<p>Not in the mood and still have sex.</p>
<p>Married people who cheat are indeed scum. But why the harsh criticism of SINGLE people who date younger consenting adults?</p>
<p>
ONLY 30%? ONLY 30%??? You say that like thats no big deal. It is a big deal.</p>
<p>Awcntdb, you are acting as if there is one monolithic sugar daddy culture and that you somehow have access to the hopes, dreams, desires and motivations of all the folks in these relationships. That’s obviously not the case. Some 19 year old girls might think that the 45-year-old men buying them cars and clothes and trips really love them and may some day marry them. Others may need to have sex with the old dude in question to support their heroin or coke habit. Still others may have the clear-eyed attitude that you ascribe to them. </p>
<p>Similarly, some of the men may treat the women wonderfully as business associates with benefits as you seem to imply. Many others may treat the women in an entirely degrading manner, and still others might be leading the women on as to their ultimate intentions. The is obviously no basis for sweeping generalizations. </p>
<p>As for what the men participating in these relationships tell you, I’m sure they are trying to justify their relationships to you and would try and put a positive spin on it. So it’s not like their accounts of the situations are all that trustworthy. And the young women are not likely to turn to you at one of these business functions and say: “Having sex with your business partner makes me want to vomit but I do it anyways because I want the dough.” </p>
<p>For whatever prurient reason, I’m finding your accounts of these relationships to be highly entertaining. However, I’m taking your conclusions with an enormous grain of salt. </p>
<p>How many young women in such relationships have you met, anyway? </p>
<p>Do they know that you know they are not your colleagues’ real girlfriends?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Kinda reminds me of some of the miserable shareholder meetings i have to smile through, listening to the blathering shareholder pontificate on and on and on…</p>
<p>And these meetings last more than 5 min.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, I can’t speak for @jym626, but I thought the “interesting” word choice was “doing jack with the SD”!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Last you heard? What exactly does that even mean? Are you some kind of “industry analyst” for this profession? Because you clearly fancy yourself an expert, and unless I’ve missed it (which is entirely possible given the pace of this conversation!), you’ve yet to share what your actual credentials are to be able to cite statistics like the above. I mean beyond your underlings’ disclosures to you (100% honest no doubt!) and what you hear in casual conversations with Sugar Folk.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did I miss some historical revisionism somewhere? ALL of those cases are in the annals of high-end PROSTITUTION. Do whatever you like, but don’t deny what this is. There’s nothing “implicit” about it!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Talk about a straw man! Here’s another option for you: How about only sleeping with someone you actually have a mutually-respectful relationship with and not asking to be paid for it? Or (GASP!) doing without sex for a while if the only options are disgusting pigs your age or older men who pay you for it? </p>
<p>For a self-described “socially conservative libertarian” (whatever THAT is exactly), you sure have a jaundiced eye about the average college student! </p>
<p>Yes lucie. You are correct. I was referring to the use of the expression “without doing jack” which is an amusing double entendre when used here, as it has in several posts.</p>
<p>And LOL on the industry analyst. Wonder who is doing the data collection.</p>
<p>
Lots of different ways of getting scr<em>w</em>d, eh GMT? 
</p>
<p>The data set seems to be men who bring their sugar-girlfriends to awcntdb’s business functions. Am I to understand correctly that 30% of those are married men? Wow! I’ve never been to a business function where a married, non-separated colleague has brought a girlfriend instead of his wife. </p>
<p>(The term “sugar-baby” is really starting to make me sick). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Jeez Louise, IxnayBob, I know you are joking but this is dangerously close to “You really want it even though you are saying no.” 
</p>
<p>I’ve seem some of my loathsome, old fart colleagues around town w their SB on arm, while their wives are back in the States. Family & I were in a restaurant, and my young son recognized one of my colleagues dining w a skankily dressed companion at neighboring table. When son commented he didn’t recognize the woman, I discreetly offered that the woman was his maid. That’s when my son said, “but she doesn’t dress like a maid.”</p>
<p>Maybe the maid dresses more appropriately?</p>
<p>“Last you heard? What exactly does that even mean? Are you some kind of “industry analyst” for this profession? Because you clearly fancy yourself an expert, and unless I’ve missed it (which is entirely possible given the pace of this conversation!), you’ve yet to share what your actual credentials are to be able to cite statistics like the above. I mean beyond your underlings’ disclosures to you (100% honest no doubt!) and what you hear in casual conversations with Sugar Folk.”</p>
<p>Maybe he’s the Goldman Sachs analyst assigned to the sugar category. </p>
<p>Doubt that anyone at GS would use the expression “without doing jack” - at least not in any public forum.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I get totally get your viewpoint and reaction.</p>
<p>As someone’s whose brain does not think or function like the brain of an SB, I get the fact that you cannot fathom a female thinking, acting, and doing such things on her own volition.</p>
<p>Your viewpoint and reaction are no different than my not understanding how a guy could be attracted to another guy. My mind cannot wrap around the thought in any way, shape, or form. And there is no justification any gay guy has ever given me that remotely helps me understand it. I just do not get it, but they sure do. Therefore, your skepticism is more that respected and understood because I understand your brain, morals etc. cannot make sense of it, just like I cannot make sense of another guy being attracted to another guy. </p>
<p>(I see there are other questions in your post and will get them separately}</p>
<p>Your brain doesn’t function like that of a SB. But does it function like that of the SD? </p>
<p>Re the rest of your post. There are a lot of heterosexual people where I can’t figure out what anybody sees in them, but someone does. </p>
<p>As someone who is not female, how can you truly “understand” the thinking of a SB. And why the continued focus on the SB and not the SD.</p>
<p>Cross-posted</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am beginning to get confused …</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Over the last 8 years, about 15 to 20. Kind of hard not to meet them at executive meetings and social events. They are all over the place. </p>
<p>Yes, the colleagues and the SBs are rather upfront about it. The SBs do not hide. As I said, I do not know one SB who does not brag about it to her girlfriends. I am quite sure some keep it quiet, but I have not met a member of that group yet. It is a different world there.</p>
<p>Why are you so selective in which posts to address? There seems to be an air of condescension about the sbs Perhaps I am wrong… but thats the tone that comes across.</p>