Men, would you be a sugar daddy given the chance? (partner, average)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hell no. I value my money more than some random floozy who'd get inside of my pants for it. Why pay some gold digger for fake love? If she doesn't like me specifically for who I am, then she can **** off.
I would if I were old and had a lot of money. It's cheaper than hiring actual prostitutes. Look at Hef and how much fun he has. If I were THAT old I wouldn't though, I don't think I'd care about looks as much at that age when sex is like stuffing a marshmallow peep into a garden hose.
I'm curious how many of you men in you're 30's to 50's would prefer to spend a lot of money on what is basically a prostitute of college age, rather than have a true love romance and committed partnership with someone closer to your age and about as intelligent?
.
Well my answer is no. If I wanted to go that route I'd rather pay per go basis, why support a girl like that and put up with all the bs and drain my finances when I could pay for a night or a weekend saving myself grief and money. Besides that way, I could have your company on Tuesday and you college girlfriend's company on Friday instead. Or none of you when I don't want to.....
But...if you think a true love romance and committed partner is sure fire if she is closer to age then you are mistaken , plenty of 15, 20 or longer marriages fall apart and usually it is the man that has a harder time picking up and finding some one new.
Besides, while a woman in her 20's can be appealing there is nothing that says a woman in her 40's or 50's can't be either. There some are women in their 20's who after having a baby or two have a tummy and boobs that look like a train wreck and just because they are younger that doesn't mean sex will be better.
But I see that a substantial minority votes for Yes. I think some men believe that they can buy love, that spoiling a woman can make her fall in love. I'd say few women are like that, and the vast majority of women who would enter into such a relationship are mostly emotionally dead and incapable of real love.
After much vacillation, I voted "Yes", not because I desire such a relationship or regard it as morally indistinguishable from a more equal one, but because something along those lines is inevitable. If two people are intimately close, but their financial situation differs greatly, how is it possible for the wealthier NOT to support the poorer? I don't mean a gauche trade of sex for dollars, but the basic consequence of inequality.
Let's take the Hugh Hefner example. Hugh is most likely a billionaire. How many billionaire single women are out there? Suppose that Hugh wants to get married to a woman close to his own age, in similar financial circumstances. How exactly is he to go about doing that? Even if he finds some superstar female lawyer earning $400K/year, or maybe Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina, there's still a huge financial imbalance. And I don't think that Meg or Carly are single. Let's quit pretending that this is just some arrogant rich guy throwing his cash around to score appealing arm-candy.
Now let's downscope this to more modest circumstances. Suppose that you're a farmer in India. You're the biggest landowner in your village, with the most acreage and the most farm animals. You might even have electricity in your house, whereas no one else does. Your net worth is only $100K, but by rural Indian standards you're fabulously wealthy. So who are you going to marry? Who in your age bracket is still single? How would you NOT end up in a distorted relationship?
After much vacillation, I voted "Yes", not because I desire such a relationship or regard it as morally indistinguishable from a more equal one, but because something along those lines is inevitable. If two people are intimately close, but their financial situation differs greatly, how is it possible for the wealthier NOT to support the poorer? I don't mean a gauche trade of sex for dollars, but the basic consequence of inequality.
Let's take the Hugh Hefner example. Hugh is most likely a billionaire. How many billionaire single women are out there? Suppose that Hugh wants to get married to a woman close to his own age, in similar financial circumstances. How exactly is he to go about doing that? Even if he finds some superstar female lawyer earning $400K/year, or maybe Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina, there's still a huge financial imbalance. And I don't think that Meg or Carly are single. Let's quit pretending that this is just some arrogant rich guy throwing his cash around to score appealing arm-candy.
Now let's downscope this to more modest circumstances. Suppose that you're a farmer in India. You're the biggest landowner in your village, with the most acreage and the most farm animals. You might even have electricity in your house, whereas no one else does. Your net worth is only $100K, but by rural Indian standards you're fabulously wealthy. So who are you going to marry? Who in your age bracket is still single? How would you NOT end up in a distorted relationship?
What you're describing is diffrent. These sugar daddies typically would NOT be able to get their teen-aged girlfriends would it not be for their fat wallets. It's not just an accident of disparity in income as you put it. It's straight up using the man for his money, and using the young female for her fresher body.
How would you wrinkly old men feel if you wanted true love with a woman, if it was the other way around, but you found the women preferred to pay for a handsome young man with no meaning or companionship. A hollow companionship lasting only long enough as the money kept coming in.
Society, you sicken me. All this obsession with sex and young bodies. It would seem that's all that really matters to you. It's too bad.
I'm curious how many of you men in you're 30's to 50's would prefer to spend a lot of money on what is basically a prostitute of college age, rather than have a true love romance and committed partnership with someone closer to your age and about as intelligent?
I'm 21 and apparently females in my age bracket are all like, yay, of course I'll pimp myself out for money! I have a boyfriend who is 13 years older, and he doesn't even take me out to dinner, let alone buy me flowers because he's poor. The idea of a sugar daddy has appealed to me just because I do appreciate the fine life, but I'd rather get an honest job and work my way up through education because that dynamic is so heartless and superficial. And having a partner who loves me more for my personality than my physical self is preferred. All you (sugar daddy) men want is fresh meat, and aren't willing to put the time and effort into cultivating a lasting and loving relationship with a more mature woman. When I'm older, in my 30's let's say, and see a lot of men my age disinterested in a committed relationship with someone like me because they want someone just out of high school I think I will be sickened. Girls my age, even girls I know, are becoming prostitutes so they can be lazy. I bet older women are disgusted by the lack of morals and self-respect (to be willing to exploit themselves) of younger women like myself, and feel I should do them a favor by not adding myself to the pool of young whores.
I wonder, if my own boyfriend became rich, would he leave me for someone younger, who he wouldn't have to commit to? Probably.
I'm a cynical person, but also a realistic person. I bet most men would prefer to be a sugar daddy given the chance.
Having just turned 30 .... I couldn't afford to be anybody's sugar daddy, so it's a moot point.
And for the record, I live in a university / beach town where this is routine -- a ton of old guys with money, and a ton of college girls looking for "help with rent from a generous man."
But hypothetically, if I was single and very wealthy, would I? Probably. I wouldn't mind having a crew of beautiful naked college girls to clean my beach mansion.
But like the question asks, If I was married and very wealthy? No. Only a total scumbag would do that to his partner. Plus if you had kids this would be setting a horrible example.
Having just turned 30 .... I couldn't afford to be anybody's sugar daddy, so it's a moot point.
And for the record, I live in a university / beach town where this is routine -- a ton of old guys with money, and a ton of college girls looking for "help with rent from a generous man."
But hypothetically, if I was single and very wealthy, would I? Probably. I wouldn't mind having a crew of beautiful naked college girls to clean my beach mansion.
But like the question asks, If I was married and very wealthy? No. Only a total scumbag would do that to his partner. Plus if you had kids this would be setting a horrible example.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
