How Sugar Daddies Are Financing College Education

Parent Cafe
421

<p>

</p>

<p>We are talking two different things here. You are talking reasons for entering the relationship, and I am talking construct in my posts.</p>

<p>Just like any other types of relationships, people get into them for different reasons, but defined types of relationships do have general operating guidelines, which define their construct; that is why we choose certain types of relationships. A marriage has a set of general guidelines; casual dating has one set; polyamorous has one set; polygamous has another set, and so on. </p>

<p>Now, do people enter these different relationships for a whole host of various personal reasons? Of course, but that does not mean they are forced into the relationship or that the general guidelines / rules evaporate, for part of the deal is to operate within the rules of the understood relationship, whatever type it is.</p>

<p>I have learned there are four general operating guidelines for the SD-SB relationship: 1) they like each other, 2) have agreed to a set of do’s and don’ts in terms of function attendance, arranging dates, type of sex etc, and 3) after the meet and greet(s), it is the potential SB who has the final say on whom is her SD. Because the guy is there for companionship and good times (other than sex), there is no SB who is forced to be an SB. No one can go and enjoy diner and dancing with someone who does not want to be there. Fun is part of the relationship. 4) And an SB can end the relationship simply by going silent and not returning the SDs’ messages or calls - no dear john letter or call required, although some do that. That simple. I have seen that happen to two SDs, and after the third no response, they just dropped it, stopped sending the arranged gift and moved on. An SD can do the same as well. It is a real relationship with defined guidelines and boundaries just like any other relationship, albeit one guideline is monetary and agreed to in advance.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This is nothing exclusive to the SD-SB relationship.</p>

<p>How is this different than a girl with a younger guy and she is thinking the same thing? I have seen that more times that I care to cite in college, grad school, and people on the rebound, with people of the same age, i.e., the guy has no interest in long-term, but never tells the girl that until breakup day. Girls do it too.</p>

<p>I am sure this happens to some SD-SB relationships, just like in any non-marriage relationship type.</p>

422

<p>

</p>

<p>Because I have a life, and cannot be posting forever. </p>

<p>Plus, not all posts require a response. Tit for tat stuff I ignore, as I understand people have different viewpoints, and I am not out to change anyone’s mind in the least. I am just explaining what I know. Substantive posts with premised points and questions that I have not addressed before I answer.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You have me at a loss here, and I do not understand what you mean, but I will see if I can answer in a way that makes sense. </p>

<p>I am just explaining exactly what I see and what SBs have said to me and around me. And I am simply responding to assumptions I deem inaccurate, based on my being around live, breathing SBs and their SDs. </p>

423

<p>Well, at least they were alive. Dead SBs would be even more concerning. </p>

424

<p>

</p>

<p>Would they still date each other if one were not paying the other one? If not, then the fact that they like each other has nothing to do with the real nature of their relationship.</p>

<p>Seriously, everything begins and ends with that. If these people would no longer be dating, or having sex, if one were not paying the other to do it, then it is not a normal relationship and you can’t pretend it is just because they legitimately like each other or legitimately desire each other. </p>

<p>However, I agree with @nottelling – unless you are actually the madam who sets up all these people, or maybe unless you are the official couples’ therapist for this milieu, there is no way you know everything about how all their relationships really work. In fact I think there’s a decent chance you’re simply making all this up. I’m treating this as a purely hypothetical discussion.</p>

425

<p>Many or most dating relationships are influenced by money. The 55 year old women who want SBs to disappear so they get their rightful property back (all 55 year old men), also have a distinct preference for dating a guy who is at least comfortably well off.</p>

426

<p>

</p>

<p>Nah, Sorghum, that’s not true. We just want the guy to have the decency to fall in love with the gal before he buys her a BMW.</p>

<p>(Oh, and to wait until after the divorce is final).</p>

427

<p>

</p>

<p>What you saw was very most likely not an SB, unless the guy likes females he goes out with to dress like that. </p>

<p>Another thing, which is implicit to these relationships is the guy wants the SB to be like someone he is dating. Again, that is the first criteria of the SD-SB relationship.</p>

<p>And this is why I bet many of you have seen SD-SB relationships in action, i.e., an older guy around 40 with a 20-something year-old, and because they were acting like any normal couple and were dressed appropriately for whatever they were doing, it never crossed your mind this was an SD-SB arrangement.</p>

428

<p>I wouldn’t assume “skankily dressed” at all about a SB. </p>

429

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes. </p>

<p>The real SD has no interest in a boring relationship. He wants someone he wants to be around, just like the SB wants someone she wants to be around. </p>

<p>And that is one thing that I get people cannot wrap their heads around and is the real sticking point here, so the impulse is make it some non-feeling, money-only thing, like a prostitute relationship. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Fair enough.</p>

<p>Realize though what you state applies to any relationship of which you are not an intimate part - you may think you know why people get married or are dating and why they are together, but you never really know. And you never really know what happens inside said relationship behind closed doors. </p>

