If so, the lying, cheating, stealing and killing are all means for a few men to get laid as often as they want. To toy with participating in all this without any significant insight makes for a rather depressing article.

Actually, it's my view that corporate greed is based primarily on inherited fears (of retaliation and heads on pikes) and the sexual perks serve to reinforce the behavior.

In a world which abolished corporations and established basic security for all six billion of us, prostitution would be an anomaly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lighten up Posted by: solrev
» RE: Lighten up Posted by: fringedweller
» Uglier by the day Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: don't be so literal Posted by: Jasonix
A free market solution
Posted by: nechayev on Feb 28, 2008 4:26 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's good to see young women like Nicole finally beginning to understand their true place in our society. I would have to see a picture of her in a bathing suit first to be really certain of it, and haven't been able to google one up so far...but anyone who has ever observed dating behavior can see that these are exactly the same choices that we have internalized for ourselves, we don't need parents bargaining our matches for us any more. Everything and everybody is for sale, willing sellers to willing buyers, and nobody at root believes any differently. Can't wait until my perfect, magnificent, extraordinary, blonde ten year old daughter grows up and puts herself on the auction block.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» why? Posted by: Coleman
» RE: A free market solution Posted by: donl51
» RE: A free market solution Posted by: oceanwaves99999
Masters in humanities
Posted by: rickiey on Feb 28, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ah, that explains it.

How very "the entire world is like me" for a woman with an elitist degree like "masters in humanities" to generalize that (and I quote) "offering them far more money than they could get in most professions".

Here's a tip: The girls that went and got their masters in engineering?

I just had one read the article, she said and I quote "yeah, I think I'd pass on the pay cut, even though I can see the temptation, lets face it, it would be a lot less work".

Perhaps if the author had bona fide technical job skills, she would see it differently.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Irony Much? Posted by: zerachiel
» RE: Irony Much? Posted by: rickiey
Just a tidbit
Posted by: Axiom69 on Feb 28, 2008 6:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Myself and a couple of friends were coming out of a bar when a prostitute asked if I wanted a date. I politely said "no thanks". She asked if I was gay. I said "No, I just don't believe in paying for something I can get for free". She smiled and said "Honey, it's never free".

As far as this article goes I guess if a woman wants to get paid for sex that is her buisness. I just wonder what the real cost is in terms of self respect? Sure she can make a lot more money on her back than a teacher can but when she looks in the mirror of her Jaguar is the person looking back as happy as the teacher looking in the mirror of her Chevy?

The moral of the story? Money can't buy you happiness. But you sure can sell your happiness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Honey, it's never free". Posted by: oregoncharles
» Oh for heaven's sake... Posted by: faeriefangs
Selling bodies
Posted by: LeeAnnG on Feb 28, 2008 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's such a big deal made about women selling their bodies "for sex." People "sell their bodies" for all kinds of things. Athletes, of course, are on that list, as are models and actors. How culturally accepted it is depends upon what the body ultimately is used for.

Americans seem to at least tolerate - and even sometimes aspire to - the display of the body, no matter how sexual the nature of that display might be. "Make me a supermodel" (or a similar title - I've neve watched it) is a TV show. The enhanced breasts and other sexual features of women's bodies are predominant in mainstream television shows. The swimsuit issues of magazines make them big, big sellers. All of this is a form of sex for money, and sometimes immense amounts of money. But somehow we are supposed to stop short of taking money for the consumation of the desires elicited by the promotion.

There are few things more violent or potientially dangerous to the human body than boxing, but it's not only legal, it's glorified in many parts of society. Boxing stars like Mohammed Ali become heroes to legions of young men who, like young women who turn to sex for financial security, may see it as a way out of poverty.

When I once championed the notion of legal prostitution in a blog, someone asked if I'd want my daughter to be a prostitute. My answer was that if it were legal and controlled, I'd much, much rather have my daughter be a prostitute than have my son be a boxer.

