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

SugarDaddy.com: Readers Respond

By Tana Ganeva, AlterNet. Posted March 1, 2008.


What does it say about our society when women can make more money doing sex work than in most other professions? Our readers weigh in.
Advertisement

It's not surprising that men with lots of money are eager to spend some of it procuring sexual favors from attractive young women. Nor is it surprising that Web sites like SugarDaddy.com have sprung up to facilitate this process. But what does it say about our society when a young, educated woman can make a far better living doing sex work than in most other professions?

Nicole McClelland's "What a Choice! Sex with a Sleaze for $100,000 or Writing for Peanuts" explores the power dynamics of sugar daddy relationships, tapping into a host of social, economic and political issues. McClelland's article raises many interesting questions about the lack of professional opportunities for young women, the politics of sexuality, and the role of sex in a capitalist society that commoditizes human relationships.

Our readers weighed in on this article with a thought-provoking discussion about sex work, gender relations and power in our society.

Many readers came to the defense of the sugar daddy set-up, arguing that these arrangements take place between consenting adults and are, therefore, none of our business. Libertine writes: "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."

Dano M points out that trading sex for money is no different than other financial transactions: "I see little philosophical difference between this type of body for rent and other skills for rent professions."

Reader robedal agrees: "It has always been the case that people rent parts of their bodies to others at various rates. Thus if I was involved in some questionable activities, I could rent the brain of an experienced professional (called a lawyer) to help me break the law or avoid punishment. I see no moral superiority to lawyers aiding criminal activity over persons who rent other portions of their anatomy for varying periods of time."

Other readers argued that sugar daddy relationships are no big deal, since women trade sex for money in one of our most revered and vigorously defended institutions: marriage. Almhco writes: "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?"

Goeswithness disagrees, pointing out that equating marriage to prostitution is unfairly dismissive of the work done by homemakers. "Actually I think the "comparison to housewife" bit is an unfair cliche. If women married men solely for material possessions, meaning to live disconnected lives, maybe. But in marriages at least people do try to make a life together, make a family together, share the important events in life, support one another. And one might presume that there is love. Furthermore, working at home and raising kids is doing her part towards contributing to make that collective life."

Xenocyd bluntly counters, "The divorce rate has risen in tandem with the rise of financial prosperity of women. Historically, marriage has been largely prostitution. Don't dance around that."

Other readers point out that in our society female sexuality is always a commodity, regardless of whether or not individual women trade sex for money. LeeAnnG argues that "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 ... 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 consummation of the desires elicited by the promotion."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: sugar daddy, sex, prostitution, gender, power, capitalism

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:
Thing is...
Posted by: suprmark on Mar 1, 2008 1:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one is making that sort of money directly out of uni. No matter whether you've finished high school or a PhD (male or female), helping someone make more money is less valuable than assisting that person to feel more sexual pleasure.

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

» RE: Lazy man's sex? Posted by: Landbaron
» That's a good point. Posted by: suprmark
» RE: That's a good point. Posted by: pdxstudent
but...
Posted by: carbon-based on Mar 1, 2008 2:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
apparently women can make more money doing sex work than they, or men , make at many jobs.

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

carbon-based
Posted by: bitsfick on Mar 1, 2008 4:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your remark while it didn't go far enough is the first intelligent post of yours that I have read. It's not only women who are selling sex because they can make more money than anywhere else, there are thousands of men doing the same thing. Either homosexual, or heterosexual, or both. I read and I think it was on this site, about older wealthy women going to lower income countries for vacation in hopes of finding a young virile good looking male lover. For which they are willing to pay handsomely.

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

this article gives a biased summary of our views
Posted by: Suzon on Mar 1, 2008 5:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rather surprizingly, given the vehement defenses of pornography by commenters some time ago, a majority of posters seemed quite uncomfortable with the idea of sex for money.

However, the article above begins by quoting four "no big deal" comments, followed by a mildly disagreeing comment, itself followed by two more "no big deal" type comments.

Page two begins with two posters saying that prostitution was connected with capitalism, there were then two defenses of sex work and one (again, mild) disagreement.

I think that works out to eight pro-prostitution comments to four comments questioning sex for money.

If a consensus could be claimed, it might be that the majority of us felt that sex for money wasn't a good idea if there were other survival strategies available. Not at all the tone of this article.

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

Ignoring the biology here
Posted by: Jasonix on Mar 1, 2008 5:26 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This story, and the comments that the editors find noteworthy, are analyzed strictly through the lens of wealth distribution and class warfare. This way of looking at it is good, and points to many of the injustices present in our society.