<p>However, if the people are your family members or colleagues, I bet you think you know, but you actually do not; all you are doing is making assumptions based on what they tell you and what you witness. And this is why people are shocked when they find out that Uncle Bob and Aunt Ellen are big-time swingers. </p>

<p>Therefore, like you and what you think you know about others relationships based on talking with them and being around them, I am doing the same having been around true SDs and SBs. So yes, I could be totally wrong just like you could be totally wrong about what you think and assume about others’ relationships based on what they show and tell you.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This reminds me of how I used to screen potential dates in my younger years. </p>

<p>I have been flying airplanes since I was a teenager. In college, whenever I met a girl that I thought I liked, after a couple dates or so, we would talk about doing something together, such as it would be cool to go somewhere (one example, on a whim, one young lady talked about never being to Disney World). Standard couple talk about wishes each would like to do.</p>

<p>When something like that came up, I would then tell them I was a pilot and we could go said place this weekend or the next long school holiday. Well, guess what? 8 out of 10 girls did not believe me and expressed open skepticism. Without changing tone, I would simply say OK, and would drop the subject and also quietly dropped them right there too, as a potential long-term companion. And they never saw the plane and probably wondered why I never went out with them again. (I never took that lady to Disney for she was one of the skeptics)</p>

<p>Basically, that is all I needed to know. It was not my job to show off or convince them that my pilotage and airplane were true because their imagination did not go as far as a young guy who is a pilot with access to an airplane. </p>

<p>Therefore, it is more than fine you think I am making it up, as I am used to not being believed by many people. In such cases, I just go on happily with my life. Alas, there are worlds, which exist others cannot fathom do exist, including worlds about which I do not know nothing. However, unlike you, I do not dismiss those worlds when I hear about them, just because I do not know the details.</p>

430

<p>@awc, I knew this commercial airline pilot acquaintance that i caught in the act of trolling for dates in eastern europe by leveraging his profession. He was a rather homely looking guy in his 40’s. I ran into him in a camera shop while waiting to get my photos developed (it was a while ago), and witnessed him chatting up the young russian sales girl by opening his wallet and showing her photo after photo of himself in his pilot’s uniform next to an airplane-- painfully tacky. I did notice the girl’s demeanor perk up when she saw the photos.</p>

431

<p>

</p>

<p>What I get from this is you are applying a personal standard to everyone else. Understood, as we all do this, i.e., apply our standards to things we see in the world and then judge them in that context. </p>

<p>In regards to my post #428, given your standard, I was a creep when I was dating. I have dated girls who I essentially just liked. And with several of them (including my wife initially), I would fly them around the country to different places. Now flying them around cost me much more than multiple BMWs. However, I did not love most of them, just liked them a lot. However, my giving them such gift as flying privately does not make a me creep or make me indecent in any way just because I did not love them.</p>

<p>I understand the major distinction is, unlike the SD, my girlfriends and I had no monetary arrangement. </p>

<p>However, here is the irony - because we had no arrangement, I was much more at risk of a girl thinking I loved her than any SB who got a car or similar trips from an SD. Girls could have easily taken my gestures, as “Wow, he really loves me” when I actually had no feelings of the sort and for 95% of them never developed such feelings, even if we dated for months.</p>

<p>But the major flaw really is your SB love assumption - the SBs are not lost on the fact that a monetary arrangement underlies their relationship at the start. Why? Because the SBs choose SDs because the guys do have money, relatively speaking, i.e., more money than her. </p>

<p>The SB actually expects gifts, as part of the arrangement, such as a car etc. Therefore, the SB really is much less taken that gifts are about love because even she knows why she initially enters the SD-SB relationship, i.e., not because of potential love initially, but because of initial like only coupled with the fact the guy has some money too. Gifts are part of the deal and true SBs are hoping to get some gifts, as part of the arrangement. </p>

<p><a href=“Oh,%20and%20to%20wait%20until%20after%20the%20divorce%20is%20final”>Quote</a>.

[/Quote]
</p>

<p>This is an aspect that is being made larger than the issue that it is in the SD-SB world.</p>

<p>I agree, wait till the divorce is final, but to state it like cheating is the basis of most SD-SB relationships is just plain wrong. It is an errant impression to give. 2/3rds or more of SD-SB relationships involve single men and single women and no cheating on a significant-other.</p>

432

<p>trolling - homely - tacky? You missed out creepy too. Girl sees a guy with an interesting, to her, life and gets interested, even though he is not young, or handsome, or poor?</p>

433

<p>@sorghum, I wouldn’t have described him as creepy, More like just really pathetic.</p>

434

<p>

</p>

<p>What’s pathetic, he is leveraging his advantages pretty well.</p>

435

<p>

</p>

<p>Your concern is noted and is a valid one. </p>

<p>However, I do think this is more correct for the world of street walkers, escorts, and women who pretty much sleep or hangout with random men, i.e., several different men a night or week. Such random conditions do raise the odds of bad things happening. </p>

