Do you think that being a sugar baby is just another form of prostitution?

[veganrogue]

Are any girls here sugar babies and if so, what have your experience been like?

Girls and guys, what do you think about sugar babies in general?

[wolfcat87]

No... a prostitute sells sex specifically. Sugar babies sell who they are as a person. I've been a sugar baby for years. No sex is required in the relationship. It's more like dating but with more defined outlines of what both expect. No guessing games or wasted time.

For example, for one sugar baby interview I met up with a retired doctor because we had medical careers in common. We met at a small hole in the wall cafe. We were very compatible personality wise, and he was an attractive man, but he wanted someone to travel with him by RV across the country for a few years. I'd already traveled all over the U. S. by car and had no real interest in doing it by RV for years. We also lived 2 hours worth of driving away, and he wanted to meet every weekend. There was no real room to compromise. So, we shook hands at the end and agreed to part ways. He handed me cash for my time and we parted ways. He said I'm an excellent candidate, and he only wished we lived closer.

I've been a sugar baby for an architect about 3-4 hours away. Known him for nearly 10 years, and we've had sex maybe twice? Completely my choice. He'll hand me hundreds just to come hang out with him, have fun, and get spoiled rotten. I can say lets eat or do anything, and he'll pay for it. We enjoy each other's company. I enjoy sailing with him and learning about architecture since I see it as a beautiful art form. He has a custom bathroom he designed that is fun to use. We don't even sleep in the same room when I'm there.

[Billlewis]

Finally -- somebody gets it! Thank you for being the voice of reason in a discussion that's gone off the deep end... lol;)

[veganrogue]

Thank you for sharing your experience and teaching me something new.

[Kelly6]

@wolfcat87
Totally agree

[Screenwriter]

Any kind of relationship that is solely "paid" is a form of prostitution, whether sex is involved or not.

Being a sugar baby means the man is a sugar daddy and the "sugar" is always money.

Though some women are solely arm candy, available to be present at events that the man needs an attractive, accompanying female, others are mistresses who have clothes, food, apartments paid for by the man in question and are occasional sex partners.

Still others are solely sex partners, paid in like manner to the aforementioned arm candy and mistresses. "Pay" is the unifying concept.

If the relationship is a pecuniary transaction, it is a form of prostitution. The woman is paid for her time, whether her time involves a sexual transaction, or simply her presence. She appears at the behest of the sugar daddy and acts in relation to HIS needs for her presence or absence. She has no agency and little choice in the transaction.

She cannot demand the presence of the sugar daddy due to his business and personal obligations, and because of the nature of the relationship. She is commanded to appear for him because he pays her. She cannot pay him and demand his presence.

This is classic prostitution.

[wolfcat87]

I would like to interject that some sugar babies are looking for mentors in the business world. Some are dating to marry someone wealthy. So, there's not always money exchanged.

[Screenwriter]

@wolfcat87 If you're "dating to marry someone wealthy" you're a gold digger. Again, the point is getting money and an easy life.

If you're only seeking a "mentor" to TEACH you about the business world, you are not a sugar baby. If you are seeking to be introduced to people who can give you business or money to start a business, again, this is about MONEY and is a transaction. It's not about friendship, or enjoying someone for WHO they are.

These are all about the Benjamins.

[wolfcat87]

No, because a gold digger ONLY cares about money. A person can require a wealthy partner and still wait for someone they actually care about. There's a big difference there. Would you marry a man who is $1 million in debt? Are you a gold digger if you say no? Financial standards are normal in dating. All relationships are not transactional just because money is involved and an important factor...

A sugar baby is dating to benefit in some way from someone better off than her. A mentor with a bunch of experience fits that requirement.

Why do you assume money equals an easy life? The saying "more money more problems" exists for a reason.

You also assume the sugar baby can't already have her own money. I have a far higher net worth than the majority of Americans at any age. So, what would I be gold digging for?

"It's not about friendship, or enjoying someone for WHO they are." Except that's not true either. I only pick people based on whether I like them. They only pick a sugar baby based on whether they actually like her as a person as well. No amount of money would get me out of bed and out of the house for a man I don't already like.