But the old leftist way of looking at things - analyzing everything in terms of economic relations and cultural power structures - is limited. There's a new kid on the block, folks. It's called evolutionary psychology - along with its big bad brother cognitive neuroscience. Can anyone say paradigm shift? Things that we do as human beings come out of our biology - the economics and cultural institutions that develop stem from biological human nature, and must be explained in that light in order of the explanations to be ultimately satisfactory and useful for people wanting to make a better society.

As a result of the conditions of our evolution, human males prefer younger women and women are willing to forgo sexual satisfaction in order to get a male with social dominance and resources, which in our society is money. (I don't know how many times I see short, fat, balding, dim-witted guys whose dads own banks dating hot girls. Actually, many women marry the ugly rich guy, but cheat with the attractive pool boy, which is why some studies find that as many as 10 percent of children are being raised by men who think they're the kids' fathers but aren't. In fact, women when they're not fertile are attracted to average looking men, but when they're fertile they're attracted to the 6', 195-lb green-eyed stud at the gym.)

The effects of technology and the extremes of inherited wealth that we've created allow these basic human impulses to be exaggerated so far beyond their evolutionary adaptiveness that they're now actually maladaptive and threaten the future of the human race. An 18-year-old girl living in ancient Palestine who was willing to get a dowry from an "older" 30-year-old man with 25 cows was evolutionarily advantageous. A 25-year-old woman becoming a whore or a trophy wife to a 50-year-old with a BMW is not. In the case of the whore, their self-respect and future prospects are ruined; once a sex worker, always a sex worker, as many pointed out.

In the case of the trophy wife, you're going to run the risk of having stupid, perhaps even retarded or insane babies, because old men have defective sperm. Google it; it's for real, and it's a serious risk. Anyone wonder why suddenly there's autism and all these childhood disorders that no one ever used to hear about? It's because there are so many 40 or 45 year old dads. So you're going to have retarded babies, and when the 40-year-old junior executive who takes you as a trophy wife becomes a 50-year-old senior executive, he's going to find another trophy. And he'll cheat on you a dozen times along the way. (Of course, if you're that kind of woman, you'll probably do a fair amount of cheating on your own with the 6', 195-lb green-eyed fitness instructor at the gym.)

That's the facts of life. Time to evolve, people.

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

» RE: Ignoring the biology here Posted by: lefty010
» Just-So stories Posted by: supercrisp
» RE: Just-So stories Posted by: particle
» The Big Meeting Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: The Big Meeting Posted by: particle
» Ahh, Yes, The One Pony Show Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Ahh, Yes, The One Pony Show Posted by: pdxstudent
» Life imitates art; swimming in BS Posted by: sanddollar
» RE: Ignoring the biology here Posted by: particle
Buyers of Bodies
Posted by: Maya on Mar 1, 2008 6:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What does it say about us as humans, when we let men believe it is THEIR right to buy the bodies of women and children. And it is mostly women and children who are victims of prostituters. In reality, it is the world's poor, uneducated women and children who have been deemed, by your brother, your son, your uncle, as sub-human committed to live without any rights of human dignity

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

The Underlying Debate
Posted by: pdxstudent on Mar 1, 2008 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In articles like these, which is to say not simply those that have to do with sex, but those that are dealing with this kind of questionable choice, the issue that gets people riled up is not really in the article itself, that is, in its unique terms. In this case, the terms are sex, women and money.

The argument, the matter of difference, is over individual and social determinations and now they inter-relate. Those who think that the individual comes to be an individual because they are already an individual and not because of a process of socialization are more likely than not to say that individual consent, at least in a "normal" individual, is transparent and above question. Those who think that there is no such thing as an individual without the mediation of a social body/process are more likely than not to see, in this case, coercion and even a kind of violence. They but heads because the individualist takes for granted the individual's capacity to act as an individual while the latter sort of person does not.

There will be no useful agreement in the practical terms of articles like these until there is a closer agreement on that underlying issue, which means, for me, until individualists recognize the split quality of the human condition: the basic antagonism of our split consciousness and the social antagonism that is both the externalization of this split consciousness and the internalized condition making it possible.

All of this is to say, disagreement in articles like these has more to do with how one positions the individual within and relates them to their social context. Those who opt for the former appeal to a theoretical presupposition for which there is no possible evidence, those who opt for the latter only have and only need history and otherwise empirical inquiry for their ground.