<p>The average SD has way too much to lose. He is an executive or professional something, and is not hiding the relationship. The SB is all over his cellphone, all over his checkbook, knows his friends, has been to his house, and is seen all around town with him. It is not some seedy under-the table relationship where the guy can harm her and no one knows who he is. He would be the first contacted by the police, if the SB turns up dead. </p>

<p>As far as I know, more coeds have gone missing and presumed dead in the UVA area in the past 5 years than the number of SBs gone missing at the hands of a bona fide SD. </p>

<p>Coeds who go out drinking have much more to fear from the random guy than any SB has from an SD she has screened and is now in an arrangement with. The SD is a known person in her life.</p>

<p>Are there SDs who are creeps, killers etc? Of course, there has to be, as they are part of the population. But, I would bet SDs in general are less criminal than the general population. But, like the preppy killer of NY years ago, there are weirdos with money in there, but there are weirdos everywhere. However, it is a big stretch to confuse real SDs with guys who ■■■■■ Craigslist for girls or real weirdos, same as it would a be a stretch to say the occasional marijuana user is the same, as an meth addict.</p>

436

<p>

</p>

<p>I was just the reverse. I would run from both types of women: the ones who were skeptics and those for whom it was so over the top that they got giddy. Neither was good in my book.</p>

437

<p>I can see someone thinking that a guy saying he has his own plane is a made-up story, and being skeptical. I don’t think it’s wise to just accept “trust me, I have …” uncritically, do you? </p>

438

<p>

</p>

<p>Please note you changed the standard of what I have been saying. </p>

<p>I never said the SD-SB was a normal relationship; you made the normal stipulation up to support your argument. I have consistently described it as a wholly separate type of relationship. </p>

<p>Specifically, I said is it is a relationship, which has various elements of a normal relationship, i.e., they must like each and have stuff in common and want to be around each other. I never called the SD-SB relationship a normal one, as we think of standard heterosexual relationships. </p>

<p>Additionally, in several of my posts, I clearly said it is different world. And I also said if asked by a female, I would not condone. However, I do understand why some people choose that route. Similar to how I understand why people rob banks, but that does mean I think that activity, as a normal way of getting money. </p>

<p>Reducing the essence of your argument, according to your standard, a MMF or FFM threesome relationship is normal because no money is involved.</p>

<p>Well, there is a difference. I get a monogamous SD-SB relationship that involves money much more than I get the threesome thing.</p>

439

<p>

</p>

<p>I guess we do approach life differently. </p>

<p>It strikes me as a waste of time interacting with people if my operating premise is people I am talking to are lying to me about things they have. What a jaded way to live. I rather be alone. </p>

<p>For the sake argument, if I accept your premise, I suggest a different remedy - even is one is skeptical about something, the smart person keeps his mouth shut, observes, and waits to be proved correct in his skepticism.</p>

<p>You remind me of a funny incident that happened 17 years after I left school. We were coming back from vacation from a certain state one summer, and, as usual, I went to the local airport ahead of time to make sure the plane was prepped. And as I was opening the door of the plane, this car drives by and lo and behold one of the girls I dated in college was in the car with her family. It was one of the girl of who was skeptical. It was ironic that the guy she married had a airplane too. I guess she learned somewhere along the line not to be skeptical, not that our past situation had anything to do with it though, as she could have easily met him at an airport. </p>

440

<p>Is there an exam at the end of this lecture?</p>

<p>If someone I met in college told me he was a pilot and had access to a private plane to fly me somewhere, I might be skeptical. Engaging in critical thinking is a good thing, and when something said by a new acquaintance sounds like either bragging, a low probability occurrence or both, I am likely going to question it, and not just blindly accept it as the truth. That seems smart, and smart is a quality some guys like in a potential mate. (Its also a reasonable response from women who have heard all sorts of pick up lines.) Then again, some may like the dumb as a stump arm candy, though form the descriptions here, thats not what we’ll be told a SD wants- he wants a bright, attractive intellectually and physically stimulating companion,who he pays for this benefit with no long term commitment or strings attached. I think the job should come with healthcare and retirement benefits… but I digress ((and am speaking with tongue firmly in cheek, in case that isn’t obvious).</p>

<p>There are of course some similarities between real dating and the SD/SB relationship, in terms of who pays for the social activities, But the mutual use/use component of this relationship from the outset is what I find distasteful, and ESPECIALLY when the SD is married. The fact that "only "about 30% are married is insulting, as it seems to minimize this and somehow makes it ok. It is not ok, not at any level. </p>

<p>When I was in grad school, we used to say that when we took a history from patients at a certain facility and asked about their drinking history, we’d multiply what the females said by 4 and what the males said by 10. I think the same applies here. Would strongly suspect more SDs are married, and that’s horribly disrespectful to their spouses and families. </p>