The onus on sex for money seems to be based on two unfortunate factors: religion and male dominance. If women can legally make money just for having sex, why would so many get married and also have to clean, cook, wait on a man, and often also hold down a job outside the home?

The religious naysayers probably have a point - making prostitution legal just might have a detrimental effect on traditional marriage. Of course, that might not be such a bad thing if it also meant that when people do get married, greater equality and mutual respect resulted. I'm not saying that would happen, but anything that levels the playing field can't be all bad. Keeping prostitution illegal is just one more way to keep women in their place.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Soldiers Posted by: suprmark
» RE: Selling bodies Posted by: donl51
» But just for clarification Posted by: LeeAnnG
» And the answer is... Posted by: MartianBachelor
Great Article
Posted by: racy_rick on Feb 28, 2008 6:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The motivation to this woman just seems so plausible. It is almost like medieval patronage to an artist or composer. A paid hand-woman.


"Alls well that ends well"
racy.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHORES
Posted by: v186 on Feb 28, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is hilarious, women will do anything in their power to try and make a trainwreck look like a field of daisies, so long as it makes them look like they are right about something.

If someone seriously doesn't see that this is women being straight up whores, no matter what pretense the website sets the dates up as or the reasoning for taking these dates offered by the men, then you're delusional.

Women must think that all guys have IQ's under 75 or something and we can't see the forest for the trees.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHORES Posted by: donl51
» RE: WHORES Posted by: lepidopteryx
» Why condemn only the women? Posted by: chief of okeefe
» Typical remarks for Repukes... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
There Have Always Been Sugar Daddies
Posted by: Southern Gal on Feb 28, 2008 6:37 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There have always been sugar daddies and there have always been women in need of money. Feminism has made some inroads, but most women do not earn the same wages as men in similar jobs. Women are usually the ones who have to raise the children, when hubby decides to find himself or swap her in for a new model. And so it goes. These young women are going at this from another angle, which is to put themselves in the position of power by choosing from a selection of willing, wealthy candidates while they're still young enough to attract wealthy men. It's much like a reversal of the man's game. I think that the majority of men and women still go at it the old fashioned way, which is to find a mate and to make a life with love as the binding factor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wow.......all this anger.
Posted by: steven w on Feb 28, 2008 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am seeing some really harsh judgement here. People that hate sex, people that hate older men, people that hate, hate, hate. Relax dammit! Why can't it be that some people do not ever get to meet someone to love because they have to work their asses off? Why can't it be that some younger women happen to like older men. Why is it OK for older women to have younger men? When I was younger, we younger good-looking guys were broke and often had some serious competition from the older guys that had money. It is a lonely world, and the question is, how do we find someone we are attracted to without spending money one way or the other? Church?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wow.......all this anger. Posted by: lepidopteryx
» RE: Wow.......all this anger. Posted by: steven w
Oh, the empowerment!
Posted by: linden on Feb 28, 2008 7:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author is confused about what feminism is. I recommend she actually crack a book or two on the subject, starting with Shulamith Firestone.

When did money come to equal empowerment? The ability to make your own money equals empowerment, but it still matters what you do to make it. A starting lawyer at a big firm makes $165,000 a year, but that's not the end of the story. Persist in that occupation, and you could enter politics, or become a judge, or win big cases that change the face of the law. That's empowerment. Work as a prostitute, and you'll always be a prostitute, even after you stop doing it.

How empowering is it to put yourself at the mercy of a john, who can decide to cut you, rape you, or even kill you? How empowering will it be for you to put out and then have the john refuse to pay? How empowering will it be if word of your former "profession" gets out when you're trying to pass the character test for getting a law license, or enter medical school, or run for office?