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

It's about the power
Posted by: lefty010 on Mar 1, 2008 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, some very good arguments on both sides about this issue.

I think the problem lies in the power differential. The story isn't about wealthy women looking for male prostitutes. That would probably, at best, be boring to readers. In that arrangement the man still has ultimate physical power...the male still retains ultimate control in the situation regardless of whether or not he's the one being paid.

The reason this issue has wheels is because in the bigger picture, men are in the power position. If men and women held equal power this would truly be an issue of choice on the part of both participants (and probably unnecessary if both parties had equal resources). As it stands, the sex industry perpetuates the damaging paradigm of patriarchy.

Another example of the power differential would be how society views strippers. Male strippers are usually not stigmatized for the rest of their lives if they have been a stripper. A woman is more likely to experience negative consequences on many levels as a result of working in the sex industry (many women have suffered these consequences simply because of photos that have been posted on the internet).
Marriage is just as much of an unequal arrangement due to the patriarchal makeup of our culture.
As is usually the case, this is ultimately about who has the power in the situation and not so much about the sexual aspect of the issue.

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

» RE: It's all about penetration Posted by: lefty010
» A Tip Posted by: pdxstudent
My perspective...
Posted by: craigandrew on Mar 1, 2008 7:49 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know if I can write this sensibly, but I will give it a shot anyway.... It is my perspective that for the past how ever many years woman have been trying to force themselves into a mans world to the detriment of the feminine. And women choosing to enter the sex industry and trade represents the beginning of women engaging the business world on their own terms... women in the grand sense.

When men enter the work force it is a very physical engagement except no one wants to pay men for sex, they want to pay men to dig a ditch. And the whole structure is set up and evolved from that. And when women engage the system on their own terms it should change the system and not them...

Or something like that... sorry if that doesn't make any sense.

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

» On Whose Terms? Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: craigandrew
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: lefty010
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: craigandrew
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: lefty010
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: craigandrew
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: lefty010
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: Joni50
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: craigandrew
» RE: On Whose Terms? Posted by: pdxstudent
» PS Posted by: craigandrew
» RE: PS Posted by: Joni50
» RE: PS Posted by: craigandrew
Call it what it is
Posted by: Spedbo on Mar 1, 2008 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is prostitution, hooking, walking the streets, allowing a man to enter your body, your personal space, literally, solely for his pleasure. Men are paying women for sex. The woman is a hooker, "Would you like to have a man be a provider for you? Do you just love to be taken care of and treated like a princess?" (source - www.sugardaddy.com). She gets getting money by getting a man to orgasm. The man is a john, "Are you a caring individual who loves and wants to share the finer things in life?" (source - www.sugardaddy.com) No, he wants to have sex - the kind of sex he wants to have. You don't pay for what you are already getting at home - with an attractive younger woman so he can feel young again.
The language tries to make it seem somewhat classy or high class, but in reality, it is women selling their bodies for sex and men buying the fantasy that sex with younger women is automatically better.
Whether this is right or wrong, really isn't for me to judge. But they are high priced hookers and the men are paying to get laid.
BTW, I am male, have a master's degree and the equivalent of another master's degree, been working as a teacher for 12 years and the hookers involved in sugardaddy will earn more than me if the headline $100,000/ year for sex with a sleaze is accurate.

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

» RE: Call it what it is Posted by: goddessq
$15.00 per hour versus $100.00 dollars and hour (or more)
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Mar 1, 2008 10:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
$15.00 per hour versus $100.00 dollars and hour (or more)?
It's quite obviously why women would choose sex work over a "real job."

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

» RE:R U Jasonix's sibing? Posted by: lefty010
» Using hands Posted by: suprmark
Fabulous hourglass figures (a body that won't quit)
Posted by: Landbaron on Mar 1, 2008 11:27 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These woman belong to the world, why should they waste their lives (at least their youth) with one person. They can make a fortune in prostitution and at the same time free up jobs for other woman. A plastic surgeon on TV say; "looks are like currency". I've heard guys on HBO specials say that they like prostitution 'cos they can be with girls that they couldn't get normally and the girls they can get they're not interested in. But let the chips fall where they may and how would this society evolve?

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

It's women like you who are stopping us form having a woman President
Posted by: igancedo on Mar 1, 2008 12:19 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is what Roseanne told a stripper in the 90's, -I just saw a re-run on television- but it still feels appropriate today.

