Sugar Daddy Parties!

Fr0dders · 26 Oct 2011 at 11:40

Its no different to prostitution.

No different that is to the top end of prostitution with high end escorts who will charge you £200 an hour.

Is this a bad thing ? no not really. Its a completely different thing to trawling the street corners in the middle of the night offering yourself to anybody that pulls up for £50.

I like porn just as much as the next man, and for the reasons i've said above, porn isn't that dissimilar to high end escorting either. It says it all that the number of pornstars who also do escort work is quite high. Heck in the US there are plenty of "*&$! a fan" type events where fans can meet up and get to have sex with their favourite star

Doesnt bother me mind, sex for money is as old as civilization itself.

steve-h · 26 Oct 2011 at 11:43

Abraham said:
Really? You think people in this thread wish they were blowing hundreds of pounds, I'd imagine on top of the cost of the date, every time they went on a date with a not particularly attractive woman?

You clearly care about money, you aren't a sugar daddy.

Sunbed · 26 Oct 2011 at 11:51

Ahleckz said:
What is a proper career though?
Why is it wrong that a woman doesn't wish to pursue a family life?

All I'm thinking is that there is a line somewhere (not sure myself on how to draw it) between what these women are doing and a "family life". I have no problem with either the male/female in a relationship staying at home to look after the house/family i.e. the traditional way of having a family (this is how I was brought up, dad working, mum doing shopping and looking after me etc).

I doubt the women at these parties are considering families. They are basically just escorts (with sex implied later on). I'm not saying it's completely wrong or inhuman, just demeaning

Cosimo · 26 Oct 2011 at 11:57

steve-h said:
ITT: people who wish they were sugar daddies.

When you get to look like him you will be wishing:

Yamahahahahaha · 26 Oct 2011 at 12:48

I was actually wondering why something like this didn't exist already in the UK.

A distinction must be made between:
Actively paying the girl to see her and presumably 'get jiggy with mr biggy' as someone on page 1 put it.
Taking a girl out on dates, taking her shopping, buying her relatively expensive items of jewellery / cars / maintaining a lifestyle that she wouldn be otherwise unable to afford.

I know the latter sounds like normal dating, but the style of relationship would be based more around the older gent treating her as a muse rather than a one night stand.

steve-h · 26 Oct 2011 at 12:49

simulatorman said:
When you get to look like him you will be wishing:

no doubt.

Psycho Sonny · 26 Oct 2011 at 13:27

MrLOL said:
Its no different to prostitution.

No different that is to the top end of prostitution with high end escorts who will charge you £200 an hour.

Is this a bad thing ? no not really. Its a completely different thing to trawling the street corners in the middle of the night offering yourself to anybody that pulls up for £50.

I like porn just as much as the next man, and for the reasons i've said above, porn isn't that dissimilar to high end escorting either. It says it all that the number of pornstars who also do escort work is quite high. Heck in the US there are plenty of "*&$! a fan" type events where fans can meet up and get to have sex with their favourite star

Doesnt bother me mind, sex for money is as old as civilization itself.

theres a few people in this thread that have not caught onto this though, cant believe how delusional they are, its so obvious is an undercover escort party. why else would they be paying £300 for a date, if they are wealthy im pretty sure they have the contacts and knowledge on how to get a date without paying.

Abraham · 26 Oct 2011 at 13:27

Ahleckz said:
Hahaaaaaaaaaaha. Do you get the stupidness of your post?

It's not right! It's awful, a feminist would resent your point.

They'd (at least radical feminists) probably embrace it and demonstrate how the power has shifted from the patrioachal system of before where men exploit women to the women who are now in control of their own career and are the ones who hold the power.

I don't agree with radical feminists, but it's a valid argument. Your apparent argument does nothing but further reinforces the divide between men and women and the roles that you expect them to play.

What is my argument? if you read my whole post you'd see that I raised the apparent disparate psychologies of those women embracing being able to do what they choose, irrespective of the appearance of those actions, and those who wish to be subservient. I do think there's something inherently wrong with wanting to be with someone just for their money, the same as I think it's inherently wrong to be on the other end of that deal.