You make way too many assumptions.

[Screenwriter]

@wolfcat87 No one's talking about marrying someone in debt. But your statement is you "require a wealthy partner." That is about money. Primarily. The point is, no matter how much you like a man, if they're not wealthy, you aren't interested. Correct?

And how many men are "wealthy" anyway. Most have average salaries. It sounds so much like the 6 inches, 6 feet, 6 figures. Only 14% of American men are 6 feet tall. Only 9 percent are millionaires. The other 6 inches are pretty average.

So, on height alone, 86 percent of men are unavailable to you. If you consider a millionaire a wealthy man, then 91 percent of men are unavailable to you.

Money doesn't guarantee a 360-degree "easy" life, but it guarantees financial security. You won't want for comforts. That part of your life will be "easy." Emotionally, socially, educationally, family life: none of those things are guaranteed secure or easy. Again, I'm solely talking about money.

Why isn't the sugar baby seeking to self-actualize by making herself better off through her own power instead of using a man to make her better off? It smacks of being lazy and predatory.

There are mentorship programs in many careers that offer people experience in areas they're interested in. I've done one myself. Didn't have to date anyone, and I learned a great deal.

You state that choose a man based on whether you like him AND on his financial status. You don't have one without the other. Sugar babies are only chosen if they are young, attractive eye candy. If they aren't the first two, liking them will never materialize.

I'm reading what you're saying and making logical connections, not assumptions.

You won't get out of bed for a man you don't like, but you also won't get out of bed for a man who isn't wealthy. That's clear. No assumption on my part.

[wolfcat87]

Wealthy is subjective. A man can be middle class and wealthy to some girl.

Extremely in debt is the opposite of wealthy. If having standards that include wealth vs the extreme lack of means someone's a good digger, then everyone is one. Very few people would even consider marrying someone extremely in debt. That's still a relationship decision based on money, and it's one we can ask agree on.

I've certainly gotten out of bed for men who aren't wealthy. They simply must have more to offer in other ways.

Like I said, many sugar babies are doing well. I have a million dollar portfolio. You're assuming it's predatory when it's simply dating with more upfront requirements and conditions. Both people benefit more with less hassle.

True, many careers have mentors. Many do not.

[OlderAndWiser]

A prostitute sells access to her mouth, pussy, or ass for the pleasure of her customer, whoever it may be, and however he wants, it if he pays the price. She does this solely for the money and does things with people she would never allow into her life, except that she wants his or her money. Perhaps ALL sugar babies don't have sex for money as an explicit and discrete transaction, but she sells access to herself in other ways, and she sells herself to guys with whom she would otherwise not associate, except that she wants his or her money. And I suspect that very few sugar babies NEVER have sex with their customers. And when he does want sex, don't you think she agrees because she doesn't want to lose all that money he is giving her?

It really doesn't matter whether it is like prostitution. The real question is whether you respect a woman who does this? Would you be okay if your 18 year old daughter wanted to do this?

[wolfcat87]

I would absolutely support my daughter becoming a sugar baby. Far better than doing all of the same for free for some guy who contributed nothing to building her up and supporting her. A sugar baby's partner knows she's valuable and behaves accordingly. We aren't hurting for money, so she'd have no problem saying no to anything.

[OlderAndWiser]

@wolfcat87 You are still a sugar baby even though you are married.

[wolfcat87]

You are too concerned with what married people are doing. The nice thing about good marriages is the only people who matter in them are the ones who are married. 🙃😉

[OlderAndWiser]

@wolfcat87 Right. Your children don't matter. I'm not surprised.

[wolfcat87]

I'm not married to my children, so why would I mention them when you mentioned marriage?

They've done incredibly well with our 17 year relationship. Intelligent, happy, healthy, wealthy, responsible, talented, athletic, respected, popular, and wise. My family is good in every way.

So, what are you even complaining about? Pick a battle. 😆

[OlderAndWiser]

@wolfcat87 I am not doing battle. I responded to a question and posted my opinion. You don't agree with my opinion and I don't care. You jumped in and responded to what I said.