Why do women complain about equal pay and equal opportunities when they can make so much money selling their bodies for sex? Why do they complain about being sacked, for instance after the Enron debâcle, when they can pose nude in Playboy?

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

Stripper to Doctor
Posted by: Talon on Mar 1, 2008 12:29 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was a stripper for 12 yrs. . .
Then I went to medical school.
I made better money as a stripper. But we all age, don't we? Those backbends take their toll.
So, now I'm Doctor Sexy Bitch! LOL
I've always been in charge, no matter where I worked. And I'm female, imagine!

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

» Lucky You Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Lucky You Posted by: Talon
» RE: Lucky You Posted by: tornadorider2002
I can see both sides.
Posted by: maddasein on Mar 1, 2008 2:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I see nothing wrong with two consenting adults engaging in sex for money and believe that prostitution SHOULD be legal so that sex workers may do what they do in a safe and clean environment. Everyone has a right to do what they wish with their own bodies. However on the flipside of the coin, we must examine some issues surrounding why women get into this type of work. It has been mentioned that these escorts make more money than they would doing other types of jobs. This is the inherent problem, because there is a never ending glass ceiling where women as a whole make significantly less money than men and many professions are harder for women to get into because of the "Boys Club." Then when you look at the lower end of the spectrum of so called street hookers, many times they resort to sex for money because of extreme economic disparity. Now I am sure that there are some women who may enjoy this work and do it strictly because of a preference, but there are probably far more who do it for more unhealthy reasons whether it be because their feelings of self worth revolve around their bodies or they are pushed into it because of necessity for survival. I do think that there can be severe damage to one's psyche as well.

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

What it means
Posted by: snarlah on Mar 1, 2008 2:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That the amount of money women are allowed to earn has changed very little in this country, which is a sin. In the meantime, sex work should either be legalized or at least the women are not the ones who should be arrested, but their customers belong in jail. Also, any brutal treatment doled out to prostitutes by the fine, upstanding police, which no doubt includes free sex should be punishable as the crime that it is.

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

» RE: What it means Posted by: richholland
A bad day as a sex worker
Posted by: Drume on Mar 1, 2008 3:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you are good-looking, proportional, upper middle class with a college degree, an interest in and a true desire to perform sex for money, perhaps it is not so bad. You can get clients who have a similar background as yours, they are most likely cheating on their wives so there is no question that it will be discreet. You can make money at it. In the huge sex industry, my guess is that this type of sex worker is a tiny tiny minority. Most sex workers probably back into it, just as they might back into a job at McDonald's, but on a bad day, where would you rather be? Mopping up a grease spill or running from gun violence or getting the results of your AIDs or STD test?

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

Souls & Nations for Sale
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Mar 1, 2008 5:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“Some readers see sugar daddy arrangements, as well as prostitution, as the predictable outcome of a capitalist system where most relationships are based on money. According to Mister_PsyOps prostitution is …

(Alternet writer Tina Genava quoting me):

“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."

If writer Tana Ganeva misread other responses to the original sex-for-sale piece as badly as she did mine, her take here has got to be rather pointless.

I never came close to equating “ “prostitution, as the predictable outcome of a capitalist system where most relationships are based on money. ”

If Ganeva had bothered to read a bit more, she would have found my position on the matter quite clear:

“When inequality of wealth creation and wealth-distribution are rigged by an utterly cooked system that only pretends to be "capitalist" (real capitalism requires free and open markets of thought and industry) and democratic – the worst in human nature is also assured.

In short, brutality by social and economic dysfunction under a corporate crime system (Fascism) is guaranteed.”


Virtually no one engages at prostitution as a favored 1st life choice be it street prostitution or as a political-MSM prostitute for corporate monopoly rule that has ZERO to do with any kind of “capitalism” or democracy that it projects at the world.

People only sell their souls based on the fact they have few or no real options. In the sick, brutal society we happen to live under the top option impossible to ignore is a Fascist corporate crime state.

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

What DOES this say about society?
Posted by: talkville on Mar 2, 2008 4:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, it seems, the Body has joined Ideas in The Marketplace (the money-economy). And of course Individualism is part of the in-grained ethos of 'the American Way'. And the individual's survival, value and rank in society is tied directly to the ability to have (or earn) Money.