Please clarify what it was that was stupid about my post?

Cosimo · 26 Oct 2011 at 13:30

steve-h said:
no doubt.

Mind you there will be many a geek sitting in front of his screen wishing as well.

Abraham · 26 Oct 2011 at 13:31

Psycho Sonny said:
theres a few people in this thread that have not caught onto this though, cant believe how delusional they are, its so obvious is an undercover escort party. why else would they be paying £300 for a date, if they are wealthy im pretty sure they have the contacts and knowledge on how to get a date without paying.

It does read as though it's somewhat more, a paid for relationship rather than just a date or a night of nookie. I think the /date figure was just to give an idea of the rate. The idea of a sugar daddy would traditionally be either a guy with a mistress or one with a golddigger partner, happy to fund their lifestyle for what they get in return.

Vonhelmet · 26 Oct 2011 at 13:32

It's borderline prostitution, but I guess it must be pretty much legal or it wouldn't go on...

Ahleckz · 26 Oct 2011 at 13:35

Abraham said:
What is my argument? if you read my whole post you'd see that I raised the apparent disparate psychologies of those women embracing being able to do what they choose, irrespective of the appearance of those actions, and those who wish to be subservient. I do think there's something inherently wrong with wanting to be with someone just for their money, the same as I think it's inherently wrong to be on the other end of that deal.

Please clarify what it was that was stupid about my post?

You're claiming that the practice is outdated and wrong and seem to make some link between them and feminists. My point is that there's a credible argument that feminists (at least the radical ones) would support these things as it showing that the patriarchal system has been removed. It is displaying that women are the ones that are required by men, not the other way around as is commonly seen.

I don't think that these people are looking to meet their future husbands/soul mates from these things. I think that they are doing it for various reasons (money, excitement, the ability to experience something new and different, sex, whatever). Is it subjectifying women? Is it placing them beneath men? I'd argue that it isn't doing either of these things but rather it could be conceived (for arguments sake, I don't actually think many of the women taking part will know much about feminism nor 'breaking the chains' nor do they know what a patriarchal system is...) that these things are empowering woman and allowing the woman to demonstrate that she isn't requiring of man.

We'll differ because you think it's morally wrong perhaps, whereas I think it's fine. I don't see that the men are doing anything wrong, nor are the women.

My statement may have been poorly worded and slightly antagonistic (I'm a bit stressed).

Psycho Sonny · 26 Oct 2011 at 13:37

Abraham said:
It does read as though it's somewhat more, a paid for relationship rather than just a date or a night of nookie. I think the /date figure was just to give an idea of the rate. The idea of a sugar daddy would traditionally be either a guy with a mistress or one with a golddigger partner, happy to fund their lifestyle for what they get in return.

a regular exclusive high class escort then?

Spikey Willow · 26 Oct 2011 at 14:17

Vonhelmet said:
It's borderline prostitution, but I guess it must be pretty much legal or it wouldn't go on...

As others have said, prostitution is not llegal.

Abraham · 26 Oct 2011 at 14:22

Psycho Sonny said:
a regular exclusive high class escort then?

I don't know enough about escorts to know if you'd be able to pay one to have a full relationship with you.

Abraham · 26 Oct 2011 at 15:07

Moses said:
Technically, yes... but a criminal act happens, if prostitution happens (organised by one of these escort agencies). Consumption of illegal substances isn't in itself illegal, but possession is, would be a vague analogy I'd draw.

An individual paying a prostitute who works in private or for an on call escort is not an offence at all.
It's only an offence if there is a 3rd party forcing them to do it, or if they solicit in a public place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_United_Kingdom

Fr0dders · 26 Oct 2011 at 15:25

Exactly

its why i mentioned that the High Class call girl industry is completely different to the illegal act of soliciting yourself in a public place.

Its legal for a start, and of course the rates are much much higher, and thus you have a different sort of girl offering the services, and a different sort of client buying them.

These meetings sound no different from the "arrangements" clients come to with call girls / escorts.