We aren't going to agree and that's okay. You could just stop right now, but you probably won't. You are the one looking for a battle, not me.

[wolfcat87]

"The real question is whether you respect a woman who does this? Would you be okay if your 18 year old daughter wanted to do this?"

Imagine asking a question on a discussion forum and then getting defensive, upset, and accusatory when someone pauses to answer it. Work on your thinking and communication skills, sir. This is how social media works. This is how asking questions of people on public forums works. Ha ha

Not to mention, when the question YOU asked us as a forum was answered in a straightforward, honest, and mature way YOU came back with, "You are still a sugar baby even though you are married." Something completely irrelevant to my answer to your question.

There's something called a dictionary with a word called hypocrisy in it. See definition before you pretend anyone was trying to start a "battle" but you. Imagine being so childish just because I didn't answer your question the way you assumed everyone would... That's not how the world works, honey.

[OlderAndWiser]

@wolfcat87 I am not your honey. Not even close.

You could just stop right now, but you probably won't.

[Daniela1982]

That is my opinion as well.

[Daniela1982]

What Older and Wiser said.

[NathanDavis]

no, words have an actual meaning

[veganrogue]

@NathanDavis - Can you please elaborate?

[NathanDavis]

prostitution is one specific thing... and so is being a sugar baby

you can't go to a prostitute and expect the dynamics of a sugar baby... and you really can't go to a sugar baby and tell her to give you a prostitute deal either

which is why there's two different words, for two very different things... one is not a form of the other, similarities might be one or two but that's not how these things work, lol

prostitutes are prostitutes... and sugar babies are sugar babies

if one or the other do both, then these are people who are both, or they're one but also doing the other on the side

[AviatorTom]

No, a sugar baby is more like a female escort, if we're going to use labels. They provide companionship, which usually also includes sex. A prostitute doesn't offer companionship, just raw physical sex.

[dynamicyandere]

Exactly, that companionship factor is key.

If a wealthy man wants to just enjoy a cruise and bring a date with him. The experience would be more holistic since it’s more than just sex, it’s a luxurious trip, with conversation, and everything. It’s enjoying your wealth with someone rather than just being alone. It would be closer to a girlfriend-experience than strictly paid sex.

I’m not an advocate for it necessarily but, I understand how being a sugar baby and being a prostitute would be quite different in terms of mentality, vibe, and experience.

[Inbox]

@dynamicyandere Yeah, but the results are the same = no way in hell I’d date a girl who would do that.

[dynamicyandere]

@Inbox Oh, yeah. It would need to be strictly casual for sure. More along the lines of friends-with-benefits rather than a conventional relationship.

[chrissykerdock]

if a rich guy asks me out and takes me to a nice restraunt... or a nice play or concert... is that really prostitution... i think it's a rich guy wanting to have a good time... or he wants to take me to his vacation home for the weekend... or should i only stay in some slum and not have to worry about someone calling me a prostitute... think about your own life and not the girl who may be a dating an older man to get a decent meal and then look down upon her.

[Billlewis]

Well said, ma'am.

[chrissykerdock]

@Billlewis thank you for sticking up for me

[Billlewis]

No, thank *you*, for defending one of the most mutually beneficial arrangements ever engaged in. There is nothing wrong with providing financial support for a woman, regardless of what other activities are -- or are not -- being participated in, in my opinion.

[chrissykerdock]

@Billlewis i have to agree with you on that

[Billlewis]

The crazy thing about it is that a substantial number of sugar daddies never have sex with the women whom they spoil!

[Billlewis]

There are a lot more sugar daddies who are never allowed to have sex with their spoiled women than people think...
cuc.edu.mx/.../

[chrissykerdock]

@Billlewis they do but it's not that bad... they definitely don't force you... like i paid for dinner blah blah now you have to do this for me... not like that at all... like i said earlier they have a good time too... going to dinner or a concert... or vacation... a poor girl like me is always delighted... just think if every rich guy found an equally beautiful and rich girl to take he'd probably wind up going nowhere.