I confess that, on some occasions, I ponder deeply about the state of affairs in this Consequential era of ours. One aspect that keeps returning is the issue of children, since they are so resoundingly and repeatedly brought to our attention these days. But when pondering I run across the near-universal phenomenon that any child enters this society and, as soon as they are able to understand language, are confronted with a question: "what do you want to be?". How does the child understand, how can he respond? They are in a twilight zone of Wanting to Be-- thus he is not anyone --- yet! Will he ever be? Thus the child enters society: a non-being, only a potential being. What, then is one to expect? And money is simultaneously attached to being-- the more you have the more being you have.

How are we surprised when a large number of females grow up and rapidly understand that their body can be a source of money and security? It's merely impeccable logic.

Thus what is usually part of social relations and community living (a non-monetary economy) is transferred to The Market. Sexual favors are classified as a Skill and Aptitude, like any other.

What does this say about our society? From birth to death we are ALL prostitutes and prostituted, our social relations are mediated by money, and each of us individuals-whether we 'want to be' or not -- are simple space-time nodes in exchange relations ("trucking and bartering") in The Free Market.

It says about our society that we are the realized dreams of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus and all those other 18th and 19th century philosophers supplemented by an ethics of Acquisition,Self-Interest, and Rational-Choice Theories.

I can only hope that all those celebratory 'new moms and dads' out there ponder a bit more about what questions they pose to their growing, human children as they grow into this pre-planned, pre-structured, rationalized and de-humanized society we now boast of.

One thing's for sure: I myself can't find fault to level to those women who voluntarily opt to provide sexual favors in exchange for money. They are part of this new bourgeoisie and it's as legitimate a "Career" as any other.

I must wonder now: what are friends and neighbors? What's a neighborhood? And I wonder: how does Britney Spears understand herself? And how did she come to be?

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

Imagine this scenario reversed...
Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal on Mar 2, 2008 9:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...with young men having the opportunity to link up with sugarmommies.

I guarantee we would not be having so much moralizing, pontificating, and rationalization going on here.

There would just be a lot more job opportunities for the "moral" men in the traditional workplace!

It's all about who has the money, power and the general, obvious NATURAL sexual drives and libidos.

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

Money
Posted by: henderson on Mar 2, 2008 9:09 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Doesn't it ALL just boil down to MONEY AND POWER, again? Does selling your body help to bring about equality for everyone? Does it make the earth a better place for everyone? Does it really make life "better", or does it just enable you to buy more "things"? Does it really give you self-respect? Are you really being true to yourself? Are money and power really the only goals we want to have in this life?

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

SEX 4 SALE
Posted by: jrmart on Mar 2, 2008 12:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hmm, lets see now. Pamela Anderson;Britney Spears;Paris something or other. What are they selling? guess.
ok, one of those may have some talent other than her body, but you get the idea.
If some poor slob of a girl wants to make it in the entertainment industry She had better be read to simulate getting fucked ON CAMERA! She will need to ok with showing of pretty much everything she has under her clothes. And not in the privacy of an apt. or hotel room, but on screen for literally millions of lusty men and awed girls.
So what is the difference? that isn't a rhetorical question. I really just don't see a difference. In one way the "escort" or "kept woman" (now theres a phrase) allows physical penetration But doesn't the "Actress/celebrity" allow many many more intimate psychological penetrations?
With proper care, the chance of std is minimal. The sugar daddy has the power of money, but the woman has the real power. It is just that 90% of Women don't understand that.
AS long as it is truly HER choice. Then go girl.

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

» Get it straight Posted by: Coleman
Sexual Wage Predators
Posted by: abemko on Mar 2, 2008 3:47 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any healthy relationship involves the free choice of each party to get involved in the relationship simply because they chose. Not for the money, not for the contacts, not for the prestige, not for the sex. If you want to see normal relationships, watch the unselfconscious close and honest relationships of children. Money and power corrupt every relationship.

Sugardaddy.com is simply sexual slavery similar to the addicts willingness to sell his blood for a high or the poor indian farmer selling his kidneys to pay off seed loans or illegal immigrants risking life and limb in the killing fields of Iraq for the possibility of a better life for themselves and their family. The argument that these are adults making a choice is nonsense. It is a coercive choice - girl, you can die the slow death of a $7.00 job without benefits or a future for yourself or, God help you, your children or you can accept my generous offer of giving up control of your body and freedom for my sexual pleasure. Some choice. Each human being is entitled to self-determination and a decent and dignified life.

The sugardaddys are just sad isolated socially maladjusted people who use their power to take advantage of the less fortunate. No healthy individual would be willing to buy a relationship, sexual or otherwise, his self self-respect would demand a relationship of free choice and equality.

