Well, the few I knew who did this, did this during college. Their sugar daddies paid for their education and housing, etc. Better than student loans, I guess.
If you’re wishing you could “find someone” then you’re not getting “what you want” by paying someone to pretend to like you. You’re fooling yourself in lieu of trying to better yourself.
And, frankly, if you have enough cash to pay for some girls apartment, dinners and gold jewelry in exchange for sex, then you’re rich enough to join a health club, buy some decent clothes, etc. You’re just picking the lazy way out by paying someone for an illusion. Especially if your primary issue is being an asshole.
Now, of course, if the goal is simply to bang hot chicks and not this “so lonely” nonsense then go for it.
Some men realize they are not emotionally able to be present 50% of the time or whatever it takes to have a relationship. They might be just as comfortable having a semblance of a relationship as with a mistress. I see no problem with it.
I have no problem if two adults want to have that kind of relationship. I would only think it to be immoral if one party was deliberately deceiving the other regarding the nature of the relationship. If those involved are happy with the arrangement, who am I to frown on them?
Gross income.
Given the ease with which you can get a divorce these days, I’d have to agree. Just make sure you sign a relationship agreement first!
I thought the galling part was losing half your shit when they get sick of you.
There’s nothing easy about divorce. Trust me. Especially when kids are involved.
This discussion is hilarious.
It seems to be a matter that these people are explicitly performing as a married couple.
Yes, the model for “Traditional Marriage” is prostitution.
He has to pay - alimony if he wants to dump her. How long does alimony last? Until she finds another man to marry her and assume financial responsibility for her.
If a boyfriend moves in with a woman with a child who is receiving public benefits, the Social worker will ask “Are you assuming rhe role?”. Do not tell me it is not about who pays.
Until the 1980’s that asshole lawyer was right - it was impossible to rape your wife. By law, the husband was entitled to sex anytime he wanted it. Specific laws were required to make “Spousal rape” a legal possibility.
He had to pay, and she had to put out.
What does that sound like to you?
Amen.
Agreed 100%. And in a real world senario, from what I have seen, one party typically enters the “transaction” with the hope that it WILL develop into something more.
Its choke full of putfalls for me.
I can’t see the least thing wrong with it. Except for issues of legality the pitfalls don’t seem to be any different than with traditional relationships.
Without getting all soft and philosophical, at some point, we all take stock in ourselves and ask who we are and how we got ‘here.’ And some of these women know right up front they are prostitutes. And some wish it away - for now. But of these women who don’t want to be prostitutes and have convinced themselves that they aren’t are going to have to try and come to grips with that reality at sooner or later, little to no resolution. That is the ‘wrong’ part to me.
All of this Spock like wisdom is due to my living in one side of a duplex with the other side owned by an upscale strip club for the girls that would live there for 2-3 weeks before the traveled up I-95 to the next club. As a man in my mid -20s, I had a love, hate relationship with this living arrangement as you can imagine. I need to write a book . . .
True enough. But it’s a lot like a root canal–needing one sucks worse than actually getting one.
I’ve heard they have low end sugar babys who date, like, successful plumbers and such.
As for the OP, I don’t see anything wrong with it.
There’s nothing illegal here, as long as they aren’t explicitly contracting to pay for sex acts. exchanging money for companionship, where sex is an implicit part of the whole package, isn’t illegal.
As someone who is in a “traditional marriage”, it doesn’t resemble this in the slightest. Any more than real friendship is ‘the same’ as paying someone to act as your friend.
It may appear to be the same superficially. The difference is that the relationship is the focus - if I lost all my money tomorrow, I know without a shadow of a doubt that my wife would stick by me, as I would stick by her if she lost her looks tomorrow (and, of course, vice versa). In a feigned, payed-for relationship, the money is of course the focus, and if it disappeared so would the relationship.
Similarly, if I behaved badly towards my wife, if I offended her sense of morality and decency in some way that ruined our relationship - of if through the passage of time it just faded away - she would leave, no matter how much money was on offer to stay (and again, I dare say, vice versa); and this would be true even if the divorce laws of our country offered her nothing.
Isn’t the rich guy having a mistress practically traditional? Through history, at least in some countries, I think it’s been a very normal and expected thing, as long as you were reasonably discrete. In the US, we’ve gone down a different cultural path, but as a culture, we have significant hangups about sex.
As others have pointed out, the only real downside is that it’s not exactly a long term career choice for the woman, and it’s not really something you can put on a resume.
A “traditional” mistress is typically somewhat different from what is described in the OP.
In the “traditional” set-up, one married for reasons of family advancement, and then acquired a mistress on the side (more or less acknowledged depending on the culture at the time).
In the OP, it is unmarried people (mostly I assume men) acquiring a “paid girlfriend” in lieu of marriage to anyone.
The dynamic would, I think, be different.
slow clap
Thank you; I will now quote that for the rest of my life. 