The idea that women constitute the "sex class" is inherent to their oppression, and the author does nothing to challenge that assumption. By peddling her tight young ass, she plays into a system that values women differently than men, based on their looks and sexual availability.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You crack me up Posted by: Q30
» RE: Oh, the empowerment! Posted by: oregoncharles
» Fee payment Posted by: BlueTigress
» Right Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Oh, the empowerment! Posted by: YogiBear
Question Nicole- just wondering,
Posted by: steven w on Feb 28, 2008 7:28 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if the sex was really good with older guy, would you admit it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Question Nicole- just wondering, Posted by: SatanicJamboree
Assortative mating
Posted by: zeofredo on Feb 28, 2008 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm hardly a zoologist, but this all reminds me of the documentaries where you see the gorillas or the lions all hanging out, with the lead male surrounded by many females. We have come up through eons of evolution as human creatures, and yet it appears we've not completely outrun this basic paradigm.

I'm a male, single, in my forties, very youthful in appearance, but because I'm a lazy so-and-so, I will not have female company for years to come. It's my choice, and while I miss the sex, I have a few nice female friends I can talk to and feel 'normal'. It's not for me, but if I want to get married, I'd have to deliver a lot of bacon to the table to keep my place as a 'worthy partner'. This will always be the game... so many females will often consider their value in terms of the 'quality' of man they attract. Even if they find a man that attracts them, the feeling seems to be that he must out-earn them or otherwise occupy an ascendant position in the relationship, financially. I see it everywhere I look.

The difference would be in 'poorer' places, such as central or east Europe. Here I see women that either have given up on this kind of assortative mating or don't have the distractions that our culture endlessly offers its members.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Reason the World is So Over-Sexed These Days . . .
Posted by: BillDouglas on Feb 28, 2008 7:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Reason the World is So Over-Sexed These Days . . . is because sexual energy is creative energy.

Mass media and psychotropic drugs have so flatlined creativity, the human psyche screams out to release that energy . . .

And the only venue modern society provides is illicit sexual activity.

If we could open up our education, and create a society where people were more than widgets in a machine, and their creativity could bloom into what it was meant to become and create . . .

These issues with illicit sex would go away

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

um...
Posted by: HolesInMyBoots on Feb 28, 2008 7:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Diseases.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: smartest... post... here. Posted by: Ghoulman
» How do they file taxes? Posted by: messedup
An old Mans thoughts on this
Posted by: jrmart on Feb 28, 2008 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was raised in the Father Knows Best, Ozzie and Harriet age. Women were thought, or represented to dislike sex for sex sake. A Masters degree for a woman? ha, sure IF you wanted to be a Man. Women were "supposed" to have sex with their husbands, not particularly like it. Good lord back then the most erotic thing a man could say during intercourse was "fuck". Well, I think we would agree that that was a sad and silly view point. Had that attitude led to happy homes with loving couples, maybe it had some merit. For me it merely led to total misunderstanding of the Female. I love my wife. But--one of the strongest factors in my asking her to marry me was that she so loved me that she "gave up" her body to me. As an act of love, she "surrendered". It just didn't occur to me that she might actually Want to have sex. Then came the feminist movement. A huge boon to the male. Now men could get laid with ease, no having to convince the woman that it was Love. Women have progressed socially, economically, and sexually. Sadly, men are still just men. Married Men go to prostitutes or surrogates because they don't want to think that the mother of their children would do or say those nasty things. When a man is thinking with his lower head rather than his upper one, he is relentless in pursuit of HIS happiness. The woman, no matter how refined or how educated is only a way to orgasm. There are those men that enjoy escorting beautiful YOUNG women to show the people around them just how sexy and successful they are. Again, the woman is just a prop. A tool.
So, where does this bring us? It brings us to whether or not the prop, the female, (not to be confused with the "woman") should exploit this male. (not to be confused with "man").
Men are men. They can't seem to evolve. So is taking advantage of these males enormous wealth immoral? That I think is totally up to how the woman (not to be confused with "female") feels about it. It is a difficult choice I know. In my mind there is no right or wrong answer. It is a matter of compartmentalizing. I am 73. I look 73. Could I entice a 19 year old beauty to go to bed with me? Ha, not likely. BUT if i had so fucking much money that I couldn't spend it fast enough, would I? Well, personally no. But that is just me. Would it be wrong to spread my money around to people who need it? I think not. Anyway, that is the view of this old man. One who prefers the company and touch of his wife of 48 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