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

» RE: "Sexual Wage Predators" Posted by: StarchildSF
SeekingArrangement.com - Mutually Beneficial Arrangement?
Posted by: Sugar Daddy on Mar 2, 2008 11:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is so much talk about Sugar Daddy dating, but the real website that should have been discussed is SeekingArrangement.com .... forget about the traditional Sugar Daddy. How about Benefactors and Gorgeous women who are willing to enter into mutually beneficial arrangements and relationships?

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

This magazine ...
Posted by: realmuzik on Mar 3, 2008 2:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Spread was passed along to me by a friend. I was skeptical at first, as I was generally negative in opinion regarding sex work (particularly forced upon sex work trafficking). But after reading it my perspective on the matter changed dramatically. There really are consenting adult men and women choosing sex work. Some are indeed doing it for the money. But for many it is even a political statement such as, "You choose what happens to your body ... that your body belongs to you and not (for one) the government." It is fitting for a progressive such as myself to recognize this. While the jury's out on sugardaddy.com, the reality is that sex work is more than the negative sound bites the general public is thrown about them by the religious right prudes, aggressive power-hungry prosecutors, and Catherine MacKinnons. Don't get me wrong. I can never, ever condone sex work and trafficking forced upon people (most especially minor teenagers). But I can and will defend sex work as a consensual adult choice that is a reality not discussed as often as it should be.

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

Uniquely American
Posted by: zeofredo on Mar 3, 2008 9:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A special emphasis is made time and again in these articles that women are unlikely to earn worthwhile salaries in regular professions . In almost every other nation worldwide this is also the case.... so why is it so poignant that AMERICAN girls are peddling themselves on the market? Probably because the attitude for consumption is far greater in US. Men are lame, it's true: the average working-class fella seems happy to have a basic crashpad for his silly gadgets, but their women never seem satisfied: bigger house, more comfort, more stuff. Not many guys are capable of generating that kind of income anymore, so in terms of traditional marriage, which is still promoted as the 'norm', nobody's getting what they want anymore .

Sex has always been a bargaining chip in this culture. I've been other places and found women who are engineers and managers who have the partner they want and a life that satisfies, yet live in modest circumstances (Czech Republic). They are happy because they have social ties that reach beyond family; they are not afraid to stay with a partner even if he is less professional than they... sex is not rationed out according to good deeds, but according to healthy appetite.

It's hard to care about the 'unfortunate' American girl in the wider context. Some of the least sophisticated attitudes (in the Western world) toward sex and relationships are to be found in America.

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

» RE: small correction Posted by: zeofredo
WHAT KIND OF PERSON PAYS SOMEONE TO FUCK THEM?
Posted by: de aqui on Mar 3, 2008 11:05 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Talk about degrading! While I don't let women off the hook for making stupid facile choices and thinking that "it's ok to sell your body" or "it's empowering to sleep with strangers for cash" I have to say it's interesting to me that no one ever really examines the male mentality (straight and gay) that it's ok to pay someone to have sex with you. I find this so gross and unsexual. I mean how demoralizing to have to pay someone to make love to you. How could you even enjoy it knowing that they were only in it for the money (no matter how much they pretend) It is really something I don't understand about men.I see these guys lay out money for strippers (A LOT of whom are lesbians or who REALLY LOATHE MEN) and yet so many of these guys pretend (or maybe they actually do believe) that the women like it. When a lot of the time they are laughing at these guys and hating them bitterly while they take their money. The whole equation is VILE. It's astounding how men can delude themselves. As a woman who has had sex with many men (for enjoyment ONLY) While I understand the temptation to make a quick buck on your back, I would hate to alienate myself from my own sex drive by turning my body into a commodity (regular work is bad enough)

But even worse would be to PAY someone to touch me sexually- How degrading.

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

» Your remarks are telling Posted by: de aqui
What it says about society
Posted by: StarchildSF on Mar 3, 2008 6:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"What does it say about our society when a young, educated woman can make a far better living doing sex work than in most other professions?"

What it says is that society does a very poor job meeting sexual needs relative to other needs. So many people's (mainly men's) normal, healthy, human desires for sexual interaction are going unfulfilled, that a large market has arisen for people (mainly women) to make a living catering to those desires, and the criminalization of these people has further driven up the price of their product.

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

Pity the Poor Hunk
Posted by: stellabloo on Mar 4, 2008 11:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whatever. Great career strategy I guess - until you have to explain to that really really good-looking guy in your peer group that you're da