[Billlewis]

I love spoiling a beautiful woman and her boyfriend rotten, and I do it not because I'm trying to get laid, but because I love it when she teases me and tells me about how incredible the sex is with her boyfriend... lol

[sawno]

I don't think dating and being spoiled by a rich man is the same as being a sugar baby. Its why you do it that counts. Are you solely with that guy for the goods? Or are you with the guy for the man? If you advertise yourself as available to a high bidder with no serious commitment to me that's prostitution. If you genuinely like someone who offered and your in it for the man, then it doesn't matter how spoiled you are by him, its not prostitution.

[Nice222]

Yes what she said!!

[wolfcat87]

@sawno Hmm, prostitution is exchanging sex for money specifically. Being spoiled and cared for by a wealthy man is being a sugar baby regardless of feelings.

[RavVid]

Ambiguous is my net summation. Two cases.

First case say a girl is studying and is struggling with costs. She thinks I could get an older man to subsidize me if I give him sex. The girl makes it clear to potential "suitors" what exactly the deal is.

Second case. A girl, however it comes about, gets involved with an older guy. It might be as a side chick but there is an element of romantic attachment. The guy starts subsidizing her which the girl appreciates. She is a supported girlfriend.

In both cases it is sex for money but that is marriage too although in this case it is called the man providing.

We wouldn't usually regard a supported girlfriend as a prostitute but we probably would regard the first girl as a prostitute or as maybe a mistress if she chastely provides services to just one man.

Sexual services for resources is a fundamental in any pair bonding species.

[WhiteSteve]

I’m probably not even informed enough about it to have a valid opinion, but if they’re gonna tell us we have to unnaturally live our lives in pursuit of currency in order to survive, I sure as hell don’t want to be told there are a whole lot of wrong ways to accomplish that.

If you can provide some kind of service, whether it’s sexual, or even just companionship, and there’s a market and a willing buyer, and no harm is being done to either party…. I say get it how you live, haha.

[Billlewis]

No, not at all. A woman who is a sugar baby is simply providing a much needed service for a guy who otherwise wouldn't be able to date a woman as attractive as her.

Moreover, many sugar babies receive very generous financial support from the guys whom they're dating, without ever even once letting them have intercourse with them.

[juliammm]

I agree with @NathanDavis it is a very different thing.

The level of expectation from each other is not the same. There is a lot of affection in a sugar relation.

[NathanDavis]

agreed...

[JacobJordan]

Of course it is. Prostitution is any work for which one is paid under the table (untaxed) so very many things qualify as Prostitution. A 'whore' is the specific act of sex for money. So while the 2 are synonymous Prostitution is not limited to just sex work

[LucasBeastall]

Ganna hit that with a solid no. But also a yes depending on your definition or example. Where’s the line? How transaction is the relationship, just because it’s reliant on money doesn’t mean you’re whoring yourself out.

[wiltingrosepetal]

Depends on how physical the relationship is. Mosty or purely sex, you're basically just an escort. But if its just paying for a relationship then no, it's a simple business trade

[RavenDarkheart]

Don’t know what being a sugar baby is like. I think @wolfcat87 really explained the differences better than I can.

[PeachyPie93]

Yeah it can be, but more often they are basically like a side chick. And like others said dudes will still pay just for your company not really for sexual favours.

[aceleon]

yes. what they do making money from their womanhood aka prostitution.

[iFarted]

One gets physically penetrated while the other emotionally, mentally and possibly physically as well. One is a short term transaction, the other is a longer term transaction. I'm gonna go with yes.

[DARKCLOUD1945X]

It is just a different form of paying for pussy. Even if there is no sex it is still a form of prostitution to get some goods or services.

[KrakenAttackin]

Of course. Trading money/handbags for sex is prostitution.

[chefbigoo]

It's the monetary system that is the problem, and so , this is the only place to make change (at the cause).

[Thestupidusername]

Yes ofcourse..

[Thestupidusername]

And no I am not a sugar baby nor will I ever be one..

[Anonymous]

It's escort services, with sex... prostitution

[TadBehaya]

In a way, yes

[Anonymous]

It is prostitution.