Sugar daddy parties - "It's almost an inspirational thing."

[fewcloudy]

At least it is according to the last line of this article.

www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/15431565

Can't wait...

It's the same story world over for women, the same free choice that sees them do many things which are, in fact, harmful.

What the actual fuck?
That rich men and young women cine to such arrangements is one thing (it's a free country, it's consensual) but that BBC news is reporting this in such an anodyne way, normalising it, that's what is despicable and shows how misogyny is so widespread.

""A lot of these women here tonight may be very wealthy but they want to feel like ladies and to be with a man who can provide for them."

Vile!

Assuming you want to 'feel like a lady' (and that's an odd assumption for the start of the 21st C IMO), you can only acheive that by pretending to be unable to look after yourself? OMG that is just so like empowering!

FFS.

Greythorne, and on a Newssite aimed at teens too! Maybe they were trying to be ironic

is that what newsbeat is? i haven't seen it before. the bbc's attempt at teen newsround?

That's the TEEN newssite? that is quite something.
Don't worry about uni costs, teenagers. There is always a way round these things.

They also heavily looked into porn and Babestation on that site, interviewing the 'girls' (hope they're women) about how it is not exploitative.

here too

Why? I don't understand why you would run a news service for teens and feel that these were things that needed reporting

Why don't they do nice stories about fluffy animals and stuff?

"Or that well off educated men would have more self respect. Who'd want to have sex with someone who quite likely despises you?

I mean sharing a canteen lunch break with someone who despises you is unpleasant enough. Imagine sharing sex with them. urrgh, why would you put yourself in that position?"

I did it for 25 years, but I was married to him - does that count? (Probably not, as he didn't have any money.)

The normalisation approach of the reporting is v v v v sad. to me there are 2 interesting (unasked) questions:

1. 'sugar daddies' why can you not from a relationship without it being about your relative wealth?

1. 'girls' dont you want to have sex with someone....you want to have sex with?

both parties seem quite fucked up as individuals. but this is completely ignored.

SQ, has it occurred to you that teens read it and ask exactly the same questions that you do? That it makes them question why something like that is acceptable and not considered pseudo-prostitution?

'Why don't they do nice stories about fluffy animals and stuff?'
Is that really what you want the potential young activists of tomorrow to be filling their time with? Fluffy animals rather than PETA and human rights issues and global inequalities?
I'm surprised, when I was 15 these were exactly the sort of things I was concerned about and am pleased that my teens debate.

I don't think all girls and young women will read that and think, "oh, that looks like a good idea for getting some cash without much effort." But, as Real Tilly points out, the way it is reported is very "normalising." It comes across as no more unusual than, I don't know, going to a wine tasting or a salsa night.

Even if it doesn't consciously register, the more "messages" like this they take in, and the more they hear of and from young women who sell sex and insist it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, surely the more likely they are to think it's a viable option.

Also, just a quick point - I don't think education has much to do with this. You can be highly educated, yet have a very low level of self-esteem and/or have absorbed the concept that for women, being attractive and catching a man is the most important goal in life. Similarly, you can have little education or even a low IQ but still have self-respect, still believe that your value as a person isn't dependent on looking hot and pleasing men.

I agree that academic education has very little to do with how much self-worth a person has, or what they see as the markers of success.
I was just a bit taken aback by the fluffy animals and the assumption of gullibility that seems to be the prevalent view of teenagers on this thread.
I can't imagine DD or her friends falling for the whitewash, for the spin.
Certainly they all seem to have a healthy scepticism about pontificating from the mainstream world of adults.

I likewise didn't mean to suggest that young women are all gullible and never question anything! I have alot of colleagues who are engaged in youth work though who have desperately sad stories to tell of young women and girls who perhaps haven't grown up in situations where they were able to cultivate much self-respect or individual agency. Their horizons may seem to be pretty narrow and their options few. These are the people, imho, most vulnerable to this kind of leading for all sorts of social, economic and psychological reasons. Some genuinely seem to believe that they could be the next star of a reality tv show or talent contest. They could easily see sugar daddy type parties or the Belle de Jour version of selling sex as better options than pushing a pram, living on benefits or a part time job in the chippy. Many don't see lots of alternative futures and the idea of being "bought" by a rich benefactor might not on the face of it seem the worst of the lot.

Is that a lack of education?
In that they see no alternatives to improving their situations and believe what they see on TV just happens without any effort or hard work?

It may not be a lack of formal education. Most of the young women and girls I'm talking about are still at school (some only just though, and at risk of exclusion.) There are a whole swathe of reasons why they often have poor self-esteem, little confidence in their abilities and limited aspirations. Some of it is related to socio-economic class and where they live, some is related to what they see their family and peers doing, thinking and believing (also very limited.) Against that background, you have those "lifestyles of the rich and famous," daft reality tv and talent(less) competitions that belt out the idea that it's not about goal-setting, dedication, hard work, using your brain. It's about getting that one lucky break that will land you in the clouds.

These are just ymptoms of a greater problem that's been building over the last sixty years.

"It's an understanding between both parties as adults to move forward at an introductory level that there's going to be compensation."

Compensation?

What are they compensating for? For not being young, decent, nice men? Or what?

It's certainly not something I'd do (LOL, like I'd ever have either the money or the looks to be on either side of the bargain even if I wanted to).

But as was pointed out upthread, they're consenting adults and they're not harming anyone else. To each his/her own.

I agree it's basically prostitution. But arguments against most prostitution usually centre around questions of widespread coercion and abuse. This is surely the ultimate example of the opposite of that - a bunch of ambitious society women not the least impoverished or under anyone's yoke, simply making the decision that they want a lot of money and are willing to enter into a "relationship" including sex to get it.

That some women are willing to make this choice freely is hard for some people to accept. But everyone's different, I suppose. If you're going to argue for empowerment and freedom, then you have to accept that some people will use the power and freedom they have in ways you don't personally like.

I'm not interested in the choices of the women, confidence.

I'm interested in the choices of the men.

Why are they so skanky?

These are just ymptoms of a greater problem that's been building over the last sixty years.

How so? This kind of arrangement is as old as humanity itself.

Eleanor - Because they want sex, preferably with beautiful young women, and it's the easiest way for them to get it. For some it might be the only way.

What do you mean by skanky?