how to explain to the person you want to marry
Posted by: patman47 on Feb 28, 2008 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i think when the time comes for a man or woman to have a lifelong partner and they want to be truthful then they will have to say they were a sexworker. i think you will lose out at this point as many people will just say "i don't want you".
because once a sexworker, always a sex worker. it ain't about the money honey.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ahh, but.... Posted by: oregoncharles
» Most wives are sexworkers Posted by: chief of okeefe
Trial-Sized Sex Work?
Posted by: sabrinamorgan on Feb 28, 2008 8:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, honey... if you're going to do it, at least stop dabbling and go professional.

Professionals know that, first off, they set the rules for any given encounter. Men, particularly men used to being catered to or obeyed, will push for any inch they can get.*

If you let them set the rules, they will, it's as simple as that. He could tell you were a n00b, thusly you got treated like a n00b.

But, again, hon - have some respect. I know it's horribly trendy to scoop up some page views by dabbling in the sex trade for just long enough to write about it.

I could become a columnist just long enough to gossip to my clients about it - but I respect the writing profession and don't care to use it cheaply. One of the core stances of sex-positive feminism is that sex work is real work, and that professionals who treat it like a profession should be accorded the respect you'd give a dedicated professional in any profession, whether or not you found it personally distasteful.

As a sex-positive feminist, it might be worth it to consider that for a sex worker, this isn't a game. This isn't a hobby or something we do for thrills, writing material, or amusing anecdotes at cocktail parties (though those are some nice perks).

We do it because we're reasonably well paid and enjoy the work. We get up and do the job when we'd rather be out with our friends. We get up and do the job when we want to sleep in, or when we're not feeling well. It's not a joke. It's not a lark. It's a job.

*Not all men are douchebags, but it's a helpful assumption. That way the 60%+ of clients that are perfectly pleasant are a nice surprise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Trial-Sized Sex Work? Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Trial-Sized Sex Work? Posted by: armadillo17
» RE: Trial-Sized Sex Work? Posted by: scryberwitch
What's the Big Deal?
Posted by: Libertine on Feb 28, 2008 8:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's all out in the open, no one is trying to fool anyone about the true nature of the transaction, and the participants are all consenting adults.

Everyone who gets involved in this knows full well what they're getting themselves into; it doesn't occur under duress, so I see no reason to complain about it.

I'm guessing that the main objective is based on their belief that sex "should" occur only in relation to love and for no other reasons and that these transactions do not even give the illusion of love. That's perfectly well and good to conduct one's own sex life based upon this belief, but as far as I'm concerned, sex for any reason between fully consenting adults need not have to be justified to anyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's the Big Deal? Posted by: steven w
» RE: The real point... Posted by: oregoncharles
when mr. bush says we're in no recession....
Posted by: eosrk on Feb 28, 2008 8:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...you better run for cover

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some Confusion Between Websites
Posted by: Jadxia on Feb 28, 2008 9:05 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, the author seems to be confusing two different sites online. SugarDaddie.com is also a site, and much different from SugarDaddie4me or SeekingArrangement. The latter two sites are much more mercenary, listing actual dollar amounts. When I attempted a brief stint on them, guys seem to treat the girls like high-class prosititutes. I thought having it all on the table would be refreshing; it was more like repulsive. On the other hand, SugarDaddie.com has a more romantic notion of things, for the wealthy to meet girls who enjoy the finer things in life and who may not have the means. I've met a number of guys from this site for drinks, etc, and only a small percentage have offered to pay me for sex. Many of them want long-term relationships or even marriage, and money is less of a focus than having a high-class good time (i.e. fancy restaurants and hot cars). Just remember, no man has ever paid for sex, they only pay for the right to tell a girl when to go away.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Did anyone notice...
Posted by: Q30 on Feb 28, 2008 9:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...that she took umbrage at the gall of men who wanted "hot" sexual partners while simultaneously being insulted whenever an "ugly" man propositioned her? She can demand hot sexual partners, something men should never do.